Does my reality exists regardless of how I perceive it?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
18-01-2016, 03:47 PM
RE: Does my reality exists regardless of how I perceive it?
(18-01-2016 03:32 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  
(18-01-2016 03:24 PM)Chas Wrote:  That is only one definition of fact from one source.

It is also defined as:
  • the quality of being actual
  • something that has actual existence
  • an actual occurrence
  • a piece of information presented as having objective reality
  • something that actually exists; reality; truth:
  • something known to exist or to have happened:
  • a truth known by actual experience or observation; something known to be true:
  • something said to be true or supposed to have happened:

So, instead of using your one cherry-picked definition that lets you play word games, how about we use a more common definition.
It would be considered cherry picking if they carry alternative meanings.
As far as I can tell they all mean the same thing. Do you agree?

No.

Quote:A statement was made once.
The earth was flat.
It was considered a fact.
This statement is no longer considered a fact.

What makes a fact no longer a fact?

That someone considers something a fact does not make it a fact.

The Earth was never flat so it was never a fact that the Earth was flat..

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
18-01-2016, 03:49 PM (This post was last modified: 18-01-2016 04:12 PM by Agnostic Shane.)
RE: Does my reality exists regardless of how I perceive it?
(18-01-2016 03:26 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(18-01-2016 03:04 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Your logic is:
Premise: The pain reached my brain without going through my thought process
Conclusion: Therefore pain & the hammer is real regardless of my thought process

Scientifically speaking:
There is no way the pain can reach your brain without going through your thought process.
The premise is false therefore the conclusion is false.
Invalid argument

You are quite wrong. The pain is felt before there is conscious recognition or thought.

Your argument is invalid as it is based on an incorrect understanding of neurology.
Chas I already defined "thought" as the "process of thinking".

This is the dictionary meaning.
https://www.google.com/search?q=google&i...ught+means
thought
noun
the action or process of thinking.

I even went further to post the anatomy of a thought.
http://michaelbalchan.com/braininfrastru...vid=4s4TeL

Furthermore I am the original poster of the topic.
When I say thought the meaning I wish to portray is "the process of thinking". If you find alternative meanings to the word thought please know that I do not wish to convey those meanings as it is not relevant to the topic I am discussing.
You are free to start a new topic with those alternative meanings to prove a new point you may be trying to make.

So tell me Chas:

"You are quite wrong. The pain is felt before there is conscious recognition or thought."
I am not speaking about recognition here.
I am speaking about the "process of thinking" from start to finish.
"The process of thinking" does not start at the point of conscious recognition in this regard.
In order to prove my theory wrong a test has to be conducted that proves that reality caused me to produce a conscious reaction that completly bypassed "the process of thinking" up until the point of a conscious reaction.

Anatomy of a Thought
When you have a thought, an electrical signal passes back and forth between the various neurons responsible for that thought. Because the brain is always trying to become more efficient, every time two cells communicate with one another the brain makes it easier for them to do so in the future by building up the connection between them. Technically, it does this by building a myelin sheath2 around the axon, which facilitates the transmission of the electrical signal.
The more you have a thought, the more the sheath gets built up, and the easier it is for electrical signals to pass between cells. The easier it is for electrical signals to pass, the easier it becomes to have the same thought in the future. As the father of neuropsychology Dr. Donald O. Hebb famously said, “neurons that fire together wire together.”
The process can be thought of as similar to the way that construction crews might add another lane to a well traveled street or highway to make it easier for cars to travel. Every time you have a thought it’s like giving a signal to the construction crews that more thought-traffic is coming, so they prepare by building more infrastructure.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-01-2016, 03:53 PM
RE: Does my reality exists regardless of how I perceive it?
(18-01-2016 03:49 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  
(18-01-2016 03:26 PM)Chas Wrote:  You are quite wrong. The pain is felt before there is conscious recognition or thought.

Your argument is invalid as it is based on an incorrect understanding of neurology.
Chas I already defined "thought" as the "process of thinking".

This is the dictionary meaning.
https://www.google.com/search?q=google&i...ught+means
thought
noun
the action or process of thinking.

I even went further to post the anatomy of a thought.
http://michaelbalchan.com/braininfrastru...vid=4s4TeL

Furthermore I am the original poster of the topic.
When I say thought the meaning I wish to portray is "the process of thinking". If you find alternative meanings to the word thought please know that I do not wish to convey those meanings as it is not relevant to the topic I am discussing.
You are free to start a new topic with those alternative meanings to prove a new point you may be trying to make.

So tell me Chas:

"You are quite wrong. The pain is felt before there is conscious recognition or thought."
I am not speaking about recognition here.
I am speaking about the "process of thinking" from start to finish.
"The process of thinking" does not start at the point of conscious recognition in this regard.
In order to prove my theory wrong a test has to be conducted that proves that reality caused me to produce a reaction that completly bypassed "the process of thinking"

Anatomy of a Thought
When you have a thought, an electrical signal passes back and forth between the various neurons responsible for that thought. Because the brain is always trying to become more efficient, every time two cells communicate with one another the brain makes it easier for them to do so in the future by building up the connection between them. Technically, it does this by building a myelin sheath2 around the axon, which facilitates the transmission of the electrical signal.
The more you have a thought, the more the sheath gets built up, and the easier it is for electrical signals to pass between cells. The easier it is for electrical signals to pass, the easier it becomes to have the same thought in the future. As the father of neuropsychology Dr. Donald O. Hebb famously said, “neurons that fire together wire together.”
The process can be thought of as similar to the way that construction crews might add another lane to a well traveled street or highway to make it easier for cars to travel. Every time you have a thought it’s like giving a signal to the construction crews that more thought-traffic is coming, so they prepare by building more infrastructure.

Oh my dear fuck. Facepalm

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like GirlyMan's post
18-01-2016, 03:55 PM (This post was last modified: 18-01-2016 03:59 PM by Peebothuhul.)
RE: Does my reality exists regardless of how I perceive it?
At work.

So you're talking about thought, hence pain should not he brought into the conversation. They are different and it's conflating/confusing the issue.

Second, if you're accepting neurons as being real or reality... then you should have to accept the rest of reality that goes along with them.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Peebothuhul's post
18-01-2016, 03:56 PM
RE: Does my reality exists regardless of how I perceive it?
(18-01-2016 03:47 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(18-01-2016 03:32 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  It would be considered cherry picking if they carry alternative meanings.
As far as I can tell they all mean the same thing. Do you agree?

No.

Quote:A statement was made once.
The earth was flat.
It was considered a fact.
This statement is no longer considered a fact.

What makes a fact no longer a fact?

That someone considers something a fact does not make it a fact.

The Earth was never flat so it was never a fact that the Earth was flat..

Are you sure? I attended a church service in a church which was a New Age church an Offshoot of Unity and heard a sermon where the main point is that everybody is aware that cancer was virtually unknown 100 years ago. And this guy reading from Willard Fillmore believed that Cancer didn't exist until man went looking for it, same with dinosaur bones and the American Continents and that the world was flat until people made it round with their scientific speculation etc.. Bet yer ass I didn't spend a lot of time in that church!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-01-2016, 04:00 PM
RE: Does my reality exists regardless of how I perceive it?
(18-01-2016 03:47 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(18-01-2016 03:32 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  It would be considered cherry picking if they carry alternative meanings.
As far as I can tell they all mean the same thing. Do you agree?

No.

Quote:A statement was made once.
The earth was flat.
It was considered a fact.
This statement is no longer considered a fact.

What makes a fact no longer a fact?

That someone considers something a fact does not make it a fact.

The Earth was never flat so it was never a fact that the Earth was flat..
Chas facts have a "point in time" dependent meaning.
Facts of the past may someday be replaced
Facts of the present may someday be replaced as well

By your logic only an Omiscient being could make the claim of something being a fact.
It was considered a fact that Pluto was a planet only recently.

This is why the meaning of a fact is time dependent & perspective dependent as well.
A fact is not nor ever has been a claim to absolute certainty.
It is better to describe a fact based on it's indisputable nature as a result of the evidence provided.
We can disprove facts with logic and evidence. This might shock you but it happens very often.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-01-2016, 04:01 PM
RE: Does my reality exists regardless of how I perceive it?
(18-01-2016 02:28 PM)Banjo Wrote:  This guy still has yet to hit his hand with a hammer. This must mean he thinks he is more than thoughts. The pain cannot be "thought" away.

What a BS artist.

Might better be served hitting his head with a hammer!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-01-2016, 04:02 PM
RE: Does my reality exists regardless of how I perceive it?
(18-01-2016 04:01 PM)DerFish Wrote:  
(18-01-2016 02:28 PM)Banjo Wrote:  This guy still has yet to hit his hand with a hammer. This must mean he thinks he is more than thoughts. The pain cannot be "thought" away.

What a BS artist.

Might better be served hitting his head with a hammer!
To prove what?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-01-2016, 04:03 PM
RE: Does my reality exists regardless of how I perceive it?
(18-01-2016 03:49 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  
(18-01-2016 03:26 PM)Chas Wrote:  You are quite wrong. The pain is felt before there is conscious recognition or thought.

Your argument is invalid as it is based on an incorrect understanding of neurology.
Chas I already defined "thought" as the "process of thinking".

And you don't understand that pain is not thinking.

Quote:This is the dictionary meaning.
https://www.google.com/search?q=google&i...ught+means
thought
noun
the action or process of thinking.

I even went further to post the anatomy of a thought.
http://michaelbalchan.com/braininfrastru...vid=4s4TeL

Furthermore I am the original poster of the topic.
When I say thought the meaning I wish to portray is "the process of thinking". If you find alternative meanings to the word thought please know that I do not wish to convey those meanings as it is not relevant to the topic I am discussing.
You are free to start a new topic with those alternative meanings to prove a new point you may be trying to make.

No, I am pointin out a fundamental flaw in your understanding that renders your argument shaky at best.

Quote:So tell me Chas:

"You are quite wrong. The pain is felt before there is conscious recognition or thought."
I am not speaking about recognition here.
I am speaking about the "process of thinking" from start to finish.
"The process of thinking" does not start at the point of conscious recognition in this regard.
In order to prove my theory wrong a test has to be conducted that proves that reality caused me to produce a reaction that completly bypassed "the process of thinking"

What does that even mean?

Quote:Anatomy of a Thought
When you have a thought, an electrical signal passes back and forth between the various neurons responsible for that thought. Because the brain is always trying to become more efficient, every time two cells communicate with one another the brain makes it easier for them to do so in the future by building up the connection between them. Technically, it does this by building a myelin sheath2 around the axon, which facilitates the transmission of the electrical signal.
The more you have a thought, the more the sheath gets built up, and the easier it is for electrical signals to pass between cells. The easier it is for electrical signals to pass, the easier it becomes to have the same thought in the future. As the father of neuropsychology Dr. Donald O. Hebb famously said, “neurons that fire together wire together.”
The process can be thought of as similar to the way that construction crews might add another lane to a well traveled street or highway to make it easier for cars to travel. Every time you have a thought it’s like giving a signal to the construction crews that more thought-traffic is coming, so they prepare by building more infrastructure.

And that has fuck all to do with pain.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-01-2016, 04:06 PM
RE: Does my reality exists regardless of how I perceive it?
(18-01-2016 03:55 PM)Peebothuhul Wrote:  At work.

So you're talking about thought, hence pain should not he brought into the conversation. They are different and it's conflating/confusing the issue.

Second, if you're accepting neurons as being real or reality... then you should have to accept the rest of reality that goes along with them.

My use of pain was to prove that he exists. He does not seem sure he does exist. Smile

NOTE: Member, Tomasia uses this site to slander other individuals. He then later proclaims it a joke, but not in public.
I will call him a liar and a dog here and now.
Banjo.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: