There isn't really a 'freewill problem'.

[untermensche]

The effects are the observed effects.

The clear observation is we use thoughts to initiate movement.

To do that consciousness must have an effect on the brain.

There is no logic in saying because some kind of unknown activity of the brain creates the phenomena of consciousness that the phenomena of consciousness cannot also have effects on the brain.

The brain generates thoughts.

That is a hypothesis.

Show me a brain doing it.

Not a brain with a bunch of activity that you claim is doing it.

Prove your hypothesis by showing how a brain does it. Without missing a step.

Minus that all you have is an unsupported hypothesis.

But the salient point here is that even if the brain is somehow generating a thought that does not tell us anything about what a thought can do.

 

[DBT]

Sour Grapes, Sweety.

I have explained the error of your wording over and over, to no avail. There is no free will to be found in your 'person as pattern, etc, that acts upon the body' because there is no such entity.

You don't address what I say. You do try to explain what you mean but it still falls far short of any sort of argument for free will because your assumptions are flawed.

Wow. You are seriously condescending. Unnecessarily so.

Depends on what I am responding to. If you check the tone of your own posts you may understand. But then, a good number of posters are blind to their own excesses, they only see fault in others.

 

[DBT]

The effects are the observed effects.

The clear observation is we use thoughts to initiate movement.

To do that consciousness must have an effect on the brain.

There is no logic in saying because some kind of unknown activity of the brain creates the phenomena of consciousness that the phenomena of consciousness cannot also have effects on the brain.

The brain generates thoughts.

That is a hypothesis.

Show me a brain doing it.

Not a brain with a bunch of activity that you claim is doing it.

Prove your hypothesis by showing how a brain does it. Without missing a step.

Minus that all you have is an unsupported hypothesis.

But the salient point here is that even if the brain is somehow generating a thought that does not tell us anything about what a thought can do.

You have always ignored the evidence, research and analysis that has been provided. Barring that, a simple hard knock on the head with a mallet ends the process of thought.....why? because the brain is responsible for thought and there is no thought without brain actively generating thought....perceptions, feelings, etc, included

 

[DBT]

The brain generates thoughts.

Sure. In exactly the same way that a server generates processes

Do you understand the distinction between hardware and software? Do you understand the distinction between architecture and process, as it relates to information systems - whether those systems are silicon based or organic?

What you appear to miss is the brain generates its own 'software' - which is not free will. The process is an intrinsic part of what a brain is and what a brain does. Brain activity, when active, is inseparable from the brain. It cannot be copied or installed by an external agent, barring brain washing techniques.

The brain acquires information from its senses and it is this information that acts upon the brain shaping its response according to its architecture....the brain of a bird as compared to the brain of a cat, etc, producing its own set of behaviours...

 

[untermensche]

That is a hypothesis.

Show me a brain doing it.

Not a brain with a bunch of activity that you claim is doing it.

Prove your hypothesis by showing how a brain does it. Without missing a step.

Minus that all you have is an unsupported hypothesis.

But the salient point here is that even if the brain is somehow generating a thought that does not tell us anything about what a thought can do.

You have always ignored the evidence, research and analysis that has been provided. Barring that, a simple hard knock on the head with a mallet ends the process of thought.....why? because the brain is responsible for thought and there is no thought without brain actively generating thought....perceptions, feelings, etc, included

Try addressing the salient point.

You have not proven your hypothesis with your empty appeals to authority on the matter that do not exist. The timing of human guesses tells us nothing about the will.

 

[DBT]

That is a hypothesis.

Show me a brain doing it.

Not a brain with a bunch of activity that you claim is doing it.

Prove your hypothesis by showing how a brain does it. Without missing a step.

Minus that all you have is an unsupported hypothesis.

But the salient point here is that even if the brain is somehow generating a thought that does not tell us anything about what a thought can do.

You have always ignored the evidence, research and analysis that has been provided. Barring that, a simple hard knock on the head with a mallet ends the process of thought.....why? because the brain is responsible for thought and there is no thought without brain actively generating thought....perceptions, feelings, etc, included

Try addressing the salient point.

You have not proven your hypothesis with your empty appeals to authority on the matter that do not exist. The timing of human guesses tells us nothing about the will.

I am not appealing to authority. Observation, research, experiments, testing and analysis is the means of discovery and learning.....it's called the scientific method.

The timing of response is determined by physics, input must necessarily precede transmission and propagation of information within the brain, then processing, then response and conscious representation of the external world and self responding to its objects and events....you raising your arm and pressing the chosen button.

That, basically, is how it works according to the physics of cognition.

Now you can wail and protest all you like but the facts of this physical process of cognition won't go away.

 

[Speakpigeon]

You have always ignored the evidence, research and analysis that has been provided. Barring that, a simple hard knock on the head with a mallet ends the process of thought.....why? because the brain is responsible for thought and there is no thought without brain actively generating thought....perceptions, feelings, etc, included

Yes, and epileptic patients can testify that what an EEG registered as an electric perturbation going through their brain coincided with their subjective experience of mental confusion.

Still, while there is no doubt in my mind that our brain provides us with our specific mental and thinking capabilities, it remains unclear that whatever a brain can do could entirely explain the subjective experience of our mental life.
EB

 

[untermensche]

The timing of response is determined by physics, input must necessarily precede transmission and propagation of information within the brain...

Nobody has ever timed any aspect of consciousness. Nobody has the slightest clue what it is.

They have settled for timing guesses made by consciousness. Of course if the consciousness is making a guess it is initiating something.

 

[DBT]

You have always ignored the evidence, research and analysis that has been provided. Barring that, a simple hard knock on the head with a mallet ends the process of thought.....why? because the brain is responsible for thought and there is no thought without brain actively generating thought....perceptions, feelings, etc, included

Yes, and epileptic patients can testify that what an EEG registered as an electric perturbation going through their brain coincided with their subjective experience of mental confusion.

The patient does not need to testify. Their condition is associated with the abnormality that is evidently present in their brain, some structural, some chemical.

''Structural epilepsies are conceptualized as having a distinct structural brain abnormality that has been demonstrated to be associated with a substantially increased risk of epilepsy in appropriately designed studies. The structural brain abnormality can be acquired (such as due to stroke, trauma or infection) or may be of genetic origin; however, as we currently understand it, the structural brain abnormality is a separate disorder interposed between the acquired or genetic defect and the epilepsy.''

Still, while there is no doubt in my mind that our brain provides us with our specific mental and thinking capabilities, it remains unclear that whatever a brain can do could entirely explain the subjective experience of our mental life.
EB

Why is that? What else could explain subjective experience?

 

[DBT]

The timing of response is determined by physics, input must necessarily precede transmission and propagation of information within the brain...

Nobody has ever timed any aspect of consciousness. Nobody has the slightest clue what it is.

They have settled for timing guesses made by consciousness. Of course if the consciousness is making a guess it is initiating something.

Response times can be timed and have been timed, right from nerve loop reflex to auditory, visual, tactile response, etc.

Plus as I said....physics does not permit conscious representation of information before the brain acquires this information from its senses. The eyes do not create vision, visual imagery, visual experience, etc, the brain does. The eyes gather light waves, which is information and transmit this information to the visual cortex to be processed, the ears do not hear, they convey information to the brain, etc, etc.

 

[Emily Lake]

Sour Grapes, Sweety.

I have explained the error of your wording over and over, to no avail. There is no free will to be found in your 'person as pattern, etc, that acts upon the body' because there is no such entity.

You don't address what I say. You do try to explain what you mean but it still falls far short of any sort of argument for free will because your assumptions are flawed.

Wow. You are seriously condescending. Unnecessarily so.

Depends on what I am responding to. If you check the tone of your own posts you may understand. But then, a good number of posters are blind to their own excesses, they only see fault in others.

Nothing that I have posted comes anywhere near the level of condescension engendered in "Sour Grapes, Sweety". Not even close.

 

[Emily Lake]

''Structural epilepsies are conceptualized as having a distinct structural brain abnormality that has been demonstrated to be associated with a substantially increased risk of epilepsy in appropriately designed studies. The structural brain abnormality can be acquired (such as due to stroke, trauma or infection) or may be of genetic origin; however, as we currently understand it, the structural brain abnormality is a separate disorder interposed between the acquired or genetic defect and the epilepsy.''

Just for consideration, I am epileptic, and I have no structural abnormalities. I have a process abnormality. My brains sometimes misfires for no good goddamned reason that anyone has been able to identify. There's a very large number of epileptics who have no structural abnormalities. Similarly, schizophrenics don't have structural abnormalities, nor do people with personality disorders, nor do people who are simply assholes.

It is not only brain architecture. That's the point here. You keep insisting that it is architecture alone that is at play in consciousness, thought, decision-making etc. But that simply isn't true. At a minimum, the architecture requires a process - it requires inputs and feedback loops.

Again, logical constructs: all hands have cells, but not all cells make hands. All minds have brains, but not all brains have minds. All conscious thought requires a brain upon which to operate, but not all brains ensure that conscious thought is present.

 

[DBT]

Depends on what I am responding to. If you check the tone of your own posts you may understand. But then, a good number of posters are blind to their own excesses, they only see fault in others.

Nothing that I have posted comes anywhere near the level of condescension engendered in "Sour Grapes, Sweety". Not even close.

That is a matter of perspective.

 

[DBT]

''Structural epilepsies are conceptualized as having a distinct structural brain abnormality that has been demonstrated to be associated with a substantially increased risk of epilepsy in appropriately designed studies. The structural brain abnormality can be acquired (such as due to stroke, trauma or infection) or may be of genetic origin; however, as we currently understand it, the structural brain abnormality is a separate disorder interposed between the acquired or genetic defect and the epilepsy.''

Just for consideration, I am epileptic, and I have no structural abnormalities. I have a process abnormality. My brains sometimes misfires for no good goddamned reason that anyone has been able to identify. There's a very large number of epileptics who have no structural abnormalities. Similarly, schizophrenics don't have structural abnormalities, nor do people with personality disorders, nor do people who are simply assholes.

It is not only brain architecture. That's the point here. You keep insisting that it is architecture alone that is at play in consciousness, thought, decision-making etc. But that simply isn't true. At a minimum, the architecture requires a process - it requires inputs and feedback loops.

Again, logical constructs: all hands have cells, but not all cells make hands. All minds have brains, but not all brains have minds. All conscious thought requires a brain upon which to operate, but not all brains ensure that conscious thought is present.

You missed a relevant part of what I said. I did not say, claim or imply that epilepsy is only caused by structural abnormalities....what I said was;''Their condition is associated with the abnormality that is evidently present in their brain, some structural, some chemical'' - which includes chemical abnormalities, neurotransmitters, etc, etc.

Why take what was a brief remark and assume that this is all that was meant?

For example;

''Epilepsy may develop because of an abnormality in brain wiring, an imbalance of nerve signaling chemicals called neurotransmitters, or some combination of these factors. Researchers think that some people who have epilepsy have too much of a neurotransmitter that increases impulse transmission and others have too little too little of neurotransmitters that reduce transmission.
Either situation can result in too much neuronal activity and cause epilepsy. One of the most-studied neurotransmitters that plays a role in epilepsy is GABA, or gamma-aminobutyric acid, which is an inhibitory neurotransmitter.''

Nor is it fair to assume that there are no associations with brain function just because the cause or causes of an episode may not be known.

 

[Speakpigeon]

The patient does not need to testify. Their condition is associated with the abnormality that is evidently present in their brain, some structural, some chemical.

''Structural epilepsies are conceptualized as having a distinct structural brain abnormality that has been demonstrated to be associated with a substantially increased risk of epilepsy in appropriately designed studies. The structural brain abnormality can be acquired (such as due to stroke, trauma or infection) or may be of genetic origin; however, as we currently understand it, the structural brain abnormality is a separate disorder interposed between the acquired or genetic defect and the epilepsy.''

The cause of most cases of epilepsy is unknown.

Epilepsy
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epilepsy
The cause of most cases of epilepsy is unknown. Some cases occur as the result of brain injury, stroke, brain tumors, infections of the brain and birth defects, through a process known as epileptogenesis. Known genetic mutations are directly linked to a small proportion of cases. Epileptic seizures are the result of excessive and abnormal neuronal activity in the cortex of the brain. The diagnosis involves ruling out other conditions that might cause similar symptoms, such as fainting, and determining if another cause of seizures is present, such as alcohol withdrawal or electrolyte problems. This may be partly done by imaging the brain and performing blood tests. Epilepsy can often be confirmed with an electroencephalogram (EEG), but a normal test does not rule out the condition.

Still, my point was that admitting to the role of the brain in the existence of the mind is well motivated even from our subjective point of view.

If you think it's enough to do away with the subjective point of view then the knock on the head test is good enough. Or indeed anything with the same effect such sleep, coma, or indeed the death of the subject. Or wait, just put the subject in a hermetic box. You should be able to observe that physical means stop any observable, objective elements that there is any mental activity.

Still, while there is no doubt in my mind that our brain provides us with our specific mental and thinking capabilities, it remains unclear that whatever a brain can do could entirely explain the subjective experience of our mental life.
EB

Why is that? What else could explain subjective experience?

I have no idea what could explain subjective experience and I can't even conceive how the brain would.
EB

 

[untermensche]

Again, if consciousness is making guesses about the timing of things then it is clearly initiating something.

 

[Kharakov]

And this just does not entail that Mind is independent of Brain....

For a mind to influence a brain it must NOT be independent of it. It must have intimate contact with it.

So your mind does not influence a brain?

 

[untermensche]

And this just does not entail that Mind is independent of Brain....

For a mind to influence a brain it must NOT be independent of it. It must have intimate contact with it.

So your mind does not influence a brain?

My mind decides which ideas I believe not my brain.

 

[Speakpigeon]

So your mind must have decided you should believe that you mind decides which ideas you believe not your brain.

Who cares?
EB

 

[DBT]

The cause of most cases of epilepsy is unknown.

While the reasons for epilepsy on a case to case basis may not be known, the source of epilepsy is known; brain structure and function, state and condition, even if the exact cause be it chemical or structural is not known in many cases. Plus, speaking generally, there is not one single cause of epilepsy but many, it may be structural, electrical, chemical or any combination.

I have no idea what could explain subjective experience and I can't even conceive how the brain would.
EB

Yet subjective experience is only related to brain activity, without that necessary condition there is no experience.....all experience being subjective.