The objective mind

[untermensche]

Are you claiming you did nothing and those words just appeared?

If I'm not dealing with a free active mind then there is no reason to say anything to you.

What could a dumb bunch of tissue care? And why would anybody care what a bunch of dumb tissue said?

A mind on the other hand.

 

[fromderinside]

Funny isn't it. I'm here and I articulate what comes up.

You on the other hand can't fathom that.

Poor boy.

Something about the relations between frontal cortex, sensory/motor cortex and cerebellum the literature suggests.

On the other hand you are still fishing around for an objective mind to justify your belief in a subjective mind.

 

[DBT]

What productive activity has anyone ever done in their sleep?

So unless something is 'productive' it is not a motor action performed by a brain? Is lifting your arm a 'productive' action? If not, is it done by some agency other than the mind, as you happen to claim?

What the hell do you know about the difference between the mind awake and the mind asleep?

It is well enough understood that it is the brain that performs motor actions whether the 'mind is awake' or the 'mind is asleep'

You make a lot of claims from TOTAL IGNORANCE.

Nah, that's always been you.


A parietal-premotor network for movement intention and motor awareness
''It is commonly assumed that we are conscious of our movements mainly because we can sense ourselves moving as ongoing peripheral information coming from our muscles and retina reaches the brain. Recent evidence, however, suggests that, contrary to common beliefs, conscious intention to move is independent of movement execution per se. We propose that during movement execution it is our initial intentions that we are mainly aware of. Furthermore, the experience of moving as a conscious act is associated with increased activity in a specific brain region: the posterior parietal cortex. We speculate that movement intention and awareness are generated and monitored in this region. We put forward a general framework of the cognitive and neural processes involved in movement intention and motor awareness.''

Try an experiment.

The next time you want to try to blow smoke up my ass with claims of things you have no idea about just let your brain answer.

Do not use your mind to force your hands to type out words.

Enough of your bullshitting me. Let's do this experiment.

That just demonstrates that you have no understanding of the subject matter or what people are trying to point out.

 

[untermensche]

So unless something is 'productive' it is not a motor action performed by a brain? Is lifting your arm a 'productive' action?

Being able to move the arm as the mind's chooses is the beginning of productive movement.

Productive movement for an ape is doing something productive with the movement.

Like walk to a specific destination. Or build a skyscraper. Or type out the words of a play.

It is not stumbling across the room and falling.

It is not a knee jerk after striking the patellar tendon.

What did I say about posting research that does not define the objective mind?

You are willfully trying to change the subject.

And worse you post a study I can't even read.

What kind of shit is that?

And from the look at what you posted that is another study making up stories with only information about where significant increases of activity occur. You can't support stories about the mind without knowing what it is. In all that activity they looked at where SPECIFICALLY is the objective mind?

If you can't answer that question you are merely waving your arms and deflecting.

Try an experiment.

The next time you want to try to blow smoke up my ass with claims of things you have no idea about just let your brain answer.

Do not use your mind to force your hands to type out words.

Enough of your bullshitting me. Let's do this experiment.

That just demonstrates that you have no understanding of the subject matter or what people are trying to point out.

You're blowing smoke not explaining anything.

You have NO understanding of the connection between mind and brain.

You have no clue what the objective mind is.

 

[untermensche]

Funny isn't it. I'm here and I articulate what comes up.

Is that English?

You are dodging the obvious with all your might.

If I am not talking to a free mind choosing their words freely then there is no reason to listen to any of it.

The mind, an organ that works with ideas not proteins, as an extension of the brain is the only way to explain the data of experience.

 

[fromderinside]

Wow. Now the mind is an organ. Ever seen one? No. Not believed you had one. have you ever seen one in the flesh, they orgon mind that is. I'm using seen in it's literal sense..

I wonder what your next blunder is going to be and how you are going to duck this one.

What you are seeing is the product of a brain functioning properly.

 

[DBT]

You're blowing smoke not explaining anything.

You have NO understanding of the connection between mind and brain.

You have no clue what the objective mind is.

I can only point out again that you accept no explanation other than your own, no matter what the source, science, experiments, case studies, evidence, analysis by researchers all count for nothing......nobody knows anything, nobody understands anything.

Only you, you claim to know, you claim to understand, the only problem being, the evidence goes against you.

Which of course you don't care about. You have your own faith. Enjoy it. Enjoy the illusion of understanding something that according to you, nobody else understands.

I hope it brings you comfort.

 

[untermensche]

Wow. Now the mind is an organ. Ever seen one?...

