What are "feelings" and "emotion"?

[undergroundp]

(31-10-2014 03:52 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  And a picture causes a chemical reaction how?

Here is your problem. It's like asking "And light causes a headache how?" or "And food causes digestion how?" or "And illness causes a fever how?"

The answer is simple and has been repeated to death:
Automatic reactions of the brain to stimuli.

[Mathilda]

(31-10-2014 03:52 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  And a picture causes a chemical reaction how?

(31-10-2014 01:04 PM)Mathilda Wrote:  The brain is made up of neurons. These transmit vesicles of chemicals (neurotransmitters) within synpatic clefts which have the effect of causing other neurons to fire. Neuromodulators are used to excite or inhibit neurons over longer time periods.

This book will explain it all in detail (Chapter 14 is particularly good if you want to implement it yourself on a computer)

http://www.amazon.com/Biophysics-Computa...omputation

(31-10-2014 03:52 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  This is 2 different equations you've given me now... the first equation doesnt match your 2nd one, they are completely different equations.... why?

I was talking about two different things. This is evidence that you are deliberately misunderstanding what is being said. This suggests that you are trolling.

(31-10-2014 03:52 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  Also we saw the voles didn't produce dopamine until AFTER the "feeling" hit to mate. The act then produced the dopamine, enhancing the feeling.

(31-10-2014 02:22 PM)Mathilda Wrote:  Dopamine is used for reward. I can dig out the paper if you want but generally the stronger the hunger the stronger the reward.

You should bear in mind that the brain is a complex system made up of many different neuromodulators interacting on the same parts of the brain. So you could have one neurochemical signalling an emotional drive and another counter-acting it to produce a continuation of a behaviour that satisfies that drive.

It wouldn't make sense to have one neuromodulator signalling both the need and the satisfaction of that need (unless it produced and used in entirely different parts of the brain that is).

Deliberatly ignoring posts that refute what you claim so that you can repeat yourself is evidence that you are a troll.

[morondog]

Well ol' Wolfie, you had your chance. Well done! Good representin' for Christ right there. Made them atheists take notice! You sure showed us. Now quit bein' a tit and fuck off please

[Wolfbitn]

Hey no sweat off my balls

All I wanted was an intelligent conversation with sources from both sides. Its not my problem that I was the only one with sources
No hard feelings though with anyone... alls good
We can move on without a problem

[cjlr]

(31-10-2014 04:17 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  Hey no sweat off my balls

All I wanted was an intelligent conversation with sources from both sides. Its not my problem that I was the only one with sources
No hard feelings though with anyone... alls good
We can move on without a problem

You've repeatedly demonstrated that you do not understand your sources.

This is problematic, and your inability to recognise it doubly so.

There is no ghost in the machine.

[undergroundp]

(31-10-2014 04:17 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  Hey no sweat off my balls

All I wanted was an intelligent conversation with sources from both sides. Its not my problem that I was the only one with sources
No hard feelings though with anyone... alls good
We can move on without a problem

No, your problem is that you ignored any arguments and evidence offered to you.

[Mathilda]

(31-10-2014 04:17 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  Its not my problem that I was the only one with sources

Here are some for you relevant to this thread:


Emotion as a continuous pattern of neuromodulation

The Neuromodulatory Basis of Emotion, Jean-Marc Fellous,, The neuroscientist, volume 5, number = 5, pages = 283-294,



The function of emotions:

From Human Emotions to Robot Emotions, Jean-Marc Fellous, Architectures for Modeling Emotions: Cross-Disciplinary Foundations. Papers from the 2004 AAAI Spring Symposium, 37-47,

Evolutionary Explanations of Emotion, R.M. Nesse, 1990, Human Nature, volume 1, number 30, pages261-289



Emotions allowing animals to satisfy needs

Who needs emotions? The brain meets the robot., Ann E. Kelley, 2005, 0-19-516619-4, Oxford University Press., 29-77,



Food tastes better when we're hungry.

Also emotional attractors in the brain as repetitive patterns of electrical activities triggered by specific environmental stimuli (pp94) (think photos triggering emotions)

Affective neuroscience: the foundations of human and animal emotions, Jaak Panksepp, 1998, 0-19-509673-8, Oxford University Press, Inc.



Debate as to whether dopamine is used as a reinforcement signal or as a preparatory 'Go' signal or to set the learning threshold in the Basal Ganglia.

The Brain and Emotion, Edmund T. Rolls, 1999, 0-19-852463-3, Oxford University Press.


Brain as a self organising system

Dynamic patterns: The self-organization of brain and behavior, J. A. Scott Kelso, 1995, 0-262-61131-7, A Bradford book. The MIT Press.

The Handbook of Brain Theory and Neural Networks, Christoph von der Malsburg, Self-Organization and the Brain,



Dopamine, seratonin, noradrenaline and acetylcholine theorised about with regard to reinforcement.

Metalearning, Neuromodulation, and Emotion, Kenji Doya, 2000, 101-104, Affective Minds, Elsevier Science Ltd.,

Metalearning and Neuromodulation, Kenji Doy, Neural Networks, volume 15, number 4, 495-506,

[OddGamer]

(31-10-2014 04:17 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  Its not my problem that I was the only one with sources

I present the following links to support our point of view.

http://www.biopsychiatry.com/lovesero.htm

http://www.oxytocin.org/oxytoc/love-science.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biological_basis_of_love

http://www.mcmanweb.com/love_lust.html

Enjoy!

[altruistica]

(31-10-2014 06:51 AM)The Polyglot Atheist Wrote:  I have the feeling I missed your intent, if so please let me know.

Everything you think is a product of your brain, but again why would that make it less extraordinary? Our intelligence is extraordinary even without a supernatural being providing it.

Consciousness, until proven otherwise, is still a product of your own brain. You are your brain. It's not an atheist view, it's just the way it is. If someday someone proves the existence of consciousness outside of the physical brain with evidence, then I'll accept that as a fact. But until then, I have no reason to think it's the reality of things, if you know what I mean.

But does it make everything less valuable? I don't know, but I don't see why that would be the case.

What do you make of this film, jump ahead to 29mins 30secs:

[Anjele]

So, is Altru a Wolfie sock that forgot what name he was posting under?