The Illusion of Self

[DBT]

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.

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.

Describing your experience is a subjective act.

Anyone in the vicinity can hear me speak. My words and descriptions can be written for anyone to see, or recorded for anyone to hear. As anyone can see, read or hear what I say, that is not subjective.

You never provide any objective data about the experience.

It is only a subjective opinion about the experience.

I know precisely what I am feeling, thinking and doing. Which I can describe. For instance, I am now typing this response while shaking my head in wonder that you consider the words you see before you, that anyone can read, as being subjective.

 

[untermensche]

Describing your experience is a subjective act.

Anyone in the vicinity can hear me speak. My words and descriptions can be written for anyone to see, or recorded for anyone to hear. As anyone can see, read or hear what I say, that is not subjective.

The words about an experience are not objective data ABOUT the experience.

Yes they are words and in being words they have an objective existence.

But their existence is not objective data ABOUT THE EXPERIENCE. The thing under examination.

They are subjective reports about the experience, not objective data about the experience.

Subjective guesses will never become objective data ABOUT AN EXPERIENCE.

I know precisely what I am feeling, thinking and doing. Which I can describe.

You can describe something in crude imperfect language.

Your descriptions are subjective data about the experience.

You are correct about one thing.

When YOU (your mind) experiences green YOU know beyond doubt YOU are experiencing green.

But when a person says they are experiencing something you can always doubt.

When a person tells you about the timing of invisible "urges" their subjective reports are not objective data about the timing.

They are guesses.

A guess is not objective data.

Especially a guess off by .35 seconds.

Something statistically insignificant when you understand it is derived solely from subjective guesses about invisible events.

 

[DBT]

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.

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.

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.

You haven't grasped the distinctions being made. Not even a little bit.

 

[untermensche]

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.

You haven't grasped the distinctions being made. Not even a little bit.

I have.

But the distinction is totally worthless.

What is being examined is an experience (an urge).

You can't see an urge. You can't time an urge with accuracy.

Because the urge is invisible and it is subjective.

Yes. Words spoken are objective evidence about the words spoken.

But words spoken are NEVER objective evidence about an "urge". They are never objective evidence about any experience.

 

[DBT]

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.

You haven't grasped the distinctions being made. Not even a little bit.

I have.

But the distinction is totally worthless.

What is being examined is an experience (an urge).

You can't see an urge. You can't time an urge with accuracy.

Because the urge is invisible and it is subjective.

Yes. Words spoken are objective evidence about the words spoken.

But words spoken are NEVER objective evidence about an "urge". They are never objective evidence about any experience.

You can feel an urge. You can tell someone that you felt an urge and they will know what you mean because they, themselves have felt urges. A reported urge can not only be related to brain activity but physically induced by applying current to the related brain region, Delgado, et, al.

 

[untermensche]

Describing your experience is a subjective act.

Anyone in the vicinity can hear me speak. My words and descriptions can be written for anyone to see, or recorded for anyone to hear. As anyone can see, read or hear what I say, that is not subjective.

Yes. The mere words have an objective existence apart from their meaning. This is trivial.

The substance of the words is pure subjective opinion.

Words about experiences are not an objective presentation of the experiences. They are a subjective opinion about the experience.

You never provide any objective data about the experience.

It is only a subjective opinion about the experience.

I know precisely what I am feeling, thinking and doing. Which I can describe. For instance, I am now typing this response while shaking my head in wonder that you consider the words you see before you, that anyone can read, as being subjective.

To you the experience is objective.

To us your words about the experience are mere subjective opinion.

There is nothing objective about YOUR OPINION about some experience.

 

[untermensche]

I have.

But the distinction is totally worthless.

What is being examined is an experience (an urge).

You can't see an urge. You can't time an urge with accuracy.

Because the urge is invisible and it is subjective.

Yes. Words spoken are objective evidence about the words spoken.

But words spoken are NEVER objective evidence about an "urge". They are never objective evidence about any experience.

You can feel an urge. You can tell someone that you felt an urge and they will know what you mean because they, themselves have felt urges. A reported urge can not only be related to brain activity but physically induced by applying current to the related brain region, Delgado, et, al.

You can feel urges.

You can't say with any precision when they start.

That is a subjective guess. Not objective data.

Guesses about the timing of invisible events will NEVER be objective data.

 

[fromderinside]

An exercise in which you probably participated when you were locating positions you were asked on which to focus.

Find some place on your body where you can feel something then move the feeling, not the sensation, to your forehead or another place. For instance I can localized to one side or another without thinking the location from which I am sensing tinnitus buzzing or ringing. With a bit of relaxation and elimination of visual inputs other than seeing the inside of my eyelids I can move that feeling to my elbows or gut. Unfortunately I can't get rid of the buzzing but I can feel the elbow or gut or forehead location focus.

Believe me I can tell where they are and when I felt the feeling there. Unfortunately tinnitus has a physical basis so it is difficult to completely disassociate my sensing of location and the sound of tinnitus effects.

BTW  Tinnitus has a physical basis. In my case it is vascular disease.

 

[DBT]

I have.

But the distinction is totally worthless.

What is being examined is an experience (an urge).

You can't see an urge. You can't time an urge with accuracy.

Because the urge is invisible and it is subjective.

Yes. Words spoken are objective evidence about the words spoken.

But words spoken are NEVER objective evidence about an "urge". They are never objective evidence about any experience.

You can feel an urge. You can tell someone that you felt an urge and they will know what you mean because they, themselves have felt urges. A reported urge can not only be related to brain activity but physically induced by applying current to the related brain region, Delgado, et, al.

You can feel urges.

You can't say with any precision when they start.

That is a subjective guess. Not objective data.

Guesses about the timing of invisible events will NEVER be objective data.

I made no mention of precisely when they start. The point here is that they can be felt and they can be reported, described and understood by others and they can be related to brain activity through imaging.

 

[untermensche]

You can feel urges.

You can't say with any precision when they start.

That is a subjective guess. Not objective data.

Guesses about the timing of invisible events will NEVER be objective data.

I made no mention of precisely when they start. The point here is that they can be felt and they can be reported, described and understood by others and they can be related to brain activity through imaging.

You can give subjective opinions about your experiences.

That is true.

But none of your subjective opinions are objective data ABOUT THE EXPERIENCES.

And in the Libet experiments the subjects were asked to guess when an "urge" started.

What exactly is your background?

You do not appear to have any medical knowledge. You do not appear to have ever done research.

 

[fromderinside]

[Uh, bowels no move.] .... (Uh, Bowels got to move. Teepee heap full of shit.)

Sub [] Obj ()

 

[untermensche]

When precisely (within a third of a second) did the urge to have a bowel movement begin?

 

[fromderinside]

Ask Bowels. He's the Indian with Teepee.

He hadn't moved. He moved when the Teepee filled with shit. You get good at this after you've counted a few hundred bullae.

You aren't so smart either.

 

[untermensche]

I'm only smart enough to know guessing about invisible urges can't be done with precision.

 

[DBT]

You can feel urges.

You can't say with any precision when they start.

That is a subjective guess. Not objective data.

Guesses about the timing of invisible events will NEVER be objective data.

I made no mention of precisely when they start. The point here is that they can be felt and they can be reported, described and understood by others and they can be related to brain activity through imaging.

You can give subjective opinions about your experiences.

That is true.

But none of your subjective opinions are objective data ABOUT THE EXPERIENCES.

And in the Libet experiments the subjects were asked to guess when an "urge" started.

What exactly is your background?

You do not appear to have any medical knowledge. You do not appear to have ever done research.

You need to look in a mirror and say that. The brain activity related to a feeling or action can be detected through imaging prior to the subject describing their decision or sensation. That is the point.

Not only that, but as pointed out too many times, the perception of movement can be separated from the movement itself using electrical stimulation of brin regions.

What is your point? Are you trying to say that none of this is the work or function of the brain? Are you trying to say the brain is the receiver of cosmic waves? Cosmic consciousness?


You appear to have no point at all. Just vague hand waving.

 

[fromderinside]

Try this on for size. I have a raster display that writes top to bottom in 1/120th of a second. If I present new data at a rate determined by experiment to be to exceed the rate the eye updates, the screen isn't seen to be overwritten by the observer then I have a pretty good idea that the rate of observer processing is less than 1/120th of a second. IOW I can predict an observer's rate of update by showing things from 1/120 per second downward until the observer reports them.

Are you still going to maintain one can't observe urges with precision If I have an urge generator that operates similarly?

Urges can be masked. Ergo urges have a physical basis. We can vary masking rates. Think about it.

 

[untermensche]

The point is subjective guesses about the timing of urges to move is not objective data.

It can never be objective data.

And those that claim it is objective data are either mindless or liars.

You move when and how you choose to move.

There is no invisible mind below the scenes causing movement before you will it.

The brain has one mind and the brain has no clue what that mind is experiencing.

Just like a gene has no idea what it's end product is.

 

[untermensche]

Try this on for size. I have a raster display that writes top to bottom in 1/120th of a second. If I present new data at a rate determined by experiment to be to exceed the rate the eye updates, the screen isn't seen to be overwritten by the observer then I have a pretty good idea that the rate of observer processing is less than 1/120th of a second. IOW I can predict an observer's rate of update by showing things from 1/120 per second downward until the observer reports them.

Are you still going to maintain one can't observe urges with precision If I have an urge generator that operates similarly?

Urges can be masked. Ergo urges have a physical basis. We can vary masking rates. Think about it.

You're not talking about anything a mind can measure.

 

[untermensche]

Some people think neuroscience is supposed to explain some magic world where the brain is constantly tricking the mind into thinking the mind is doing things.

When really what neuroscience is supposed to explain is experience. What it is and how we have it.

 

[fromderinside]

So a mind that can mask an urge/want does not permit us to measure the thing masked?

Please explain?

Remember I'm watching your hands.