I use the term in a functional sense. And the fact that we don't know what specific activity the mind arises from and therefore don't know what the mind is is MY point.

You have no point.

 

[untermensche]

You're blowing smoke not explaining anything.

You have NO understanding of the connection between mind and brain.

You have no clue what the objective mind is.

I can only point out again that you accept no explanation other than your own, no matter what the source, science, experiments, case studies, evidence, analysis by researchers all count for nothing......nobody knows anything, nobody understands anything.

Only you, you claim to know, you claim to understand, the only problem being, the evidence goes against you.

Which of course you don't care about. You have your own faith. Enjoy it. Enjoy the illusion of understanding something that according to you, nobody else understands.

I hope it brings you comfort.

You are lying if you say I can't be persuaded by evidence.

What I can't be persuaded by is a bunch of fictional stories about the workings of the mind based on nothing but knowledge of LOCATION, very crude location, of increased activity. Activity that isn't understood at all. Not one person understands how nervous tissue creates any subjective effect.

It takes knowing what the objective mind is to know what it's connection to the brain is.

That these silly stories based on nothing but location of activity that isn't understood at all gives you comfort is amazing.

That you make statements with your autonomous mind that the mind is not autonomous is amazing.

If you are not making your statements autonomously then there is absolutely no reason to listen to any of them.

And you have absolutely no reason to believe any of it.

If you are just a programmed reflex then you are worthless to anyone.

 

[fromderinside]

Wow. Now the mind is an organ. Ever seen one?...

I use the term in a functional sense. And the fact that we don't know what specific activity the mind arises from and therefore don't know what the mind is is MY point.

You have no point.

The brain functions. That you can speak of in a functional sense. Whatever it is you are referring to in a functional sense needs to be something real that can function. Mind doesn't appear to be anything like an organ because you can't ascribe one aspect of mind organ yourself. So you are even further away from being able to defend your proposal than am I. I have, at least, characterized and found experimental support for brain function many times.

Come back when you have an orchestra with which to play your imaginary opera.

 

[untermensche]

Wow. Now the mind is an organ. Ever seen one?...

I use the term in a functional sense. And the fact that we don't know what specific activity the mind arises from and therefore don't know what the mind is is MY point.

You have no point.

The brain functions. That you can speak of in a functional sense. Whatever it is you are referring to in a functional sense needs to be something real that can function. Mind doesn't appear to be anything like an organ because you can't ascribe one aspect of mind organ yourself. So you are even further away from being able to defend your proposal than am I. I have, at least, characterized and found experimental support for brain function many times.

Come back when you have an orchestra with which to play your imaginary opera.

I am not sure what point you are trying to make here with your active mind.

I chose the words I write here with my mind.

I do it. It is an activity. And if I don't actively chose some words then there would be none.

Nothing is forcing me. A situation is compelling me. That is all. But at any time I could just stop responding.

I chose when and what to say. I use my mind, not my liver, not my spleen, not any organ. It is not magic.

That is function.

 

[DBT]

You're blowing smoke not explaining anything.

You have NO understanding of the connection between mind and brain.

You have no clue what the objective mind is.

I can only point out again that you accept no explanation other than your own, no matter what the source, science, experiments, case studies, evidence, analysis by researchers all count for nothing......nobody knows anything, nobody understands anything.

Only you, you claim to know, you claim to understand, the only problem being, the evidence goes against you.

Which of course you don't care about. You have your own faith. Enjoy it. Enjoy the illusion of understanding something that according to you, nobody else understands.

I hope it brings you comfort.

You are lying if you say I can't be persuaded by evidence.

Not so. I have posted more than enough quotes and links to experiments and case studies, analysis by researchers, etc, but you reject it all in favour of your own unfounded beliefs.

Enjoy your faith. No amount of evidence can change your mind. Your mind is fixed.

 

[WAB]

Brain- Objective
Mind - Subjective

Objective "mind" is a contradiction in terms.

'The peas are in the pot' - objective
'I like peas' - subjective.

'I like peas' is dependent on mind, ie, it is subjective; 'peas are in the pot' is not dependent on an observer or a valuer - it's an objective fact.

That being said, I am not opposed to the idea of a person having a modicum of control over what they do. There are such things as concentration and focus, intention, and YES! even will.

ETA: THAT being said, I essentially agree with DBT: all mind, all will, all everything that occurs in the psyche, is dependent on brain activity. No brain, no mind.

The brain is not the slave of the mind: the mind is the slave of the brain.

 

[The AntiChris]

'I like peas' - subjective.

No, that's objective (there's a fact of the matter).

'Peas are delicious' is subjective (there's no fact of the matter - it's true for some, false for others).

 

[fromderinside]

like fails the same test as delicious. ​Negative works with both.

 

[untermensche]

Brain- Objective
Mind - Subjective

Objective "mind" is a contradiction in terms.

'The peas are in the pot' - objective
'I like peas' - subjective...

I experience the sight and smell and attraction to peas - subjective

The specific activity of something, likely the brain, creating you (the mind) and your experiences and your ability to have likes - objective

To say there can be the subjective without something objective as the cause is an absurdity.

To say there can be the subjective mind without the objective mind is an absurdity.

But so-called neuroscience in terms of the mind is just one invented story after another. There is no understanding of the mind and how it is created at all.

 

[untermensche]

You are lying if you say I can't be persuaded by evidence.

Not so. I have posted more than enough quotes and links to experiments and case studies, analysis by researchers, etc, but you reject it all in favour of your own unfounded beliefs.

Enjoy your faith. No amount of evidence can change your mind. Your mind is fixed.

You have posted studies. That is true.

Most of them you can't even understand and take the conclusions from the authors as holy gospel.

You have no ability to look beyond the self serving claims of the authors.

You have no ability to examine these studies.

Yes you have presented them, but it is nothing but hand waving.

There is no understanding of the objective mind in any of them.

 

[fromderinside]

The brain functions. That you can speak of in a functional sense. Whatever it is you are referring to in a functional sense needs to be something real that can function. Mind doesn't appear to be anything like an organ because you can't ascribe one aspect of mind organ yourself. So you are even further away from being able to defend your proposal than am I. I have, at least, characterized and found experimental support for brain function many times.

Come back when you have an orchestra with which to play your imaginary opera.

I am not sure what point you are trying to make here with your active mind.

I chose the words I write here with my mind.

I do it. It is an activity. And if I don't actively chose some words then there would be none.

Nothing is forcing me. A situation is compelling me. That is all. But at any time I could just stop responding.

I chose when and what to say. I use my mind, not my liver, not my spleen, not any organ. It is not magic.

That is function.

So easy.

You choose as the result of processing input differing from your bent. You don't write with your mind. You write with your pen, pencil, typewrite, keyboard, ....

So, self awareness is argument for mind now? Simplest example is mirror recognition situation. I wonder what those darling little mirror cells are doing as you read my texts? Hmmmnnn. Mind? I think not.


Not forcing you. How the hell do you rationalize surviving? Scientists have already modelled that one pretty well. I'm pretty sure that if you could just stop responding you would have done that by now. No. What you are doing is caused and you don't seem to have any way to get around defending well entrenched biases.

Actually you seem to be acting as a Neanderthal. Trapped in a repetitive situation with no options forthcoming rather than considering options and possibilities like an iconic modern human who sees possibilities and alternatives outside oneself.

Considering you are self aware you and your mirror cells are firing empathy and tribal reactive outputs you can to do no other than what you have been doing. Machina est.

 

[WAB]

'I like peas' - subjective.

No, that's objective (there's a fact of the matter).

'Peas are delicious' is subjective (there's no fact of the matter - it's true for some, false for others).

Crap, you're right!

Note to self: Never post while drunk...

 

[WAB]

Brain- Objective
Mind - Subjective

Objective "mind" is a contradiction in terms.

'The peas are in the pot' - objective
'I like peas' - subjective...

I experience the sight and smell and attraction to peas - subjective

The specific activity of something, likely the brain, creating you (the mind) and your experiences and your ability to have likes - objective

To say there can be the subjective without something objective as the cause is an absurdity.

To say there can be the subjective mind without the objective mind is an absurdity.

But so-called neuroscience in terms of the mind is just one invented story after another. There is no understanding of the mind and how it is created at all.

To be plain: YES, whatever causes "mind" is objective. The easy answer is the brain - which I believe is what DBT has been arguing (not to speak for you, DBT).

But mind itself is a personal experience. Sure, all or at least most humans experience mind: sense of self and identity, memory, day-to-day life as a real, existential being. We might say that "mind" is objective by virtue of the fact that all or most humans experience it. Might.

But objective transcends experience. The stars, planets, galaxies, are objective. They exist beyond anyone's personal experience of them. Unless you're a Berkeleyian Idealist.

Mind does not transcend experience. It IS experience. It is subjective.

ETA: Just to be clear: I hear you with respect to will and control. I am not one to align myself to the theory that humans are wholly mechanical. Consciousness and intelligence exist.