|
On July 03 2013 21:23 Cynry wrote:
So the question wouldn't be "what is self consciouness ?" because it is constructed by the brain, but rather how come we possess the ability (and the need ? Humans can't live without that, right ?) to construct this concept ? Any evolution specialist around ?
Humans could live without that. Most animals do manage to leave without it.
but if you are really asking why :
(a)
No reasons at all. The same reason why bananas are yellow and why we even exist in the first place. Evolution and natural selection is also a part of this, this extra intelligence increased our chances to survive over the years as a species, but it doesn't really answer the "why". So the best answer remain : randomness.
(b)
God could be a reason to "why", if you believe in those sort of things.
|
On July 03 2013 20:07 Rassy wrote:
So you all here believe dan dennet, that self consciousness is just an ilusion and the byproduct of a huge "army of idiots" saying yes or no?
And that in the end, if we make a system of enough bits and program it the right way it would be self aware like we are?>
Am curious about how you people see self consciousness, i can not deduct a clear vieuw on this in these posts.
How are you guys seeing (self) consciousness?
I think self-consciousness is a emergent phenomenon of our body produced by evolution to increase our survivability by giving us better decision-making through ability of introspection and thus ability to better model the world and predict things. Basically that ability requires from the mind model of self inside a model of world and that is what produces the sensation of "self". Dennett's analogy captures something of that, but of course as all analogies is just to give you some understanding of underlying concept.
As for creating consciousness, I have no idea if material substrate is necessary and Searle and his Chinese room are right. We will have to wait for that answer. I am however sure that we can in theory construct artificial consciousness as we have already one example of material system that has consciousness, us.
|
On July 03 2013 21:46 DertoQq wrote:Show nested quote +On July 03 2013 21:23 Cynry wrote:
So the question wouldn't be "what is self consciouness ?" because it is constructed by the brain, but rather how come we possess the ability (and the need ? Humans can't live without that, right ?) to construct this concept ? Any evolution specialist around ? Humans could live without that. Most animals do manage to leave without it. but if you are really asking why : (a) No reasons at all. The same reason why bananas are yellow and why we even exist in the first place. Evolution and natural selection is also a part of this, this extra intelligence increased our chances to survive over the years as a species, but it doesn't really answer the "why". So the best answer remain : randomness. (b) God could be a reason to "why", if you believe in those sort of things.
Self-consciousness is not limited to humans, we just have more advanced version of it.
|
On July 03 2013 20:07 Rassy wrote:
So you all here believe dan dennet, that self consciousness is just an ilusion and the byproduct of a huge "army of idiots" saying yes or no?
And that in the end, if we make a system of enough bits and program it the right way it would be self aware like we are?>
Am curious about how you people see self consciousness, i can not deduct a clear vieuw on this in these posts.
How are you guys seeing (self) consciousness?
Asking the same question from a slightly different point of view:
Why wouldn't it be possible to create a machine that becomes self aware?
I'm not trying to bash you or anyone else doubting this.
But for me the concept of "soul" is harder to understand and accept than the fact that I am an advanced computer that is self aware.
When people say soul questions comes to my mind:
1. What attributes does a soul have?
2. What makes the concept of soul satisfactory? Is it the fact that it is considered eternal? And even if the soul existed and was eternal, I have no memory of my other lives (hence the "eternal" part doesn't affect my life in the slightest) so how come the concept of soul is satisfactory for so many?
3. Uniqueness? Well you are unique without a soul. There is no, even in theory, possible way of recreating "you". Sure, we can copy your atoms and with the help of an all eternal machine create you 1000 years from now but it still would just be a copy of you -> hence you ARE unique 
|
On July 03 2013 21:53 mcc wrote:Show nested quote +On July 03 2013 21:46 DertoQq wrote:On July 03 2013 21:23 Cynry wrote:
So the question wouldn't be "what is self consciouness ?" because it is constructed by the brain, but rather how come we possess the ability (and the need ? Humans can't live without that, right ?) to construct this concept ? Any evolution specialist around ? Humans could live without that. Most animals do manage to leave without it. but if you are really asking why : (a) No reasons at all. The same reason why bananas are yellow and why we even exist in the first place. Evolution and natural selection is also a part of this, this extra intelligence increased our chances to survive over the years as a species, but it doesn't really answer the "why". So the best answer remain : randomness. (b) God could be a reason to "why", if you believe in those sort of things. Self-consciousness is not limited to humans, we just have more advanced version of it.
sure, I was more referring to animals who don't (or have a very limited version of it). For example insects etc.. I should have made the precision on my post.
edit: I actually said "most" in my post.
|
On July 03 2013 21:46 DertoQq wrote:Show nested quote +On July 03 2013 21:23 Cynry wrote:
So the question wouldn't be "what is self consciouness ?" because it is constructed by the brain, but rather how come we possess the ability (and the need ? Humans can't live without that, right ?) to construct this concept ? Any evolution specialist around ? Humans could live without that. Most animals do manage to leave without it. but if you are really asking why : (a) No reasons at all. The same reason why bananas are yellow and why we even exist in the first place. Evolution and natural selection is also a part of this, this extra intelligence increased our chances to survive over the years as a species, but it doesn't really answer the "why". So the best answer remain : randomness. (b) God could be a reason to "why", if you believe in those sort of things.
Yeah but without it we wouldn't be human anymore. But it's a meaningless question anyway.
I also choose not to use the word "why" to avoid the kind of answer you gave :-D
I was more wondering what are the benefits of being self aware from a evolutionary perspective. I can guess it made us more fit to survive, but I wonder in which way it does. Maybe that's too far off topic though, but I figured if we covered how it works and how it came to work like this, it would be a interesting.
Whatever...
Edit : mcc gave a reasonable answer to my second question. Thank you.
|
Our "mind" (thoughts, personality, hallucinations, whatever) is nothing but a byproduct of the electrochemical processes that our brain produces. There are no supernatural phenomena at work in this process.
If you change one part of someone's physical brain, their "mind" could (and probably will) be permanently affected in some way.
So yes. Our mind is a physical construct.
|
doubleupgradeobbies!
Australia1187 Posts
On July 03 2013 21:56 Cynry wrote:Show nested quote +On July 03 2013 21:46 DertoQq wrote:On July 03 2013 21:23 Cynry wrote:
So the question wouldn't be "what is self consciouness ?" because it is constructed by the brain, but rather how come we possess the ability (and the need ? Humans can't live without that, right ?) to construct this concept ? Any evolution specialist around ? Humans could live without that. Most animals do manage to leave without it. but if you are really asking why : (a) No reasons at all. The same reason why bananas are yellow and why we even exist in the first place. Evolution and natural selection is also a part of this, this extra intelligence increased our chances to survive over the years as a species, but it doesn't really answer the "why". So the best answer remain : randomness. (b) God could be a reason to "why", if you believe in those sort of things. Yeah but without it we wouldn't be human anymore. But it's a meaningless question anyway. I also choose not to use the word "why" to avoid the kind of answer you gave :-D I was more wondering what are the benefits of being self aware from a evolutionary perspective. I can guess it made us more fit to survive, but I wonder in which way it does. Maybe that's too far off topic though, but I figured if we covered how it works and how it came to work like this, it would be a interesting. Whatever...
Among, I'm sure, many benefits, it allows more abstract level forward planning. To take the example of threat analysis: without self awareness you can only make a much more limited assessment of non-immediate danger that may require prediction of your future behaviour to recognise. e.g If I keep harvesting that fruit tree I'm not going to have any left over for winter.
The level of development of our self awareness is likely linked with our complex social behaviour,with our very advanced level of self awareness we can make financial decisions based on expected returns, long term price etc. and how the balance of that will affect your overall quality of life. Without a sense of self awareness and a highly developed sense of self it is difficult to assess your abilities, your future needs, your weaknesses and your tendencies etc.
|
On July 03 2013 22:03 doubleupgradeobbies! wrote:Show nested quote +On July 03 2013 21:56 Cynry wrote:On July 03 2013 21:46 DertoQq wrote:On July 03 2013 21:23 Cynry wrote:
So the question wouldn't be "what is self consciouness ?" because it is constructed by the brain, but rather how come we possess the ability (and the need ? Humans can't live without that, right ?) to construct this concept ? Any evolution specialist around ? Humans could live without that. Most animals do manage to leave without it. but if you are really asking why : (a) No reasons at all. The same reason why bananas are yellow and why we even exist in the first place. Evolution and natural selection is also a part of this, this extra intelligence increased our chances to survive over the years as a species, but it doesn't really answer the "why". So the best answer remain : randomness. (b) God could be a reason to "why", if you believe in those sort of things. Yeah but without it we wouldn't be human anymore. But it's a meaningless question anyway. I also choose not to use the word "why" to avoid the kind of answer you gave :-D I was more wondering what are the benefits of being self aware from a evolutionary perspective. I can guess it made us more fit to survive, but I wonder in which way it does. Maybe that's too far off topic though, but I figured if we covered how it works and how it came to work like this, it would be a interesting. Whatever... Among, I'm sure, many benefits, it allows more abstract level forward planning. To take the example of threat analysis: without self awareness you can only make a much more limited assessment of non-immediate danger that may be looming. Eg for our very advanced level of self awareness we can make financial decisions based on expected returns, long term price etc. and how the balance of that will affect your overall quality of life. Without a sense of self awareness and a highly developed sense of self it is difficult to assess your abilities, your future needs, your weaknesses and your tendencies etc.
To add to that and my previous post on the topic. Having model of self is extremely useful also in predicting how other people will behave.
|
On July 03 2013 21:54 papaz wrote:Show nested quote +On July 03 2013 20:07 Rassy wrote:
So you all here believe dan dennet, that self consciousness is just an ilusion and the byproduct of a huge "army of idiots" saying yes or no?
And that in the end, if we make a system of enough bits and program it the right way it would be self aware like we are?>
Am curious about how you people see self consciousness, i can not deduct a clear vieuw on this in these posts.
How are you guys seeing (self) consciousness? Asking the same question from a slightly different point of view: Why wouldn't it be possible to create a machine that becomes self aware? I'm not trying to bash you or anyone else doubting this. But for me the concept of "soul" is harder to understand and accept than the fact that I am an advanced computer that is self aware. When people say soul questions comes to my mind: 1. What attributes does a soul have? 2. What makes the concept of soul satisfactory? Is it the fact that it is considered eternal? And even if the soul existed and was eternal, I have no memory of my other lives (hence the "eternal" part doesn't affect my life in the slightest) so how come the concept of soul is satisfactory for so many? 3. Uniqueness? Well you are unique without a soul. There is no, even in theory, possible way of recreating "you". Sure, we can copy your atoms and with the help of an all eternal machine create you 1000 years from now but it still would just be a copy of you -> hence you ARE unique
I dont believe in a soul and i do believe it is possible to make a machine wich has self consciousness, i do think though that more is needed then simply a huge amounts of entitys saying yes or no depending on their input wich also consists of an amount of yes and no,s
I have come to a vague answer for myself about what is missing wich i explained in an earlier post.
Now i am definatly off though, but will keep reading and if something i find realy interesting pops up i will respond.
"Self-consciousness is not limited to humans, we just have more advanced version of it."
This is an interesting concept to wich i have to agree.
Maybe consciousness starts verry simple and physical,with the ability to feel. This still leaves a problem for me at least of who is the one feeling. Who or what is the self that experiences these feelings.
A computer consisting of just bits does not feel pain, we can off course program it in such a way that it reacts exactly the same as humans when given ,for example, an electric shock but to me it is not the same,even though dennet would argue that it is exactly the same. to me it feels as if something is missing.
|
On July 03 2013 21:54 papaz wrote:Show nested quote +On July 03 2013 20:07 Rassy wrote:
So you all here believe dan dennet, that self consciousness is just an ilusion and the byproduct of a huge "army of idiots" saying yes or no?
And that in the end, if we make a system of enough bits and program it the right way it would be self aware like we are?>
Am curious about how you people see self consciousness, i can not deduct a clear vieuw on this in these posts.
How are you guys seeing (self) consciousness? ...When people say soul questions comes to my mind: 1. What attributes does a soul have? 2. What makes the concept of soul satisfactory? Is it the fact that it is considered eternal? And even if the soul existed and was eternal, I have no memory of my other lives (hence the "eternal" part doesn't affect my life in the slightest) so how come the concept of soul is satisfactory for so many? 3. Uniqueness? Well you are unique without a soul. There is no, even in theory, possible way of recreating "you". Sure, we can copy your atoms and with the help of an all eternal machine create you 1000 years from now but it still would just be a copy of you -> hence you ARE unique
For your second question, if you mean satisfactory in the same way as "hopeful" then I think I can give a good answer.
Even if you can't remember your past lives, people would rather have the chance of living beyond their death in some form, compared to non-existence for all eternity. So I don't think its that the soul is satisfactory for the present, its a satisfactory idea because it gives them the promise of some future, which is just as important if not more important than your life, as eternity is clearly greater and more desirable than 80-100 years on Earth.
For those who might say "I wouldn't want to live for eternity, it would get boring". You can theoretically get amnesia as we are hypothetically experiencing on Earth, allowing you to re-experience things over and over again.
As for the earlier part of your post on likelihood I think you're basically right. But people still hope that there is a ghost in the machine that enables us to attain consciousness. The attributes of the soul, or how it works, is not as important as its existence for the purposes of eternal life.
|
On July 03 2013 20:54 doubleupgradeobbies! wrote:Show nested quote +On July 03 2013 20:04 xM(Z wrote:On July 03 2013 19:25 doubleupgradeobbies! wrote:On July 03 2013 18:57 xM(Z wrote:On July 03 2013 18:42 DertoQq wrote:On July 03 2013 18:12 xM(Z wrote:On July 03 2013 17:47 DertoQq wrote:On July 03 2013 17:37 xM(Z wrote:so how would you explain phobias? or, if everything is physical, why are phobias 'treated' psychologically?. Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) can be beneficial. Cognitive behavioral therapy allows the patient to challenge dysfunctional thoughts or beliefs by being mindful of their own feelings with the aim that the patient will realize their fear is irrational why would the realization of the irrationality of said fear, treat/cure a physical mechanism?. even if it would not provide a cure, it does seem like the mind/consciousness has some control power over the manifestation of physical mechanisms. my general/current take on stuff: one can not control the reaction but he can control the action. laws of the universe/physics/chemistry/biology control the reaction, free will controls the action. Because a psychological treatment is technically a physical treatment. Every time you speak to someone you alter his brain physically. When someone is sad, it is easier to give him a reason not to be sad instead of opening his brain and cutting through it. then, if our thoughts/reason can affect the physical world why would it be limited to only our physical body?. why our thoughts couldn't affect everything else in the material world? Your brain is translating your "thoughts" (which is something physical in your brain, just like your memories etc..) into a language (a level of abstraction of the information higher than your "thoughts"). It can be speaking, typing, writing or any other actions. With that you can affect everything else in the "material world" (you are affecting me right now). Note that the word thoughts is probably misleading, because it's definition is more an abstract concept than anything else. so skipping over a few logical inductions, you and doubleupgradeobbies! are saying that we all are physical variations of a quantum universe, right? (since your physicality and mine are exactly the same at atomic level, yet those same atoms give rise to different thoughts, the difference could only be explained via quantum theory, right?) Nope. We might 'possess' or 'consist of' atoms that behave the same way. But we have a different amount of them, we have different distributions of different elements/isotopes, and their arrangement is vastly different (obviously), that is to say we are biologically different, heck we're even genetically different (I would hope  ). On top of all that, even if we are to dismiss the chemical components of brain biology, we would have different numbers of neurons/axons and they would be arranged and interconnected in vastly different ways. Then, again, on top of that, we have had vastly different life experiences, which both feeds back into how the brain is wired, as well has the sorts of input it has had to process. So to make another analogy(cos I love me some analogies), if we were to think of both of us as two computers. We would have different architectures(say your a standard PC, and I'm a soft processor configured onto an FPGA), different brands of components(eg you have intel parts, I am Altera), different operational resources (you have a more powerful GPU), are running different algorithms (eg your playing a game, I'm acting as a controller for some industrial automation). And on top of all that even if we were running the same algorithm, we'd be in different program states. So just like the 2 computer systems, while we consist of atoms that behave generally in the same ways, on top of that we are even in the same family of machine (PCs, software processors, same principle really. Or in our case carbon based DNA encoded lifeforms) the arrangement of those atoms, is overwhelmingly different. We are different on an architectural, algorithmic and state based level. Is it really surprising that we don't come up with the same thoughts? The difference is not really in quantum theory, quantum effects are so small, and we are such large systems that quantum effects sort of get averaged out with so many quantum interactions coexisting. We are, however, vastly different emergent behaviours resulting from immensely complex and immensely numerous interactions of the rules of physics (including quantum effects). now you are just making statements  . if i were to ask you why those statements came to be true (not whether or not they are true) how would you reply? ex: But we have a different amount of them, we have different distributions of different elements/isotopes, and their arrangement is vastly different (obviously), that is to say we are biologically different, heck we're even genetically different (I would hope ). why do we have a different amount of them?, why do we have different distributions, why do have different isotopes, and so on ... i am calling them chain linked quantum variations. even if you state that they exist because you observe them that way it wouldn't explain why you observe them that way or why they exist that way. your logic is at a macroscopic scale and contained within what you can observe. go beyond it or at least switch to a microscopic scale: the first amoeba that came to exist was a result of a quantum variation within atoms in a given environment. your computer analogy, all computer analogies, fail on a basic level. you defined 1 and 0. 1 and 0 so implicitly the algorithm, exist because you said so, because you created them. you can't apply the same logic to atoms or the universe or whatever else because you didn't define those, because you would be talking about God ( i read your edits) I'll start off by saying the rules of quantum physics (and physics in general) came to be true, my honest answer would be: 'Why is not a meaningful question for the state of existence, or at the very least not one that we can meaningfully answer at this stage' Usually when people explore the question of 'Why?' in science they actually mean 'How?' eg emergent behaviours being explained as the interaction of their constituent behaviours, and how those interactions occur. If you really mean Why?, then you are making the assumption that reality has a purpose. I personally don't see any evidence suggesting purpose to existence, but if there is, I don't pretend to understand what that purpose is, in fact I don't even pretend to be able to imagine what cognitive tools I would need to be able to understand that purpose. So for all those macroscopic statements, the why is effectively synonymous with the how, the answer to 'Why?' is because these interactions are consistent the laws of physics. The 'How?' are those laws of physics themselves. It's when you get down to when you can no longer ask how? that it gets tricky. I believe quantum physics, gravity, other theories at the cutting edge of theoretical physics are just the frontier of a long chain of 'How?'. If we boiled down all of existence to that level, and: -You asked me 'How?' I would say that we are at the extent of our knowledge, I certainly don't know more than our physicists. -You asked me 'Why?' I would say that the question can't be meaningfully answered. As for why this particular expression of existence is observed, when there are near infinite possible states that are still consistent with the laws of physics, I still think this implies a purpose to existence. It could have been any of the possible consistent states, there is no particular reason it had to be this one, but it did have to be some state and at the end of the day this state is as valid as any other, why not?
fair enough even though it's a downer because even in science you first start to postulate/theorize something, how things might work, then go ahead and try to prove it but when you just say: 'why' can't be meaningfully answered and leave it at that ... well it's sad, to say the least.
|
I wouldn't put high hopes in the "why" anyway. Imagine that science can one day figure that, and that the answer is "well...there is no alternative". Downer indeed...
|
But thats the only possible answer?
(though i would formulate it a bit different,"it is the most likely of all posibilities")
|
As we once again enter the realm of beliefs... ^^
I'd say that all possibilities exist already. So, no alternative. But either way, some will be disappointed.
|
On July 03 2013 21:43 mcc wrote:Show nested quote +On July 03 2013 20:14 xM(Z wrote:On July 03 2013 19:00 snejja wrote:On July 03 2013 18:12 xM(Z wrote:On July 03 2013 17:47 DertoQq wrote:On July 03 2013 17:37 xM(Z wrote:so how would you explain phobias? or, if everything is physical, why are phobias 'treated' psychologically?. Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) can be beneficial. Cognitive behavioral therapy allows the patient to challenge dysfunctional thoughts or beliefs by being mindful of their own feelings with the aim that the patient will realize their fear is irrational why would the realization of the irrationality of said fear, treat/cure a physical mechanism?. even if it would not provide a cure, it does seem like the mind/consciousness has some control power over the manifestation of physical mechanisms. my general/current take on stuff: one can not control the reaction but he can control the action. laws of the universe/physics/chemistry/biology control the reaction, free will controls the action. Because a psychological treatment is technically a physical treatment. Every time you speak to someone you alter his brain physically. When someone is sad, it is easier to give him a reason not to be sad instead of opening his brain and cutting through it. then, if our thoughts/reason can affect the physical world why would it be limited to only our physical body?. why our thoughts couldn't affect everything else in the material world? because weak electric impulses and small amount of chemicals, confined in a biologically armored head have very little possibility to affect anything beyond brain itself and connected to brain muscles/organs. they could affect EEG, though - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_consumer_brain–computer_interfaces yes but the point i wanted to eventually get to with that, is this: if we, with our weak electric impulses can (and do) control our own physical body why couldn't another entity, like the universe, control its own body?. it would definitely have the energy to do so. basically if a mechanism is valid at a micro scale, why wouldn't it be valid at a macro scale? a universe with thoughts. our evolution pre-determined by thoughts of the universe. Because our control of our body is result of biological evolution and has evolutionary purpose. Universe could have the same property, but as far as we know it is not true. It would require universe to be purposeful in the same sense as organisms are. Our current view is that universe is just a bunch of matter organized by physical laws. But as I said it could be so, but what is relevance of this to this discussion ?
you would have to explain/define the word purpose, why do think we have a purpose?. if humans/all life on earth were to go extinct tomorrow, what would happen to that purpose?.
does purpose means that something/someone would care if we go extinct?, could we not exist without a purpose (but with laws)?.
we might just as well be a bunch of matter organized by physical laws, exactly like the universe.
|
I don't get why people searchor even want a purpose... I actually think it's incredibly narcistic to think that "YOU" have that very special purpose.
You can do awesome (and terrible) things for/to a society... You might even feel the need to do it, but that does in no way mean that you actually have that very special purpose.
Btw: Hitler (and other equally "bad" people) most probably also very strongly felt that they have some very special purpose in this world...
|
On July 03 2013 23:22 xM(Z wrote:Show nested quote +On July 03 2013 21:43 mcc wrote:On July 03 2013 20:14 xM(Z wrote:On July 03 2013 19:00 snejja wrote:On July 03 2013 18:12 xM(Z wrote:On July 03 2013 17:47 DertoQq wrote:On July 03 2013 17:37 xM(Z wrote:so how would you explain phobias? or, if everything is physical, why are phobias 'treated' psychologically?. Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) can be beneficial. Cognitive behavioral therapy allows the patient to challenge dysfunctional thoughts or beliefs by being mindful of their own feelings with the aim that the patient will realize their fear is irrational why would the realization of the irrationality of said fear, treat/cure a physical mechanism?. even if it would not provide a cure, it does seem like the mind/consciousness has some control power over the manifestation of physical mechanisms. my general/current take on stuff: one can not control the reaction but he can control the action. laws of the universe/physics/chemistry/biology control the reaction, free will controls the action. Because a psychological treatment is technically a physical treatment. Every time you speak to someone you alter his brain physically. When someone is sad, it is easier to give him a reason not to be sad instead of opening his brain and cutting through it. then, if our thoughts/reason can affect the physical world why would it be limited to only our physical body?. why our thoughts couldn't affect everything else in the material world? because weak electric impulses and small amount of chemicals, confined in a biologically armored head have very little possibility to affect anything beyond brain itself and connected to brain muscles/organs. they could affect EEG, though - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_consumer_brain–computer_interfaces yes but the point i wanted to eventually get to with that, is this: if we, with our weak electric impulses can (and do) control our own physical body why couldn't another entity, like the universe, control its own body?. it would definitely have the energy to do so. basically if a mechanism is valid at a micro scale, why wouldn't it be valid at a macro scale? a universe with thoughts. our evolution pre-determined by thoughts of the universe. Because our control of our body is result of biological evolution and has evolutionary purpose. Universe could have the same property, but as far as we know it is not true. It would require universe to be purposeful in the same sense as organisms are. Our current view is that universe is just a bunch of matter organized by physical laws. But as I said it could be so, but what is relevance of this to this discussion ? you would have to explain/define the word purpose, why do think we have a purpose?. if humans/all life on earth were to go extinct tomorrow, what would happen to that purpose?. does purpose means that something/someone would care if we go extinct?, could we not exist without a purpose (but with laws)?. we might just as well be a bunch of matter organized by physical laws, exactly like the universe.
We are also bunch of matter organized by physical laws, but due to us being formed by evolution (as opposed to universe) we have some additional properties, specifically drive to survive and procreate as individual organisms. That is the purpose I mean. Organism's purpose is delivery mechanism for genes and to do that we evolved as individuals (by that I mean systems that consist of parts working towards common purpose) and it is evolutionary advantage for individuals to have coordination between parts and that is exactly what your brain's control over your body is. Coordination mechanism. As far as we know universe did not evolve and has no purposeful coordination taking place.
|
On July 03 2013 23:59 mcc wrote:Show nested quote +On July 03 2013 23:22 xM(Z wrote:On July 03 2013 21:43 mcc wrote:On July 03 2013 20:14 xM(Z wrote:On July 03 2013 19:00 snejja wrote:On July 03 2013 18:12 xM(Z wrote:On July 03 2013 17:47 DertoQq wrote:On July 03 2013 17:37 xM(Z wrote:so how would you explain phobias? or, if everything is physical, why are phobias 'treated' psychologically?. Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) can be beneficial. Cognitive behavioral therapy allows the patient to challenge dysfunctional thoughts or beliefs by being mindful of their own feelings with the aim that the patient will realize their fear is irrational why would the realization of the irrationality of said fear, treat/cure a physical mechanism?. even if it would not provide a cure, it does seem like the mind/consciousness has some control power over the manifestation of physical mechanisms. my general/current take on stuff: one can not control the reaction but he can control the action. laws of the universe/physics/chemistry/biology control the reaction, free will controls the action. Because a psychological treatment is technically a physical treatment. Every time you speak to someone you alter his brain physically. When someone is sad, it is easier to give him a reason not to be sad instead of opening his brain and cutting through it. then, if our thoughts/reason can affect the physical world why would it be limited to only our physical body?. why our thoughts couldn't affect everything else in the material world? because weak electric impulses and small amount of chemicals, confined in a biologically armored head have very little possibility to affect anything beyond brain itself and connected to brain muscles/organs. they could affect EEG, though - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_consumer_brain–computer_interfaces yes but the point i wanted to eventually get to with that, is this: if we, with our weak electric impulses can (and do) control our own physical body why couldn't another entity, like the universe, control its own body?. it would definitely have the energy to do so. basically if a mechanism is valid at a micro scale, why wouldn't it be valid at a macro scale? a universe with thoughts. our evolution pre-determined by thoughts of the universe. Because our control of our body is result of biological evolution and has evolutionary purpose. Universe could have the same property, but as far as we know it is not true. It would require universe to be purposeful in the same sense as organisms are. Our current view is that universe is just a bunch of matter organized by physical laws. But as I said it could be so, but what is relevance of this to this discussion ? you would have to explain/define the word purpose, why do think we have a purpose?. if humans/all life on earth were to go extinct tomorrow, what would happen to that purpose?. does purpose means that something/someone would care if we go extinct?, could we not exist without a purpose (but with laws)?. we might just as well be a bunch of matter organized by physical laws, exactly like the universe. We are also bunch of matter organized by physical laws, but due to us being formed by evolution (as opposed to universe) we have some additional properties, specifically drive to survive and procreate as individual organisms. That is the purpose I mean. Organism's purpose is delivery mechanism for genes and to do that we evolved as individuals (by that I mean systems that consist of parts working towards common purpose) and it is evolutionary advantage for individuals to have coordination between parts and that is exactly what your brain's control over your body is. Coordination mechanism. As far as we know universe did not evolve and has no purposeful coordination taking place.
statements and assertions but you are basically saying that purpose = path, (predestined path i might add, based on your wording) right?
also, what is evolution, what do you mean when you say evolution?. why would the universe not be able to evolve too?.
the universe does expand, it grows, it changes. it's as though it lives, it evolves.
|
Oh wow, this thread took such a nosedive in the last 3 posts... Not including mcc, but really, what the fuck is that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
