Why Science Will Probably Never Address The Problem Of Consciousness

What you think about how you think.
User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 28220
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: Why Science Will Probably Never Address The Problem Of Consciousness

Postby Gord » Sat Jul 15, 2017 5:49 am

I'm just going to quote myself.

Gord wrote:Huh. As far as I knew, "science" WAS exploring the nature of consciousness.

Fer instance: https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/th ... sciousness

So, to examine the premise of this thread, "Why Science Will Probably Never Address The Problem Of Consciousness": (1) People are using the scientific method to explore the nature of consciousness. (2) What's "the problem" in question?
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

User avatar
Dimebag
Regular Poster
Posts: 658
Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2010 12:05 pm

Re: Why Science Will Probably Never Address The Problem Of Consciousness

Postby Dimebag » Sat Jul 15, 2017 11:56 am

Gord wrote:I'm just going to quote myself.

Gord wrote:Huh. As far as I knew, "science" WAS exploring the nature of consciousness.

Fer instance: https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/th ... sciousness

So, to examine the premise of this thread, "Why Science Will Probably Never Address The Problem Of Consciousness": (1) People are using the scientific method to explore the nature of consciousness. (2) What's "the problem" in question?


Complexity and emergentism are definitely interesting and possibly fruitful paths towards understanding consciousness. Complex systems can produce order through the rules or constraints imposed by the individual parts, and indeed we see this throughout nature, from the smallest subatomic particles all the way up to complex weather formations. Patterns emerge from the interaction of more than a few parts with distinct and constrained rules of interacting, where there seems only random noise. The brain and its network of neurons is a perfect analogy, the firings of neurons seems noise like, although we do see some patterns when averaging out the networks firing, with the different brain waves associated with different states of alertness, however, there must be a lower scale emergent pattern, which is the representation of information in the neural substrate.

User avatar
placid
Regular Poster
Posts: 592
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2015 6:39 am

Re: Why Science Will Probably Never Address The Problem Of Consciousness

Postby placid » Sat Jul 15, 2017 12:06 pm

Gord wrote:I'm just going to quote myself.

Gord wrote:Huh. As far as I knew, "science" WAS exploring the nature of consciousness.

Fer instance: https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/th ... sciousness

So, to examine the premise of this thread, "Why Science Will Probably Never Address The Problem Of Consciousness": (1) People are using the scientific method to explore the nature of consciousness. (2) What's "the problem" in question?


The problem is there is only 1 question to all our answers. (1)WHO WANTS TO KNOW?
(all our answers are in the 1 question)

To which there is only one absolutely answer, which is....
THAT WHAT WANTS TO KNOW?
< < same ONE.

The problem is there are no people exploring the nature of consciousness. There is only consciousness exploring the nature of itself in a myriad of different ways. All ideas are correct because they are all sourced from the same consciousness. Ideas can conflict with each other, but the consciousness in which they arise is never confused, as it is the ultimate knower of all conceptual ideas.

That which is looking, sees only flickering images in the form of colour and shape. Introspection of these images is consciousness looking at itself. These images are the only tool available for introspection as they are revealed...however, the images revealed cannot in no way ever reveal the one that is revealing the revealed images simply because no thing can be found to exist behind an image. This is an important issue when dealing with this subject that is often overlooked...until it is seen for what it is.

That is the dilemma of the oneness searching for itself. The imageless looking for itself in an image. Is like looking for yourself in a photograph...

User avatar
placid
Regular Poster
Posts: 592
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2015 6:39 am

Re: Why Science Will Probably Never Address The Problem Of Consciousness

Postby placid » Sat Jul 15, 2017 12:28 pm

SteveKlinko wrote:Consciousness will never be explained or even studied by Science as long as Scientists proclaim that there is no such thing as Consciousness or that it is just an Illusion. What can you do when people say there is no Hard Problem or Explanatory Gap and it is all already solved Scientifically? They say its all in the Neurons. They don't understand the Hard Problem of Consciousness that leads to the Explanatory Gap.

I think that Science will develop new Concepts that are not known yet. These Concepts will describe Consciousness in a Scientific way. It will be a new branch of Science. But first Science must acknowledge the existence of a separate Consciousness concept that is Not Explained yet and that can be studied. The very fact that Consciousness exists in the Universe means that we must explain it. It is basic human Scientific curiosity that will drive it. It might take thinking in new Scientific ways.


Steve, there is only one knower. If and when a new concept arises it will be known by the only knowing there is one with the knower which is consciousness.

No other consciousness apart from consciousness itself can know consciousness, for consciousness is known only as the concept dictates. And that which is known conceptually cannot know anything.

Concepts are known in the instant they arise from the only source there is which is this immediate knowing consciousness unknowable even to itself.

Inasmuch as consciousness is the Knower of all things...but is not a thing known even to itself.

So, no question regarding consciousness can be put, such as ''What is consciousness? ''Show it to me'' etc.

You cannot show consciousness because the shower is consciousness.

That which is revealed cannot reveal the revealer...there is only the revealing.

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7895
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Why Science Will Probably Never Address The Problem Of Consciousness

Postby Poodle » Sat Jul 15, 2017 1:43 pm

Wow, placid. Send me the recipe for whatever it is you're drinking.

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1177
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: Why Science Will Probably Never Address The Problem Of Consciousness

Postby Nikki Nyx » Sat Jul 15, 2017 7:11 pm

"I am he as you are he as you are me and we are all together."

Also, I'm nearly certain that my shower is not consciousness. Neither is my bathtub. :rain:
...it used to be so simple, once upon a time.
Because the universe was full of ignorance all around and the scientist panned through it like a prospector crouched over a mountain stream, looking for the gold of knowledge among the gravel of unreason, the sand of uncertainty, and the little whiskery eight-legged swimming things of superstition.
—Terry Pratchett, from Witches Abroad

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Has No Life
Posts: 18016
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: sees Maria Frigoris from its house!

Re: Why Science Will Probably Never Address The Problem Of Consciousness

Postby scrmbldggs » Sat Jul 15, 2017 7:36 pm

I ham that I bacon. Let's fry and toast together. Ramen.



:ahoy:

User avatar
Dimebag
Regular Poster
Posts: 658
Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2010 12:05 pm

Re: Why Science Will Probably Never Address The Problem Of Consciousness

Postby Dimebag » Sat Jul 15, 2017 10:28 pm

placid wrote:The problem is there is only 1 question to all our answers. (1)WHO WANTS TO KNOW?
(all our answers are in the 1 question)

To which there is only one absolutely answer, which is....
THAT WHAT WANTS TO KNOW?
< < same ONE.

The problem is there are no people exploring the nature of consciousness. There is only consciousness exploring the nature of itself in a myriad of different ways. All ideas are correct because they are all sourced from the same consciousness. Ideas can conflict with each other, but the consciousness in which they arise is never confused, as it is the ultimate knower of all conceptual ideas.

That which is looking, sees only flickering images in the form of colour and shape. Introspection of these images is consciousness looking at itself. These images are the only tool available for introspection as they are revealed...however, the images revealed cannot in no way ever reveal the one that is revealing the revealed images simply because no thing can be found to exist behind an image. This is an important issue when dealing with this subject that is often overlooked...until it is seen for what it is.

That is the dilemma of the oneness searching for itself. The imageless looking for itself in an image. Is like looking for yourself in a photograph...

Placid, you speak in a kind of code, which seems to filter out people who have, as you say, a full cup, but I understand in a way, what you are saying, and for those who are interested I will translate. From my understanding, you are describing how consciousness can not know what produces it, and therefore introspection of what might create consciousness can not produce results.

On some level I agree with you, purely introspecting allows no further information as to what produces our experience. I view our problem of uncovering what consciousness is and how it is produced like a kind of puzzle, like those pesky number puzzles, named 'sudoku', which gained popularity a few years ago. Currently, we have a few numbers spread through various boxes, however, as we probe further and further into the functional aspects of consciousness using various scanning techniques, as well as case studies of individuals with less than functional brains, we can attack the puzzle from different angles, allowing us to uncover further 'numbers' (facts regarding consciousness), and we slowly interrogate the puzzle until it gives its secrets up.

I am not saying we currently have all the angles, we will get to a point where we have exhausted all angles we currently are exploring, and need to change our approach to uncover further numbers. I have faith in the honesty of the scientific method that when we reach that stage, efforts will be focussed on these other angles, but currently we plod forward, slowly exploring all easier options, leaving the harder squares till later.

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1177
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: Why Science Will Probably Never Address The Problem Of Consciousness

Postby Nikki Nyx » Sun Jul 16, 2017 2:59 am

Common Sense v. New Age
a Dr. Seuss parody (with illustrations)

I will not eat green eggs and ham.Image
I will not eat them, Sam I am. :no:
I will not eat them in a car. :senile:
I will not eat them... Look! A bar!Image

I think I'll stop and have a beer.Image
This forum thread is getting queer.Image
Perhaps I'm just too commonsensicalImage
For new age concepts so nonsensical.Image

I doubt that drink will help me pierce :katana:
The fog herein, which is quite fierce. :burn:
But I'm not wont of drugs to taste, :nyanya:
For a mind is a terrible thing to waste. :dizzy:
...it used to be so simple, once upon a time.
Because the universe was full of ignorance all around and the scientist panned through it like a prospector crouched over a mountain stream, looking for the gold of knowledge among the gravel of unreason, the sand of uncertainty, and the little whiskery eight-legged swimming things of superstition.
—Terry Pratchett, from Witches Abroad

SteveKlinko
Poster
Posts: 209
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 5:14 pm
Contact:

Re: Why Science Will Probably Never Address The Problem Of Consciousness

Postby SteveKlinko » Sun Jul 16, 2017 11:34 am

Dimebag wrote:
SteveKlinko wrote:
placid wrote:In any case, there’s actually a much bigger problem facing any scientific approach to consciousness. No one has any idea what consciousness is. Sure, there’s plenty of philosophical speculation and mystical musing, but in my opinion there’s almost nothing solid from a scientific perspective.

Here’s why I think science cannot ever address the subject of consciousness: science studies objectively observable phenomena, whereas the most crucial aspect of consciousness is only subjectively observable. What are objectively observable phenomena? They’re the ones that more than one person can observe and communicate about. Through communication, they can agree on their properties. So the word “inter-subjective” is a pretty good synonym for “objective.” Objectivity is what can be agreed upon by multiple subjective perspectives.

The sun is a pretty objective feature of reality. We can point to it, talk about it, and make measurements about it that can be corroborated by independent groups of people.

But consciousness is not objective in the same way that the sun is. I do not observe anyone else’s consciousness. All I observe are physical perceptions: the sights and sounds and smells and textures associated with bodies. From these perceptions I build up a picture of the behaviour of an organism, and from the behaviour I infer things about the organism’s state of mind or consciousness. The only consciousness I have direct experience of is my own. Even my own consciousness is mysterious. I do not necessarily observe my consciousness. I observe with my consciousness. Consciousness is the medium for observation, but it not necessarily a target of observation.

.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/quora/2016 ... 6e8e2b654b

Consciousness will never be explained or even studied by Science as long as Scientists proclaim that there is no such thing as Consciousness or that it is just an Illusion. What can you do when people say there is no Hard Problem or Explanatory Gap and it is all already solved Scientifically? They say its all in the Neurons. They don't understand the Hard Problem of Consciousness that leads to the Explanatory Gap.

I think that Science will develop new Concepts that are not known yet. These Concepts will describe Consciousness in a Scientific way. It will be a new branch of Science. But first Science must acknowledge the existence of a separate Consciousness concept that is Not Explained yet and that can be studied. The very fact that Consciousness exists in the Universe means that we must explain it. It is basic human Scientific curiosity that will drive it. It might take thinking in new Scientific ways.

Steve, not all of science is of the opinion that consciousness is nothing more than neurons firing, there are projects which I think may at least be going down the right path. I personally think that looking for the structure of how information is represented in the brain is a good intermediate step towards describing how the brain can turn information into consciousness. Most of science is focussed on describing the function of every single area of the brain, which is also important as we want to know what the various areas which generate consciousness are doing, but it is the information itself which is the consciousness we seek, not the brain, and for that we need to find the patterns out of the chaos of neurons firing. Once we can identify individual representations of information, we can then focus in on how those representations might lead to conscious experience.

But for the experience of the color Red, it seems that the firing of the Neurons themselves cause the experience. Does not seem to be much information processing, if any, needed for this to happen. Seems like a direct path: Red Light hits Retina, Neural impulses sent to Cortex, Neurons for Red fire, we experience Red. What possible further Information processing can explain how we See Red?

SteveKlinko
Poster
Posts: 209
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 5:14 pm
Contact:

Re: Why Science Will Probably Never Address The Problem Of Consciousness

Postby SteveKlinko » Sun Jul 16, 2017 11:39 am

OlegTheBatty wrote:It has not yet been established that consciousness exists. It seems to exist, but there is nothing yet that certainly distinguishes that seeming from illusion.

My consciousness may be nothing more than my subjective impression of my existence; a convenient simulacrum to guide my inner dialogue.

How can you have a subjective impression of something that does not exist? What is having that subjective impression?

SteveKlinko
Poster
Posts: 209
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 5:14 pm
Contact:

Re: Why Science Will Probably Never Address The Problem Of Consciousness

Postby SteveKlinko » Sun Jul 16, 2017 11:49 am

placid wrote:
SteveKlinko wrote:Consciousness will never be explained or even studied by Science as long as Scientists proclaim that there is no such thing as Consciousness or that it is just an Illusion. What can you do when people say there is no Hard Problem or Explanatory Gap and it is all already solved Scientifically? They say its all in the Neurons. They don't understand the Hard Problem of Consciousness that leads to the Explanatory Gap.

I think that Science will develop new Concepts that are not known yet. These Concepts will describe Consciousness in a Scientific way. It will be a new branch of Science. But first Science must acknowledge the existence of a separate Consciousness concept that is Not Explained yet and that can be studied. The very fact that Consciousness exists in the Universe means that we must explain it. It is basic human Scientific curiosity that will drive it. It might take thinking in new Scientific ways.


Steve, there is only one knower. If and when a new concept arises it will be known by the only knowing there is one with the knower which is consciousness.

No other consciousness apart from consciousness itself can know consciousness, for consciousness is known only as the concept dictates. And that which is known conceptually cannot know anything.

Concepts are known in the instant they arise from the only source there is which is this immediate knowing consciousness unknowable even to itself.

Inasmuch as consciousness is the Knower of all things...but is not a thing known even to itself.

So, no question regarding consciousness can be put, such as ''What is consciousness? ''Show it to me'' etc.

You cannot show consciousness because the shower is consciousness.

That which is revealed cannot reveal the revealer...there is only the revealing.

I think a lot of people think of Consciousness in the general sense, and make it too complicated. I stick with one problem which is: 1) Neurons fire, 2) a Red experience happens. How does this happen? There should be an answer for this specific question. Even if there is only one knower, what is Red? Red seems like a thing in itself. What is the Redness of the Red? You can experience it but you can't describe it to anyone. It is a special thing that exists in the Universe and it must be explained.

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 28220
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: Why Science Will Probably Never Address The Problem Of Consciousness

Postby Gord » Sun Jul 16, 2017 12:52 pm

Nikki Nyx wrote:...a mind is a terrible thing to waste. :dizzy:

A mind is a terrible thing. Let's get wasted!
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

User avatar
Cadmusteeth
Regular Poster
Posts: 849
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2014 7:43 pm
Location: Colorado Springs, CO

Re: Why Science Will Probably Never Address The Problem Of Consciousness

Postby Cadmusteeth » Sun Jul 16, 2017 4:17 pm

I was part of the way there last night. But I stoped at that point because I have found that hangovers are awful.

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1177
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: Why Science Will Probably Never Address The Problem Of Consciousness

Postby Nikki Nyx » Sun Jul 16, 2017 5:31 pm

Cadmusteeth wrote:I was part of the way there last night. But I stoped at that point because I have found that hangovers are awful.

Ugh. They do get worse and we get older.
...it used to be so simple, once upon a time.
Because the universe was full of ignorance all around and the scientist panned through it like a prospector crouched over a mountain stream, looking for the gold of knowledge among the gravel of unreason, the sand of uncertainty, and the little whiskery eight-legged swimming things of superstition.
—Terry Pratchett, from Witches Abroad

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7895
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Why Science Will Probably Never Address The Problem Of Consciousness

Postby Poodle » Sun Jul 16, 2017 5:58 pm

Easy - don't get sober. Works for me, and I'm perfectly OK.
I am. I AM!

User avatar
placid
Regular Poster
Posts: 592
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2015 6:39 am

Re: Why Science Will Probably Never Address The Problem Of Consciousness

Postby placid » Sun Jul 16, 2017 6:00 pm

Dimebag wrote:Placid, you speak in a kind of code,

Yes and no, but probably because what I talk about is generally not part of the usual mainstream curriculum institutionalised by people that have no authority to impose such limited knowledge on others as if that was the only knowledge available....but do anyway...
Dimebag wrote:we slowly interrogate the puzzle until it gives its secrets up.


I personally don't believe God is going to give up it's secrets any time soon if ever. God in my language is just another word for consciousness ...No, the secret is already wide open as evidenced anyway...but no one seems to see it, and that's the way God planned it. Only God people see God...God made sure of that, God is the smart one here. God is not going to hand that sort of power over to just any old tom dick or harry body.

Okay, joking aside !! ;)

No 'man' is ''out side" of Consciousness. The one who appears to be doing the looking from a point in space, is an aspect of God’s Being as a witness of God's Self Knowing. So 'man' is the contents of consciousness inseparable from it.

User avatar
placid
Regular Poster
Posts: 592
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2015 6:39 am

Re: Why Science Will Probably Never Address The Problem Of Consciousness

Postby placid » Sun Jul 16, 2017 6:19 pm

SteveKlinko wrote: Even if there is only one knower, what is Red? Red seems like a thing in itself. What is the Redness of the Red? You can experience it but you can't describe it to anyone. It is a special thing that exists in the Universe and it must be explained.

Red is inseparable from the knower/seer/experiencer of Red.

So Red, is not a thing in itself..red is an appearance of consciousness the knower/seer/experiencer, therefore red is an image of the imageless.

Consciousness is emptiness in which everything arises... as embodied awareness. No 'man' can ever be outside of consciousness looking back at itself. A man is a concept in it, not out of it, and a concept is not a visible thing, it's a thought.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 25574
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Why Science Will Probably Never Address The Problem Of Consciousness

Postby Matthew Ellard » Sun Jul 16, 2017 11:40 pm

placid wrote:So Red, is not a thing in itself..red is an appearance of consciousness the knower/seer/experiencer, therefore red is an image of the imageless..


You really should have gone to school. Physical objects radiate electromagentic waves called photons, Humans have evolved cones in their eyes that pick up a particular frequency and convert the wave frequencies into green, blue and red in our mid's eye. We can remember these colours in our physical minds in the same way we can remember other abstract concepts like "tastes salty". This is all normal known science. :D

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 28220
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: Why Science Will Probably Never Address The Problem Of Consciousness

Postby Gord » Mon Jul 17, 2017 5:32 am

placid wrote:
Dimebag wrote:Placid, you speak in a kind of code,

Yes and no

Wrong!
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

User avatar
placid
Regular Poster
Posts: 592
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2015 6:39 am

Re: Why Science Will Probably Never Address The Problem Of Consciousness

Postby placid » Mon Jul 17, 2017 8:04 am

Matthew Ellard wrote:
placid wrote:So Red, is not a thing in itself..red is an appearance of consciousness the knower/seer/experiencer, therefore red is an image of the imageless..


You really should have gone to school. Physical objects radiate electromagentic waves called photons, Humans have evolved cones in their eyes that pick up a particular frequency and convert the wave frequencies into green, blue and red in our mid's eye. We can remember these colours in our physical minds in the same way we can remember other abstract concepts like "tastes salty". This is all normal known science. :D


Any one can draw information (common knowledge) from memory. That's the only place it lives.

But has any one ever seen a memory?

No, because no thing is conscious. :lol:

Consciousness is another word for life, which is another word for death.

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7895
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Why Science Will Probably Never Address The Problem Of Consciousness

Postby Poodle » Mon Jul 17, 2017 8:08 am

placid wrote:Any one can draw information (common knowledge) from memory. That's the only place it lives.

But has any one ever seen a memory?

No, because no thing is conscious. :lol:

Consciousness is another word for life, which is another word for death.

This is surely an expression of the unexpressionable by the unexpressed?

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 28220
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: Why Science Will Probably Never Address The Problem Of Consciousness

Postby Gord » Mon Jul 17, 2017 8:18 am

placid wrote:But has any one ever seen a memory?

Yes, I see them all the time.

No, because no thing is conscious. :lol:

I just said "yes".

Consciousness is another word for life, which is another word for death.

No it's not, and no it's not.
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 25574
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Why Science Will Probably Never Address The Problem Of Consciousness

Postby Matthew Ellard » Tue Jul 18, 2017 12:48 am

Matthew Ellard wrote:We can remember these colours in our physical minds in the same way we can remember other abstract concepts like "tastes salty". [i]This is all normal known science. :D

placid wrote:But has any one ever seen a memory?
Yes.

Categorical encoding of color in the brain
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3970503/
"We use functional MRI to identify regions of the brain that categorize color. Color categories are encoded by regions of the frontal lobes, which also categorize other information (e.g., sounds). Interestingly, the visual cortex responds only to the size of color differences, but not color categories. We conclude that color categories occur at the level of attention rather than being inbuilt into the visual system. The findings shed light on how the brain categorizes information and how it processes color."

You are about two thousand years out of date. :lol:

User avatar
placid
Regular Poster
Posts: 592
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2015 6:39 am

Re: Why Science Will Probably Never Address The Problem Of Consciousness

Postby placid » Tue Jul 18, 2017 7:36 am

Matthew Ellard wrote:
Matthew Ellard wrote:We can remember these colours in our physical minds in the same way we can remember other abstract concepts like "tastes salty". [i]This is all normal known science. :D

placid wrote:But has any one ever seen a memory?
Yes.

Categorical encoding of color in the brain
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3970503/
"We use functional MRI to identify regions of the brain that categorize color. Color categories are encoded by regions of the frontal lobes, which also categorize other information (e.g., sounds). Interestingly, the visual cortex responds only to the size of color differences, but not color categories. We conclude that color categories occur at the level of attention rather than being inbuilt into the visual system. The findings shed light on how the brain categorizes information and how it processes color."

You are about two thousand years out of date. :lol:


Very fascinating common knowledge ..where did you find it, in a text book, how easy for you to just read off information about yourself without ever having taken any part in the process, showing, happening...lol..see how nature does it all for you while all you do is just sit back and watch yourself ..?
It's all consciousness looking at it's own reflection...hoping to find itself not seeing that it's already what's looking.

Without electricity, no mind/brain mapping experiments would be possible, we owe all our knowledge relating to the workings of the brain to electricity. Electricity is Light...lighting up itself as and through the internal process via natures very own grown biological computer, revealing itself to itself via intel inside. Light being another word for Consciousness.

Knowledge is perceived as images and conceptual objects by consciousness on the screen of awareness the perceiver... perceived images are not the perceiver consciousness. Consciousness has no image. It is the projector of all images which are empty just as consciousness is empty. The very act of perceiving means consciousness cannot be what is perceived..

Please catch up with the special knowledge, anyone can know common knowledge, but you have to learn the special knowledge if you want to be up to speed.

God speed!

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7895
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Why Science Will Probably Never Address The Problem Of Consciousness

Postby Poodle » Tue Jul 18, 2017 8:14 am

placid wrote:...Very fascinating common knowledge ..where did you find it, in a text book ...


A good example of the sqealings of the Great Educational Failure school of thought.

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 28220
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: Why Science Will Probably Never Address The Problem Of Consciousness

Postby Gord » Tue Jul 18, 2017 11:36 am

Poodle wrote:
placid wrote:...Very fascinating common knowledge ..where did you find it, in a text book ...

A good example of the sqealings of the Great Educational Failure school of thought.

It's like, "Here's a link to a website containing some information," and then, "Where did you find this information, in a book" and we're all like, "websites aren't books," and he's all like, "consciousness, mannnn."
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

User avatar
placid
Regular Poster
Posts: 592
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2015 6:39 am

Re: Why Science Will Probably Never Address The Problem Of Consciousness

Postby placid » Tue Jul 18, 2017 1:13 pm

Gord wrote:It's like, "Here's a link to a website containing some information," and then, "Where did you find this information, in a book" and we're all like, "websites aren't books," and he's all like, "consciousness, mannnn."


Cyber space or on paper, it's all the same library of information.

Many authors appear..but there's only one reader.

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7895
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Why Science Will Probably Never Address The Problem Of Consciousness

Postby Poodle » Tue Jul 18, 2017 2:05 pm

No, really, placid - there are loads of readers.

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 28220
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: Why Science Will Probably Never Address The Problem Of Consciousness

Postby Gord » Tue Jul 18, 2017 6:57 pm

placid wrote:Cyber space or on paper, it's all the same library of information.

No it's not.
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 25574
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Why Science Will Probably Never Address The Problem Of Consciousness

Postby Matthew Ellard » Wed Jul 19, 2017 1:17 am

placid wrote: Cyber space or on paper, it's all the same library of information. Many authors appear..but there's only one reader.

You poor confused boy. When you previously wrote "Adolf Hitler's execution of the Jews was an act of love" you stated how you specifically came to our forum as we were different readers to the other forums that threw you off for your idiocy.

Did you forget again?
:lol:

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1177
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: Why Science Will Probably Never Address The Problem Of Consciousness

Postby Nikki Nyx » Wed Jul 19, 2017 2:22 am

placid wrote:Consciousness is another word for life, which is another word for death.
If you keep changing things, they'll never finish.

Image

Edit:
placid wrote:Light being another word for Consciousness.
Dammit!
...it used to be so simple, once upon a time.
Because the universe was full of ignorance all around and the scientist panned through it like a prospector crouched over a mountain stream, looking for the gold of knowledge among the gravel of unreason, the sand of uncertainty, and the little whiskery eight-legged swimming things of superstition.
—Terry Pratchett, from Witches Abroad

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 25574
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Why Science Will Probably Never Address The Problem Of Consciousness

Postby Matthew Ellard » Wed Jul 19, 2017 5:52 am

placid wrote: Many authors appear..but there's only one reader.

Well that's actually "no readers" for your early posts here. Can you remember what happened?
You spent three hours deleting all your posts out of embarrassment and then denied you consciously did that.
:lol:

search.php?st=0&sk=t&sd=d&sr=posts&author_id=15890&start=560
search.php?st=0&sk=t&sd=d&sr=posts&author_id=15890&start=440

Go away....

User avatar
placid
Regular Poster
Posts: 592
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2015 6:39 am

Re: Why Science Will Probably Never Address The Problem Of Consciousness

Postby placid » Wed Jul 19, 2017 5:57 am

Matthew Ellard wrote:
placid wrote: Cyber space or on paper, it's all the same library of information. Many authors appear..but there's only one reader.

You poor confused boy. When you previously wrote "Adolf Hitler's execution of the Jews was an act of love" you stated how you specifically came to our forum as we were different readers to the other forums that threw you off for your idiocy.

Did you forget again?
:lol:


Yeah, you are right, there are different readers, but the difference is an illusion. For the source of all appearances is the same one place, namely, here now, nowhere. The I is an appearance in Consciousness which is emptiness. Consciousness has no image, yet every image of I appears in it...inseparable from it.

Everything that happens in life is an act act of love. Life is a boundless infinite ocean of emptiness pulsating with Love. (did you forget that?)

No person ever acted, action is one unitary movement of consciousness aka NOONE

No one is separate, notice that all beings say the same thing..which is.. I or I am, there can be no opposite to I, there must only be one I ...this is known as knowledge, this I is perceived knowledge. Consciousness being the one perceiver of all I's, ...therefore that I is an illusory appearance of no thing.

It seems you like to get lost in the claim and blame story of ''I am the doer/knower''....but you are not alone in your belief of this false dichotomy.

There's only one consciousness that reads, and understands symbolic language as it appears as multitudes of words which are just auditory illusions of sound heard as words ...heard and seen and known by consciousness alone, perceived in the mind which is an aspect of consciousness...So yeah, it does appear that the stories are many but the reader is oneness.

But who would believe this? Let the dead bury the dead.

User avatar
placid
Regular Poster
Posts: 592
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2015 6:39 am

Re: Why Science Will Probably Never Address The Problem Of Consciousness

Postby placid » Wed Jul 19, 2017 6:03 am

Matthew Ellard wrote:
placid wrote: Many authors appear..but there's only one reader.

Well that's actually "no readers" for your early posts here. Can you remember what happened?
You spent three hours deleting all your posts out of embarrassment and then denied you consciously did that.
:lol:


Go away....


That which appears to be embarrassed is never embarrassed. Things just happen, no one or thing is making the happening happen, happenings happen and I have no idea how it happens. In other words nothing ever happened.
I wasn't there at my birth and I will not be there at my death...I am illusory knowledge.
I can't go away...there is no where to go. I'm never not here.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 25574
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Why Science Will Probably Never Address The Problem Of Consciousness

Postby Matthew Ellard » Wed Jul 19, 2017 6:07 am

placid four posts ago wrote:Many authors appear..but there's only one reader.
placid wrote:Yeah, you are right, there are different readers
How many bongs did you pull before today's posting session?

placid wrote: Everything that happens in life is an act act of love.
Explain how you deleting your earlier pro-Hitler posts was in anyway an act of love?

placid wrote:But who would believe this?
Other bong heads. :D

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 25574
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Why Science Will Probably Never Address The Problem Of Consciousness

Postby Matthew Ellard » Wed Jul 19, 2017 6:15 am

Matthew Ellard wrote: You spent three hours deleting all your posts out of embarrassment and then denied you consciously did that. :lol:
placid wrote:Things just happen, no one or thing is making the happening happen,
No Placid. You turned on your computer. You entered your password into the forum. You searched for each of your posts and deleted your own posts over three hours.

No one here, on our science forum believes your outdated 1960's hippy, bong-inspired, bull-shit. :lol:

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 25574
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Why Science Will Probably Never Address The Problem Of Consciousness

Postby Matthew Ellard » Wed Jul 19, 2017 6:44 am

placid wrote:I wasn't there at my birth and I will not be there at my death.
Can you add "no longer posting at the Skeptic forum" to that list? :D

User avatar
placid
Regular Poster
Posts: 592
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2015 6:39 am

Re: Why Science Will Probably Never Address The Problem Of Consciousness

Postby placid » Wed Jul 19, 2017 7:13 am

Matthew Ellard wrote:
No one here, on our science forum believes your outdated 1960's hippy, bong-inspired, bull-shit. :lol:


Excellent!

Because there is No one here, on no ones forum to believe. Simply because there is nothing beyond or outside of language/ knowledge.

It's entirely your prerogative as a nobody to believe what you want to believe. Nothing can be done about it, {!#%@} happens apparently.

Bye the way....never smoked, ever. Yuk, only idiots put poison in their own temple. Ever seen an animal smoking?

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Has No Life
Posts: 18016
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: sees Maria Frigoris from its house!

Re: Why Science Will Probably Never Address The Problem Of Consciousness

Postby scrmbldggs » Wed Jul 19, 2017 2:57 pm

placid wrote:...put poison in their own temple. Ever seen an animal smoking?


Yes, there are smoking chimps, oh body worshiping scat lady. Or is that "nondual fraud"?

And, plz, leave Tony out of it. He isn't saying what you think he says...


Return to “Brain, Mind, & Consciousness”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest