Chemicals in the Brain and Truth.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
20-09-2015, 06:12 AM
RE: Chemicals in the Brain and Truth.
(20-09-2015 05:35 AM)DLJ Wrote:  
(20-09-2015 05:19 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  ...
The question of how to train my neural circuitry ...

Option 1:
A chair and a whip.

Option 2:

Read stuff.

In other words, upload more and more thinking-tools into your neck top.

Pattern recognition is only useful when you have the patterns to match / compare.

Thumbsup


I’m with you to a degree on the pattern part, but what the analogy misses, is perhaps more apparent in an analogy with a pattern recognizing computer. The computer is programed in a way to recognize a particular pattern, everything else that doesn’t fit that pattern might amount to nothing more than gibberish, or seen as of no value.

But what’s the equivalent to the programing here to the human brain? Well the most obvious one, would be biases (or at least something analogous to a bias), biases that we didn’t necessarily choose ourselves, but are present in us as the result of our histories. Biases in reading stuff, would lead to when reading certain propositions the ones being recognized as true, are those that confirm those biases. When someone is able to say a series of proposition, like a tune that pleases the ears of the bias, we go ah yes it’s true.

"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
20-09-2015, 06:14 AM
RE: Chemicals in the Brain and Truth.
(20-09-2015 05:46 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  The scientific method. It works, bitch. It predicts stuff. You got something better ? Let's hear it.

Is the scientific method reducible to neurochemistry in the brain? Can I verify using scans of the brain, whether or not it's been used properly?

Or would you say where as thoughts are reducible to neurochemistry in the brain, methodologies are not?

"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
20-09-2015, 06:21 AM (This post was last modified: 20-09-2015 06:26 AM by Tomasia.)
RE: Chemicals in the Brain and Truth.
(20-09-2015 05:34 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(20-09-2015 05:19 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  I can also in essence train my brain to accept whatever these authorities claim as true, to light up the unique neural pathways in my brain, that correspond to sensation of truth for me. That when they say things are true, I can accept it as true, as a result, without having to do the same evaluations. Any series of propositions they offer, all may ring true to me as a result.

Prove it, and tell us exactly how you go about that.

Prove what? How I go about "training" my brain? You're the one that stated scientist train their brains. I was just piggyback off of your own terminology.

I don't believe training your brain in such a way is possible. Because what we perceive as true is a product of a variety of factors, shaping our neural circuitry most of which are out of our control, genetics predispositions, my upbringing, my relationship with my parents, the influence of my community, life experiences including schools, and reading etc... are shaping the chemicals in my brain, and how I think of the world.

"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
20-09-2015, 06:24 AM (This post was last modified: 21-09-2015 09:20 AM by DLJ.)
RE: Chemicals in the Brain and Truth.
(20-09-2015 06:14 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(20-09-2015 05:46 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  The scientific method. It works, bitch. It predicts stuff. You got something better ? Let's hear it.

Is the scientific method reducible to neurochemistry in the brain? Can I verify using scans of the brain, whether or not it's been used properly?

Or would you say where as thoughts are reducible to neurochemistry in the brain, methodologies are not?

Are you not understanding or simply ignoring the answers that everyone has been giving you?

Huh

Is an application reducible to ones and zeros? Yes.

Does the application equate to its ones and zeros? No.

Drinking Beverage

(20-09-2015 06:12 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  ...
The computer is programed in a way to recognize a particular pattern, everything else that doesn’t fit that pattern might amount to nothing more than gibberish, or seen as of no value.
...

Ah! I see the piece of the puzzle that you're missing.

The mismatches are as important, or more so, than the matches.

Yes




Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes DLJ's post
20-09-2015, 06:31 AM (This post was last modified: 20-09-2015 07:20 AM by Tomasia.)
RE: Chemicals in the Brain and Truth.
(20-09-2015 06:24 AM)DLJ Wrote:  
(20-09-2015 06:14 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  Is the scientific method reducible to neurochemistry in the brain? Can I verify using scans of the brain, whether or not it's been used properly?

Or would you say where as thoughts are reducible to neurochemistry in the brain, methodologies are not?

Are you not understanding or simply ignoring the answers that every has been giving you?

Huh

Is an application reducible to ones and zeros? Yes.

Does the application equate to its ones and zeros? No.

Drinking Beverage

I try and treat everyone uniquely, particularly in regards to questions where the answers are likely to be different depending on the person. I try to treat everything bucky has to say, as distinct from what you have to say. I think that's fair a way to acknowledge whatever unique disagreements, or distinctions arise among different atheists here.

Quote:Is an application reducible to ones and zeros? Yes.

Does the application equate to its ones and zeros? No.

If my brain is the one doing the application it does equate to one's and zeros. I'm not saying all of reality is reducible to the mind. But the mind requires reality to be reduced to it, it order for us to recognize it.

Suppose there is some application out there that's independent of the mind. It's entirely useless, gibberish, unless the dependency is established by reducing it all to ones and zeros. For Siri to recognize or make sense of any proposition I say to her, requires it to be broken down to zeroes and ones. Things that her hardware cannot break down in such a way, do not register.

"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
20-09-2015, 06:37 AM
RE: Chemicals in the Brain and Truth.
(20-09-2015 06:24 AM)DLJ Wrote:  Ah! I see the piece of the puzzle that you're missing.

The mismatches are as important, or more so, than the matches.

Yes

It might be for one mind, it might not be so for the other. In fact those mismatches are what someone might refer to as "non-evidence", not to be factored when considering the truth of something, like we might do so when reading about someone's personal experience, or we might do so when reading views expressed by non-scientist in regards to science, etc.... Mismatches here for some are not important.

"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
20-09-2015, 06:53 AM (This post was last modified: 20-09-2015 06:57 AM by Tomasia.)
RE: Chemicals in the Brain and Truth.
(19-09-2015 02:04 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(19-09-2015 02:00 PM)houseofcantor Wrote:  You guys... theist puts truth into the title, wherever it's going, that ain't it. Tongue
I was going to say "Yeah but he didn't capitalise it" but then I took another look at the title.

It was only capitalized because it was the title, just like the brain was. I actually mean it in small "t" form.

I don't have a complete argument here, perhaps a bare outline of one, which I can't formally articulate as of yet. The OP is primarily for the sake of building it, to explore a question, such as if "truth", like "I" and "free-will" is an illusion.

"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
20-09-2015, 06:55 AM (This post was last modified: 20-09-2015 07:10 AM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Chemicals in the Brain and Truth.
(20-09-2015 06:21 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  Prove what? How I go about "training" my brain? You're the one that stated scientist train their brains. I was just piggyback off of your own terminology.

I said nothing of the sort. You did. Now you can't back it up. You're a pathetic attention-seeking troll.

BTW, it's "piggybacking". You ever plan on learning how to write correct English ?

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-09-2015, 07:09 AM (This post was last modified: 20-09-2015 07:15 AM by Tomasia.)
RE: Chemicals in the Brain and Truth.
(20-09-2015 06:55 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(20-09-2015 06:21 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  Prove what? How I go about "training" my brain? You're the one that stated scientist train their brains. I was just piggyback off of your own terminology.

I said nothing of the sort. You did. Now you can't back it up. You're a pathetic attention-seeking troll.

What you said is:

"Some brains are trained to evaluate certain evidence. They are authorities on their subjects... "

I'm not sure what authorities on the subject you meant, other than scientist.

It wasn't very clear to me how you meant the word "trained", but I just went ahead and borrowed it for convenience.

You also didn't ask a very clear question previously either, you left it quite open to interpretation as to what your actual question to me was. If I interpreted your question wrong, than next take make it more specific.

If some misunderstanding has arose between us, it wasn't intentional. It wasn't for the sake of getting you frustrated (trolling). I prefer you to not be frustrated.

Frustrated atheists, get me frustrated, and that just fucks up my zen.

"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
20-09-2015, 07:34 AM (This post was last modified: 20-09-2015 07:39 AM by Tomasia.)
RE: Chemicals in the Brain and Truth.
(19-09-2015 01:56 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  
(19-09-2015 12:57 PM)onlinebiker Wrote:  If brains were built like computers -- all exactly the same -- you could hook up a brain and get 100 percent "yes" or "no" - "truth" or "lie" outcomes.....

Brains are computers. I'm not sure what you mean by the rest of this statement, but brains are computers in the absolute most literal sense.

The brain is a Turing-complete device. Any Turing-complete device is, by definition, a computer. There are a hell of a lot of delicate fiddly bits in there, because brains are really a bit of a mess when you get right down to it, so it's often difficult to track a single computational process completely, but the brain is very much a computer.

Assume one day we're able to create a very sophisticated computer like our brain, that's rational, able to process reality, and determine what is true or not, as we suppose the best human beings are, perhaps even better.

Wouldn't we say that whatever this sophisticated computer holds as true, is actually true. And that these truths can be reducible to it's circuitry? While we might not be able to tell what true or not based on neurochemistry of the human brain, we should be able to tell whats true or not based on the scan of the computers brain, correct?

"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
Post Reply
Forum Jump: