• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

The Illusion of Self

A subjective report does not by some magic become an objective report when somebody hears it.

It is always a subjective report and can never be more than that.
 
Yes. A person speaking is an objective event, yet and the report of one speaking remains subjective.

A subjective report becomes objective when some inventive person finds ways to attach objective physical event measures to subjective claims, permitting re-organization of the subjective world into a world that is material and measured.

Each of us know this is true because we have access to tools that can take apart and measure the elements coming to us about the event. We can video and audio a person speaking. We have built devices that permit us to reproduce those activities. Those reproductions can be preserved and repeated to us.

A person speaking is a material (objective) event independent of one reporting the observation.

For instance the subjective reality a person presumes when one sees the sun move across the sky above becomes an objective reality that one lives on a planet circling star in a solar system in a universe where much movement is determined and influenced by gravity.

One still has the subjective experience because the sun does appear from one's perspective to be circling the earth. But wise persons have managed to find laws that govern the world on which one lives that are not those one's eye and other senses subjectively report. Rather one lives an objective reality much different than one subjectively presumes.

enough into the rubble for ya?
 
DBT said:
untermensche said:
A subjective report does not by some magic become an objective report when somebody hears it.

It is always a subjective report and can never be more than that.
Click to expand...

A person speaking is an objective event.
Click to expand...

They are giving a subjective report about a subjective experience.

It will never be an objective report.

It is in no way objective data.
 
fromderinside said:
A subjective report becomes objective when some inventive person finds ways to attach objective physical event measures to subjective claims, permitting re-organization of the subjective world into a world that is material and measured.
Click to expand...

Delusion!

A subjective report can never be anything but a subjective report.

If there is some data about physiology connected temporally to a subjective report the data will never make the report objective.
 
fromderinside said:
I didn't say it wasn't. I said that attaching physical event measures to the elements generating subjective claims is an entirely different animal.

What is your problem?
Click to expand...

But you have no idea if the physiological events measured have anything to do with the reports.

The physiological effects may be producing some quantum effect and that quantum effect is generating experience.

The idea of experience is an idea we don't seem to be able to understand mechanically or chemically or based on magnetism or electricity or based on waves of energy in the air.
 
Actually researchers do have insight via experiment in to approximately how and from whence statements are generated. We stimulate locations in language cortex of an alert person and out come words and statements over and over and over and over. We elicit vocal output.

Physiology is a product of instancing a being as the result of established physical field transactions, a physical product, the producing of a physiological being. a being which was created by the existence of a particular configuration of fields resulting in the observation of a physical being from which comes a response.

Seems to me a 'free will' identification at that level would be a waste of time. It would be so because no macro action is singular. Behavior is a subsequent product produced by the several billions of instances of an input-output through the being.
If one wants to reduce observation to the combining of a particular output one loses sight of the entire process of outputs needed to produce the singular micro-product.

Doing so might get you to a proximal instance of observation within the many that are needed to produce the resulting macro-product of a physical or neural action. IOW it would be worth nothing beyond showing one's ability to control micro-observation. It certainly wouldn't show free anything.

The machine that is man is a response system even when it is asserting something new at the macro level. Humans exist in the past is all you really need to know to figure this out.
 
fromderinside said:
Actually researchers do have insight via experiment in to approximately how and from whence statements are generated. We stimulate locations in language cortex of an alert person and out come words and statements over and over and over and over. We elicit vocal output.
Click to expand...

Brain cells can be stimulated as they normally are.

Within an incredibly complex web of living tissue because of input of transmitter.

Or some stupid ape can apply direct current to the cells.

One is normal behavior and one is abnormal behavior.

I have no interest in some stupid apes created abnormal behavior.

I want to understand normal behavior.
 
There is a straightforward test for reality.

Bend over and run your head into a brick wall and see what happens. Illusion or reality?
 
untermensche said:
DBT said:
untermensche said:
A subjective report does not by some magic become an objective report when somebody hears it.

It is always a subjective report and can never be more than that.
Click to expand...

A person speaking is an objective event.
Click to expand...

They are giving a subjective report about a subjective experience.

It will never be an objective report.

It is in no way objective data.
Click to expand...

Wrong. It is a objective event when they speak. When they speak, they describe their inner feelings and thoughts. Their inner thoughts and feelings are subjective, yet can be described by the person who is experiencing them. He or she can report that they feel pain, pleasure, poor vision, stomach ache or whatever.
 
DBT said:
untermensche said:
They are giving a subjective report about a subjective experience.

It will never be an objective report.

It is in no way objective data.
Click to expand...

Wrong. It is a objective event when they speak. When they speak, they describe their inner feelings and thoughts. Their inner thoughts and feelings are subjective, yet can be described by the person who is experiencing them. He or she can report that they feel pain, pleasure, poor vision, stomach ache or whatever.
Click to expand...

Their speaking is not objective data about the experience.

It is a subjective report about the experience.

Nothing objective about it in terms of the experience.
 
Well this isn't going anywhere. Reality is what is in the environment. Humans - they are part of the environment - leverage from approximations of extant local reality through their sense capacities.

What is being discussed is subjective information transmitted by material means. Both of what untermensche and DBT are speaking is subjective information. It matters not so much that the form in which the information is passed whether spoken written down, etc. The information is subjective, coming from the mind which only has access to, at best, approximations of internal and external reality. The only objective aspect about it is that it is physical speech.

Relatively objective information can be had through empirical experiment if such is supported by confirmed theory (models).
 
What is being talked about is subjective experience and humans using words to crudely describe it.

Babbling about subjective experience is not objective data ABOUT THE EXPERIENCE.
 
untermensche said:
What is being talked about is subjective experience and humans using words to crudely describe it.

Babbling about subjective experience is not objective data ABOUT THE EXPERIENCE.
Click to expand...

I am able to describe my experience of self and the world. I can describe what I hear, see and feel. The listener can hear what I say and relate that to their own experience. We are able to compare notes.
 
DBT said:
untermensche said:
What is being talked about is subjective experience and humans using words to crudely describe it.

Babbling about subjective experience is not objective data ABOUT THE EXPERIENCE.
Click to expand...

I am able to describe my experience of self and the world. I can describe what I hear, see and feel. The listener can hear what I say and relate that to their own experience. We are able to compare notes.
Click to expand...

Describing your experience is a subjective act.

You never provide any objective data about the experience.

It is only a subjective opinion about the experience.
 
fromderinside said:
I think I just said that. Do you really need to argue with yourself or are you just dodging the idea that subjective experience can be treated through empirical experiment to yield objective results
Click to expand...

The subjective opinion about an experience is not in any way objective data about the experience.

One million subjective opinions about experiences is not objective data about the experiences.

Correlating some arbitrary physiological event to a subjective report is not objective data about the report. It is an arbitrary temporal correlation to the report.

Objective data is data one person can show another.

No objective data about an experience can be given from one person to another person.

Only subjective opinions.
 
Didn't say it was. I said one can find objective means to get at what goes in to experience because the being is a material entity.

Try to figure out how we got from subjective "the sun travels across the sky each day" to the objective "the earth revolves around the sun under the influence of gravity." Then you might understand.
 
fromderinside said:
Didn't say it was. I said one can find objective means to get at what goes in to experience because the being is a material entity.

Try to figure out how we got from subjective "the sun travels across the sky each day" to the objective "the earth revolves around the sun under the influence of gravity." Then you might understand.
Click to expand...

You can make guesses about arbitrarily chosen physiological activity temporally correlated with subjective reports. Not correlated with experience. Experience cannot be "seen" by anything except the individual mind that experiences it.

We can get subjective reports about experience.

None of them are objective data about experience.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom