Chemicals in the Brain and Truth.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
26-09-2015, 08:40 PM
Chemicals in the Brain and Truth.
(26-09-2015 02:28 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(26-09-2015 10:21 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  But a reconciliation with this picture is needed as to what it means to search for the truth.
There is a weirdness about a search for the truth.

Scientists certainly don't go around claiming to have found the truth.
The Truth is something dear to Christians, it's part of their brainwashing techniques.

Abstract concepts like "mind", "soul", "truth", "right/wrong" are things that religious folk fight hard to make out that these things are fundamental and hence have an existence rather than merely being conceptual.

This whole thread is a little awkward if you ask me. Scientists are kicking the tires of the universe, developing models that accurately reflect various aspects of the universe, models that we can take advantage of in order to build things of value that we can use to "improve" our lives.

Would you agree with a position like that of Richard Rorty: ""Truth cannot be out there -- cannot exist independently of the human mind -- because sentences cannot so exist, or be out there. The world is out there, but descriptions of the world are not. Only descriptions of the world can be true or false. The world on its own unaided by the describing activities of humans cannot.”


Where you position of truth would parallel to some degree with your position on morality?

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-09-2015, 08:43 PM (This post was last modified: 26-09-2015 09:15 PM by Tomasia.)
Chemicals in the Brain and Truth.
(26-09-2015 10:42 AM)DLJ Wrote:  What's this 'you' of which you speak?

Are you suggesting the 'homunculus theory' whereby an 'inner you' sifts through choices of thoughts looking for acceptable ones?

No. And it just a plain old ordinary "you", like when my wife tells me "you need to do the dishes."

Quote:I'm not interested in the 'truthiness' question until we've addressed the 'consciousness' question. How do the thoughts 'appear' at the top of the queue, so to speak?

I'm not exactly sure what you mean. What do you mean by "top" of the queue. Can you give me an example?

Quote: "uncomfortable, unsettling your neurochemistry in a way" ... what is the mechanism (the 'in a way') by which one's neurochemistry becomes uncomfortable?

You might as well ask me by what words, or questions could I make you uncomfortable or unsettled. Some thought might be an entirely uncomfortable one for you, which might not be so for others.


Quote:You wrote "just molecules in motion".

Just ones and zeros do not a spreadsheet make.

Spreadsheet are reducible to ones and zeros, are nothing more than a particular arrangement of them.

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-09-2015, 08:48 PM
RE: Chemicals in the Brain and Truth.
(26-09-2015 08:34 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  Are these emergent properties irreducible? Are they physical properties, governed by the laws of physics?

Fourteenth verse, same as the first...

"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it."
- A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-09-2015, 12:32 AM
RE: Chemicals in the Brain and Truth.
(26-09-2015 08:40 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  Would you agree with a position like that of Richard Rorty: ""Truth cannot be out there -- cannot exist independently of the human mind -- because sentences cannot so exist, or be out there. The world is out there, but descriptions of the world are not. Only descriptions of the world can be true or false. The world on its own unaided by the describing activities of humans cannot.”
I'd ask what he means when he says "truth" it's not clear to me from the statement above.
Facts exist outside of the human mind, is "truth" a human recognition of facts?

(26-09-2015 08:40 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  Where you position of truth would parallel to some degree with your position on morality?
Depends on the context. If my wife asked me if I had just farted, I might say, yes, that is true. I certainly wouldn't say there is no such thing as truth.

If my wife asked me if it is morally wrong to fart I might say that is for her to decide her own position on it, but not to expert her position to be accepted by me.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Stevil's post
27-09-2015, 01:26 AM (This post was last modified: 27-09-2015 01:51 AM by DLJ.)
RE: Chemicals in the Brain and Truth.
(26-09-2015 08:43 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(26-09-2015 10:42 AM)DLJ Wrote:  What's this 'you' of which you speak?

Are you suggesting the 'homunculus theory' whereby an 'inner you' sifts through choices of thoughts looking for acceptable ones?

No. And it just a plain old ordinary "you", like when my wife tells me "you need to do the dishes."
...

I can tell that you (Tomasia) didn't understand the depth of my question.

I've lost the will to keep trying.

(26-09-2015 08:43 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
Quote:I'm not interested in the 'truthiness' question until we've addressed the 'consciousness' question. How do the thoughts 'appear' at the top of the queue, so to speak?

I'm not exactly sure what you mean. What do you mean by "top" of the queue. Can you give me an example?
...

Hmmm. OK. Try to imaging all levels (cosmic to molecular) as a competition for resources. At the level of thought, imagine all the chemical firings produce reactions that equate to images. There's millions of them (trillions maybe). The patterns that match our baseline (what we expect) do not leap to the front of the queue i.e. we are not aware (conscious) of them. The patterns that do not match, trigger our senses to focus in that direction because our attention (our resources) are directed there ... these are our conscious thoughts.

Is that any clearer?

My point is that we need to understand this mechanism in detail before we adventure into the idea of rational vs. irrational.

(26-09-2015 08:43 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
Quote: "uncomfortable, unsettling your neurochemistry in a way" ... what is the mechanism (the 'in a way') by which one's neurochemistry becomes uncomfortable?

You might as well ask me by what words, or questions could I make you uncomfortable or unsettled. Some thought might be an entirely uncomfortable one for you, which might not be so for others.
...

Why would I ask that? Why would I ask 'what'? I was asking 'how'.

(26-09-2015 08:43 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
Quote:You wrote "just molecules in motion".

Just ones and zeros do not a spreadsheet make.

Spreadsheet are reducible to ones and zeros, are nothing more than a particular arrangement of them.

Correction:
Spreadsheets are reducible to ones and zeros and are everything more than a particular arrangement of them.

Ones and zeros are 'data' only.
Spreadsheets have also context, rules, process and infrastructure.

Weeping

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes DLJ's post
27-09-2015, 04:46 AM
Chemicals in the Brain and Truth.
(27-09-2015 12:32 AM)Stevil Wrote:  I'd ask what he means when he says "truth" it's not clear to me from the statement above.
Facts exist outside of the human mind, is "truth" a human recognition of facts?

Facts don't exist outside your mind either. There not a part of the properties of any external object. My toothbrush doesn't tell me it's a fact.

It's an interpretation. It's a word you attach to some feature of that abstract image that appears in your mind, you call reality, that's a result of a variety of sensory inputs that produces them in your mind.

Somebody will claim that's it a fact that Jesus was crucified under Pilate, somebody else will say it's not. Both will appeal to whatever moving target of an epistemology they hold, to justify their interpretations of the meaning of a fact along with it.

Quote:Depends on the context. If my wife asked me if I had just farted, I might say, yes, that is true. I certainly wouldn't say there is no such thing as truth.

My wife might ask me if these shoes go with this outfit. And I'll tell her yes. And she'll ask if I'm telling the truth, and I'll say yes as well.

When your wife asks you if you've farted, it's probably because she smelled something foul or heard something, and she's asking you in essence if you felt some air coming out of your ass, a minute ago. And you'd just be confirming yes I did feel my body do just that.

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-09-2015, 04:55 AM (This post was last modified: 27-09-2015 05:30 AM by Tomasia.)
Chemicals in the Brain and Truth.
(27-09-2015 01:26 AM)DLJ Wrote:  Correction:
Spreadsheets are reducible to ones and zeros and are everything more than a particular arrangement of them.

Ones and zeros are 'data' only.
Spreadsheets have also context, rules, process and infrastructure.

Weeping

Nearly all of which is reducible to 0s and 1s, and all of which are ultimately reducible to the hardware.

It might be useful to distinguish the difference between the hardware and the software of computer in some situations, but it's doesn't change the fact that's it all reducible to its hardware.

Quote:Hmmm. OK. Try to imaging all levels (cosmic to molecular) as a competition for resources. At the level of thought, imagine all the chemical firings produce reactions that equate to images. There's millions of them (trillions maybe). The patterns that match our baseline (what we expect) do not leap to the front of the queue i.e. we are not aware (conscious) of them. The patterns that do not match, trigger our senses to focus in that direction because our attention (our resources) are directed there ... these are our conscious thoughts.

Is that any clearer?

My point is that we need to understand this mechanism in detail before we adventure into the idea of rational vs. irrational.

If you're not questioning if at the reducible level whatever force bring some particular oddity into our conscious thought, are physical forces, acting upon our physical brain, than I'm not sure what the argument is.

If it's just a question of trying to find an appropriate way to use the word rational and irrational in regards to this phenomenon, it doesn't matter either. Because these are just words, that have a variety of different meanings to different people, often used in reference to the beliefs of individuals who don't share our beliefs or our own epistemology.

Ever heard of blindsight? A man is consciously blind as a result of an injury, but when asked to point to an object in front of him, he points correctly. But claims he was just guessing, because he cannot consciously see it.

So while we can say it would be accurate to say here that he didn't consciously see the object,would it be accurate to say that his unconscious ability to do so is irrational?

Perhaps some people would, those who would hold than only a conscious thought can be rational, and perhaps other wouldn't, since somewhat accurate visual computations are occurring at a subconscious level.

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-09-2015, 05:53 AM
Chemicals in the Brain and Truth.
(26-09-2015 08:31 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(26-09-2015 04:29 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Facepalm

Rational and irrational are just words in each person's "individual taxonomy" (whatever the fuck that means)? ALL words are "just words" that people ascribe individual meanings to.

So when you prattle on about "truth" as it somehow relates to the brain, you've made an assumption based on your predisposition that beliefs = truths. Which is flat out, horseshit. You are equating internal (in your brain) beliefs with external "truths" (reality). What you sincerely believe in your brain has NO bearing on the nature of reality. And if you believe in a sky wizard, your beliefs aren't influenced by reality either.

Of course what you sincerely believe in your brain has no bearing on reality. Nor does reality speak in propositions, whisper whatever parts of it are true to you either. Nor does it have to correspond to whatever abstract image you have in your head about it.

That's as much true for you as for anyone else.

0_o

You've wrote words but managed to say nothing. Consider

Do you think if you write this way, it makes you sound intelligent? (Hint: it doesn't. It makes it clear you've no clue what you're talking about and that you lack the ability of introspection and self criticism)

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-09-2015, 06:06 AM
Chemicals in the Brain and Truth.
Let me put it this way, you restated (poorly in overly convoluted terms to make it sound like you knew what you were saying) one piece of my critique of what you've been saying in this thread (including the asinine OP that contradicts what you said in your reply to my criticisms). And you never respond or address the remaining criticisms or statements.

Which means you're no longer replying because you have something meaningful to say or because you've an intelligent rebuttal, but because you just like to respond as if it somehow qualifies what you say. The "baffle them with bullshit" technique coupled to the belief that if you post last, you "win."

You should pray for a better set of strategies, scarecrow. Consider

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-09-2015, 08:32 AM
RE: Chemicals in the Brain and Truth.
(27-09-2015 04:55 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(27-09-2015 01:26 AM)DLJ Wrote:  Correction:
Spreadsheets are reducible to ones and zeros and are everything more than a particular arrangement of them.

Ones and zeros are 'data' only.
Spreadsheets have also context, rules, process and infrastructure.

Weeping

Nearly all of which is reducible to 0s and 1s, and all of which are ultimately reducible to the hardware.

It might be useful to distinguish the difference between the hardware and the software of computer in some situations, but it's doesn't change the fact that's it all reducible to its hardware.
...

I refer the honourable gentleman to the answer I gave previously ... post #64, a week ago.

Summary: Reducible but not equatable.

And I'm out. I think I've lost sight of what you are trying to achieve with this. I've certainly lost interest.

Bye.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like DLJ's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: