The Inter Mind

What you think about how you think.
SteveKlinko
Poster
Posts: 221
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 5:14 pm
Contact:

Re: The Inter Mind

Postby SteveKlinko » Fri Jun 30, 2017 1:42 pm

Matthew Ellard wrote:
Matthew Ellard wrote:Baby steps...Steve...baby steps. You can now see evidence that "red" is held as a memory in the normal physical brain. This means your "Inter Mind" essay is rubbish and you have to agree that "red" is not new magical physics but a normal memory in the normal physical brain . :D

SteveKlinko wrote:I have always said that the Color experience is linked to Brain Activity, So what's new here. The question remains. How do we experience the Color?


Not "linked" Steve. It is a direct result of neuron activity. The "red" is held in normal physical memory. You can't get around that can you? Your "inter mind" theory is not required. :D

You can't just say Red is held in Normal Physical Memory. How does that happen? How does the Red in Memory become a Conscious experience?

SteveKlinko
Poster
Posts: 221
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 5:14 pm
Contact:

Re: The Inter Mind

Postby SteveKlinko » Fri Jun 30, 2017 1:53 pm

Poodle wrote:
Dimebag wrote:... I don't think we know enough about the fundamental nature of reality to be able to explain how consciousness arises from the brain, therefore I am proposing there is something which we don't currently understand about that fundamental reality ...

And that's where you should have stopped. Anything more looks awfully like a 'you stop arguing while I put in my own ideas' kind of statement - look at it this way or I'll tell my Mum. I'm surprised at you, Dimebag - you're usually much better than that.

All options and Ideas are on the table when it comes to Consciousness. No Idea should be censored when something is completely unknown.

SteveKlinko
Poster
Posts: 221
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 5:14 pm
Contact:

Re: The Inter Mind

Postby SteveKlinko » Fri Jun 30, 2017 2:27 pm

The thing that has Surprised me the most through this thread is the seemingly absolute lack of recognition of the Conscious experience itself. It would seem that the Physicalists have not contemplated deeply about something like the experience of Red. They seem incredulous at the possibility that the Conscious Red experience is a completely different "Kind" of thing than can be found in known Physics. I see Red as a thing that exists in and of itself. It might be generated by Neural Activity but it is something that is different than Neural Activity. Think about Red. If it is a thing made out of normal Physics then what is it made out of? Is it made out of Matter, Energy, or some aspect of Space? What is it?

Can Physicalists actually See Red like a Dualist does? I have wondered about that, kind of jokingly, in earlier replies where I said they must be the p-Zombies from Philosophy. The only explanation I can come up with for their inability to understand the Hard Problem is that they really don't have the same "Kind" of Conscious experience as a Dualist. They always just rename the Conscious Red experience with different Names like: Model, Representation, Evolutionary Cognitive Tool, and Memory Association. Some of them say that just saying these Names solves the Hard Problem. All these different Names have a Huge Explanatory Gap that must be addressed.

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8008
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: The Inter Mind

Postby Poodle » Fri Jun 30, 2017 2:35 pm

oR, pOSsIblY, YoU'Re WRONg.

SteveKlinko
Poster
Posts: 221
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 5:14 pm
Contact:

Re: The Inter Mind

Postby SteveKlinko » Fri Jun 30, 2017 2:50 pm

Poodle wrote:oR, pOSsIblY, YoU'Re WRONg.

Maybe, but I Doubt it. Capitals always go at the first character of a word.

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1914
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: The Inter Mind

Postby Nikki Nyx » Fri Jun 30, 2017 5:25 pm

SteveKlinko wrote:
Poodle wrote:oR, pOSsIblY, YoU'Re WRONg.

Maybe, but I Doubt it. Capitals always go at the first character of a word.
Do they?
SteveKlinko wrote:p-Zombies

In English, nouns, verbs, and adjectives are not capitalized.
SteveKlinko wrote:Can Physicalists actually See Red like a Dualist does? I have wondered about that, kind of jokingly, in earlier replies where I said they must be the p-Zombies from Philosophy. The only explanation I can come up with for their inability to understand the Hard Problem is that they really don't have the same "Kind" of Conscious experience as a Dualist. They always just rename the Conscious Red experience with different Names like: Model, Representation, Evolutionary Cognitive Tool, and Memory Association. Some of them say that just saying these Names solves the Hard Problem. All these different Names have a Huge Explanatory Gap that must be addressed.
Seeing red again...

https://youtu.be/trinU3VD1Zo
...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
Lance Kennedy
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9638
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: The Inter Mind

Postby Lance Kennedy » Fri Jun 30, 2017 8:27 pm

No miracle. Merely evolution working to build a very complex brain capable of wonderful things.

Why is it, Steve, that you think a magical and immaterial inter mind can generate consciousness while a material mind of enormous complexity cannot? Surely the magical mind must suffer the same limitation.

The experience of red is not a thing of itself. It is just a perception like any other. Generated by neuron activity.

User avatar
Dimebag
Regular Poster
Posts: 691
Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2010 12:05 pm

Re: The Inter Mind

Postby Dimebag » Sat Jul 01, 2017 12:30 pm

Lance Kennedy wrote:No miracle. Merely evolution working to build a very complex brain capable of wonderful things.

Why is it, Steve, that you think a magical and immaterial inter mind can generate consciousness while a material mind of enormous complexity cannot? Surely the magical mind must suffer the same limitation.

The experience of red is not a thing of itself. It is just a perception like any other. Generated by neuron activity.

My greatest difficulty in accepting that a subjective conscious experience is nothing more than the neural activity which produces it, is comprehending, imagining, and even logically understanding how the two could be the same thing. It is obvious that on the two sides of this debate, you have the materialist position, which takes it as self evident that all things have been shown to be material in nature, and reducible to elementary particles, and therefore consciousness must be reducible to that which gives rise to it. Unfortunately, for the other side of the argument, you have the view that consciousness seems to be a totally different property to material stuff, and there does not appear to be any properties described by physics to allow for consciousness in the materialist view, therefore a different kind of property, namely subjective experience, must exist separate to the property of matter. Unfortunately this then seems to commit you to some form of dualism, depending on how you think the properties of matter and consciousness relate, and this makes it difficult to explain the causal relationship between them.

Due to the problem of interaction, I lean more towards the idea of consciousness being an emergent property, as it is clear that the production of consciousness is limited to all that which resides in the body and brain. Unfortunately, I also find it difficult to accept that consciousness can only be neural activity and nothing else, as it is clear that not all neural activity produces consciousness.

When I say emergent property, I am referring to the way properties of a system can change when they reach a critical point, for example, the way temperature and pressure affect h2o, and leads to h2o taking different properties, such as ice, water, and gas. There exist theories regarding the way neural networks might take advantage of this criticality (perched on the edge of chaos), and that they might undergo a continual phase transition leading to greater connectivity. This is not an implausible mechanism for which consciousness could emerge. The theory doesn't make it clear what exactly produces conscious experience, beyond the general idea that due to the fact that a phase transition occurs following the critical point, perhaps consciousness is this phase transition. But as for what substance is actually doing the transitioning into conscious experience, the theory does not explain this either.

It could very well be a dead end, however I am yet to follow it all the way to its end.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9638
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: The Inter Mind

Postby Lance Kennedy » Sat Jul 01, 2017 8:58 pm

Dimebag

Consciousness is not an emergent property. It is an adaptation, just like every other biological feature. It is a result of evolution, when that result improves survival and reproduction.

This fits nicely with my view of consciousness. My view is that consciousness is the 'self ' in mental modelling. Imagine, for example, an individual thinking about (mental modelling) the best way to seduce a female. Such seduction increases his chances of successful reproduction, and is selected for in evolution. Evolution provides him with a tool. This tool is the concept of the self. He generates a mental model of actions required to achieve the end result, where the self has the joy of sex with the chosen female. The idea of 'self ' is required to complete the mental model. And that is consciousness.

This is not so terribly different to computer models, done with transistors and wires, except that the mental model is done with neurons and includes the concept of self. There is no need at all to assume anything immaterial in the process.

User avatar
Cadmusteeth
Regular Poster
Posts: 894
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2014 7:43 pm
Location: Colorado Springs, CO

Re: The Inter Mind

Postby Cadmusteeth » Sat Jul 01, 2017 11:27 pm

Lance Kennedy wrote:Dimebag

Consciousness is not an emergent property. It is an adaptation, just like every other biological feature.

Not sure why it can't be both. Biological processes are made up of smaller components and those are made of even smaller components; you get the idea.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9638
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: The Inter Mind

Postby Lance Kennedy » Sat Jul 01, 2017 11:42 pm

Cadmus

That is very close to an evolutionary fallacy. Many people believe that more evolved means more complex, but it just is not so.

User avatar
Cadmusteeth
Regular Poster
Posts: 894
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2014 7:43 pm
Location: Colorado Springs, CO

Re: The Inter Mind

Postby Cadmusteeth » Sun Jul 02, 2017 12:21 am

Saying that it's an emergent property isn't the same as making that argument. I find it bizarre why that would be the case.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9638
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: The Inter Mind

Postby Lance Kennedy » Sun Jul 02, 2017 12:27 am

I said it was close, not quite sitting inside the fallacy box.

But the implication was of a trend to greater complexity, which is not inevitable.

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1914
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: The Inter Mind

Postby Nikki Nyx » Sun Jul 02, 2017 12:45 am

Let's just end this senseless debate once and for all.

In 2005, Francis Crick and Christof Koch postulated that consciousness arose from the activities of the claustrum.
The claustrum is a thin, irregular, sheet-like neuronal structure hidden beneath the inner surface of the neocortex in the general region of the insula. Its function is enigmatic. Its anatomy is quite remarkable in that it receives input from almost all regions of cortex and projects back to almost all regions of cortex. We here briefly summarize what is known about the claustrum, speculate on its possible relationship to the processes that give rise to integrated conscious percepts, propose mechanisms that enable information to travel widely within the claustrum and discuss experiments to address these questions.


After Crick died, Koch continued this line of work, making little headway until an extraordinary event occurred in 2014.
A 54-year-old woman who had uncontrollable epileptic seizures had electrodes implanted deep within her brain to help pinpoint the exact origin of her seizures. During this procedure, electrodes can triangulate the focal area where the seizure originates so that it can be surgically removed. They can also inject electric current to help map the brain, identifying areas responsible for important functions such as speech or movement and thus sparing them during the surgery.

Led by Mohamad Z. Koubeissi, an associate professor in the department of neurology at George Washington University, the clinical team made a remarkable observation: electrically stimulating a single site with a fairly large current abruptly impaired consciousness in 10 out of 10 trials—the patient stared blankly ahead, became unresponsive to commands and stopped reading. As soon as the stimulation stopped, consciousness returned, without the patient recalling any events during the period when she was out. Note that she did not become unconscious in the usual sense, because she could still continue to carry out simple behaviors for a few seconds if these were initiated before the stimulation started—behaviors such as making repetitive tongue or hand movements or repeating a word.

Two aspects of this patient's case had never been seen before. First, no abrupt and specific cessation and resumption of consciousness have previously been reported, despite decades of electrically stimulating the forebrain of awake patients in the operating room. Depending on the location of the stimulating electrode, patients usually do not feel anything in particular. Less frequently, a patient may report flashes of light, smells or some difficult-to-verbalize body feelings, or perhaps even a specific memory from long ago that the electric current evokes. Or the patient will twitch a finger or a muscle. But this case was different. Here consciousness as a whole appeared to be turned off and then on again. Second, it happened only at a single place, in the white matter close to the claustrum and the cortex. Because electrical stimulation of the nearby insula is not known to elicit a loss of consciousness, the researchers implicated the claustrum.

Image
...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
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 28967
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: The Inter Mind

Postby Gord » Sun Jul 02, 2017 12:53 am

Nikki Nyx wrote:Let's just end this senseless debate once and for all.

That never works. Trust me. I've been here a while now.
"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: 894
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2014 7:43 pm
Location: Colorado Springs, CO

Re: The Inter Mind

Postby Cadmusteeth » Sun Jul 02, 2017 12:57 am

The real test of patience comes soon.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26077
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: The Inter Mind

Postby Matthew Ellard » Sun Jul 02, 2017 1:03 am

Cadmusteeth wrote:Saying that it's an emergent property isn't the same as making that argument. I find it bizarre why that would be the case.
Howdy. Cadmusteeth. In essence this thread has been pulled in different directions by different members and so, some of the posts don't really make sense in the different argument contexts.

Steve Klinko was religiously arguing as a dualist, that a new type of physics arose in the universe because animals on Earth evolved brains that represent certain light wave frequencies as colour in their heads. However, that made no sense and Steve could set out no evidence or even a working hypothesis. Steve ignores other normal evolved representations like "tastes salty" for sodium chloride.

Dimebag was saying that he considers it very possible that the human conscious is more than just an evolved collection of neurons firing away in a certain manner defined by human evolution. However Dimebag has no alternative hypothesis for how that would work and the evidence is that brains are just what they seem to be an evolved system complex system where the conscious is just neurons firing away.

However we did get to read some interesting science papers along the way, including one which is strong evidence colour is added to currently viewed objects, based on our memory of that object. That is pretty strong evidence colour is just an normal representational technique that is carried in our DNA.

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1914
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: The Inter Mind

Postby Nikki Nyx » Sun Jul 02, 2017 2:04 am

Gord wrote:
Nikki Nyx wrote:Let's just end this senseless debate once and for all.

That never works. Trust me. I've been here a while now.

Hey, at least it's actually evidence.
...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: 221
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 5:14 pm
Contact:

Re: The Inter Mind

Postby SteveKlinko » Sun Jul 02, 2017 11:51 am

Nikki Nyx wrote:
SteveKlinko wrote:
Poodle wrote:oR, pOSsIblY, YoU'Re WRONg.

Maybe, but I Doubt it. Capitals always go at the first character of a word.
Do they?
SteveKlinko wrote:p-Zombies

In English, nouns, verbs, and adjectives are not capitalized.
SteveKlinko wrote:Can Physicalists actually See Red like a Dualist does? I have wondered about that, kind of jokingly, in earlier replies where I said they must be the p-Zombies from Philosophy. The only explanation I can come up with for their inability to understand the Hard Problem is that they really don't have the same "Kind" of Conscious experience as a Dualist. They always just rename the Conscious Red experience with different Names like: Model, Representation, Evolutionary Cognitive Tool, and Memory Association. Some of them say that just saying these Names solves the Hard Problem. All these different Names have a Huge Explanatory Gap that must be addressed.
Seeing red again...

https://youtu.be/trinU3VD1Zo

I write using my rules. The capitals are for emphasis. The emphasis is on Zombies. Pretty good Music.

SteveKlinko
Poster
Posts: 221
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 5:14 pm
Contact:

Re: The Inter Mind

Postby SteveKlinko » Sun Jul 02, 2017 12:02 pm

Lance Kennedy wrote:No miracle. Merely evolution working to build a very complex brain capable of wonderful things.

Why is it, Steve, that you think a magical and immaterial inter mind can generate consciousness while a material mind of enormous complexity cannot? Surely the magical mind must suffer the same limitation.

The experience of red is not a thing of itself. It is just a perception like any other. Generated by neuron activity.

Researchers have had a hundred years to answer your question. There is still no clue. I don't see the logical connection of Consciousness to Complexity that you are talking about. I don't say there is anything Magical that has to happen. You always do that. I'm suggesting that there may be Scientific principles that are still undiscovered. I come to this conclusion after years of looking at the Science of the problem. Conscious experience is another "Kind" of thing that needs another "Kind" of explanation. But if they can find it all in the Brain then at least there must be a new "Kind" of way of understanding the Brain.

SteveKlinko
Poster
Posts: 221
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 5:14 pm
Contact:

Re: The Inter Mind

Postby SteveKlinko » Sun Jul 02, 2017 12:18 pm

Nikki Nyx wrote:Let's just end this senseless debate once and for all.

In 2005, Francis Crick and Christof Koch postulated that consciousness arose from the activities of the claustrum.
The claustrum is a thin, irregular, sheet-like neuronal structure hidden beneath the inner surface of the neocortex in the general region of the insula. Its function is enigmatic. Its anatomy is quite remarkable in that it receives input from almost all regions of cortex and projects back to almost all regions of cortex. We here briefly summarize what is known about the claustrum, speculate on its possible relationship to the processes that give rise to integrated conscious percepts, propose mechanisms that enable information to travel widely within the claustrum and discuss experiments to address these questions.


After Crick died, Koch continued this line of work, making little headway until an extraordinary event occurred in 2014.
A 54-year-old woman who had uncontrollable epileptic seizures had electrodes implanted deep within her brain to help pinpoint the exact origin of her seizures. During this procedure, electrodes can triangulate the focal area where the seizure originates so that it can be surgically removed. They can also inject electric current to help map the brain, identifying areas responsible for important functions such as speech or movement and thus sparing them during the surgery.

Led by Mohamad Z. Koubeissi, an associate professor in the department of neurology at George Washington University, the clinical team made a remarkable observation: electrically stimulating a single site with a fairly large current abruptly impaired consciousness in 10 out of 10 trials—the patient stared blankly ahead, became unresponsive to commands and stopped reading. As soon as the stimulation stopped, consciousness returned, without the patient recalling any events during the period when she was out. Note that she did not become unconscious in the usual sense, because she could still continue to carry out simple behaviors for a few seconds if these were initiated before the stimulation started—behaviors such as making repetitive tongue or hand movements or repeating a word.

Two aspects of this patient's case had never been seen before. First, no abrupt and specific cessation and resumption of consciousness have previously been reported, despite decades of electrically stimulating the forebrain of awake patients in the operating room. Depending on the location of the stimulating electrode, patients usually do not feel anything in particular. Less frequently, a patient may report flashes of light, smells or some difficult-to-verbalize body feelings, or perhaps even a specific memory from long ago that the electric current evokes. Or the patient will twitch a finger or a muscle. But this case was different. Here consciousness as a whole appeared to be turned off and then on again. Second, it happened only at a single place, in the white matter close to the claustrum and the cortex. Because electrical stimulation of the nearby insula is not known to elicit a loss of consciousness, the researchers implicated the claustrum.

Image

As in all these kinds of studies there was no capability to measure actual Consciousness. This is because we don't know how to do that yet. The only thing that was measured were more Neural Correlates of Consciousness and anecdotal responses from the subject. But even if this does show the absolute dependency of Consciousness on Neural Activity it does not answer the Problem. It is a diversion. Lets focus on a properly functioning Brain. When the Neural Activity is occurring what is the mechanism or process that creates the Conscious experience? That is the Hard Problem that still remains.

SteveKlinko
Poster
Posts: 221
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 5:14 pm
Contact:

Re: The Inter Mind

Postby SteveKlinko » Sun Jul 02, 2017 1:24 pm

Matthew Ellard wrote:Steve Klinko was religiously arguing as a dualist, that a new type of physics arose in the universe because animals on Earth evolved brains that represent certain light wave frequencies as colour in their heads. However, that made no sense and Steve could set out no evidence or even a working hypothesis. Steve ignores other normal evolved representations like "tastes salty" for sodium chloride.

You forget that my purpose for writing The Inter Mind website was to point out that nobody knows how Consciousness works. You seem to think that it has to be purely in the Brain. I say on the website that that's ok. But you have to explain how the experience of Red arises from the Brain. You can't just say it is in the Brain and that explains it. Saying it's in the Brain does not explain how Consciousness happens. That is the central question of this thread. I don't have to explain anything. The website says the Inter Mind is not an explanation but rather a Framework or Perspective that we can use to study and someday understand Consciousness.

SteveKlinko
Poster
Posts: 221
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 5:14 pm
Contact:

Re: The Inter Mind

Postby SteveKlinko » Sun Jul 02, 2017 3:01 pm

The Physicalists on this thread always try to ignore and camouflage the Conscious experience itself by using new terminologies to talk about it. They are always bringing up examples of impaired Brains and looking at how that might affect Consciousness. But they are never actually monitoring the Conscious experience itself. It is unknown how to do that yet. So they use surrogates for the actual Conscious experience which usually amounts to measuring Brain Activity in various areas, or patient subjective accounts. They have no idea what the actual Consciousness of the patient is doing. The only conclusion they ever come to is that the Conscious experience is dependent on the Neural Activity. This could be true. But the thing they never are able to do is show how, in a perfectly healthy and functioning Brain, Neural Activity produces the Conscious experience that we all have. Case Not Closed. The Hard Problem remains and has not been solved by any example that has been posted on this thread.

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8008
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: The Inter Mind

Postby Poodle » Sun Jul 02, 2017 3:57 pm

This thread is going nowhere. There is absolutely zero evidence to support the validity of the 'Hard Problem' and even less to support SteveKlinko's argument, and still less to provide support for the use of OOPUCLs (out-of-place upper case letters). For that reason, I'm out.
At least, until I feel like being back in, when I'm sure I'll find Steve still rotating through the arguments he's already been through a couple of times or so.

SteveKlinko
Poster
Posts: 221
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 5:14 pm
Contact:

Re: The Inter Mind

Postby SteveKlinko » Sun Jul 02, 2017 4:26 pm

Poodle wrote:This thread is going nowhere. There is absolutely zero evidence to support the validity of the 'Hard Problem' and even less to support SteveKlinko's argument, and still less to provide support for the use of OOPUCLs (out-of-place upper case letters). For that reason, I'm out.
At least, until I feel like being back in, when I'm sure I'll find Steve still rotating through the arguments he's already been through a couple of times or so.

Sorry I am unable to convince you that the Hard Problem is real. I understand. If you can't see the Hard Problem you will not understand my arguments. Thanks for your inputs.

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1914
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: The Inter Mind

Postby Nikki Nyx » Sun Jul 02, 2017 6:23 pm

SteveKlinko wrote:I write using my rules.
So, were you taking Poodle to task for violating your rules, or the actual, accepted rules?
SteveKlinko wrote:The capitals are for emphasis.
It's much better to use the text variations for emphasis.
SteveKlinko wrote:Pretty good Music.
I like Chevelle. They're like a combination of Tool and Shudder to Think.
Sober — Tool
https://youtu.be/hglVqACd1C8

Red House — Shudder to Think
https://youtu.be/HwHHs42caCA
...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
Nikki Nyx
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1914
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: The Inter Mind

Postby Nikki Nyx » Sun Jul 02, 2017 6:58 pm

SteveKlinko wrote:As in all these kinds of studies there was no capability to measure actual Consciousness. This is because we don't know how to do that yet.
Now you're being silly. One doesn't measure concepts. Can you measure love? How about boredom? Ethics? Can emotional pain be measured? What about chicness? Creativity?

Even if you measured the activity of every single neuron that fired while a person was sitting completely still looking at a red square, what would that tell you? Nothing. Why? Because the signal-to-noise ratio is far too weak. Check it out...
1. Subject is sitting still. Neurons are firing to contract his muscles to keep him upright, and to keep his autonomic functions working.
2. Subject is focusing his vision on the red square. Neurons are firing on red, square, and red square; Googling his memory banks for red, square, and red square; and taking note of every single visual image in his peripheral vision, even though he's not focusing on them.
3. Subject is not paying direct attention to sounds, smells, tastes, or touches. But his brain is, so neurons are firing to note every aural, olfactory, gustatory, and somatosensory input.
4. Subject is concentrating on the red square. Meanwhile, he is thinking a random sequence of thoughts. Did I remember to turn off the coffee maker? I need to pay my electric bill. My car could use an oil change. I hope Diane remembers to pick up the kids after soccer practice. And on and on. Neurons firing endlessly.
How do you, as the scientist, filter out all that noise to determine which neurons are responsible for red, square, red square, and every episodic memory associated with those three images?

SteveKlinko wrote:The only thing that was measured were more Neural Correlates of Consciousness and anecdotal responses from the subject.
1. What was proven beyond a shadow of a doubt is that consciousness is organic in nature and lives in the brain.
2. They were not anecdotal responses from the patient, but specific tested responses.

SteveKlinko wrote:But even if this does show the absolute dependency of Consciousness on Neural Activity it does not answer the Problem. It is a diversion.
A diversion? Science discovers the region of the brain where consciousness lives, and you call it a diversion? It's not a diversion; it absolutely crushes your idea of an intermind.

SteveKlinko wrote:Lets focus on a properly functioning Brain. When the Neural Activity is occurring what is the mechanism or process that creates the Conscious experience? That is the Hard Problem that still remains.
That problem does not remain; the experiment resolved it: the claustrum integrates information from all regions of the cortex into a unified conscious experience. Disable the claustrum, and the conscious experience is gone. Reactivate the claustrum, and the conscious experience begins again. The anatomy of the claustrum makes this possible, as Crick and Koch noted in their 2005 paper.
...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: 19394
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: sees Maria Frigoris from its house!

Re: The Inter Mind

Postby scrmbldggs » Sun Jul 02, 2017 7:16 pm

It's much better to use the text variations for emphasis.






Hi, Io the lurker.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26077
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: The Inter Mind

Postby Matthew Ellard » Mon Jul 03, 2017 12:08 am

SteveKlinko wrote:But you have to explain how the experience of Red arises from the Brain.
It doesn't arise from the brain Steve. It is the brain. That's what brains do. Your language gives away your fundamental religious preconception.

SteveKlinko wrote: I don't have to explain anything. .
We have noticed that you don't explain anything.

User avatar
placid
Regular Poster
Posts: 639
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2015 6:39 am

Re: The Inter Mind

Postby placid » Fri Jul 07, 2017 9:27 am

SteveKlinko wrote:Sorry I am unable to convince you that the Hard Problem is real.


Steve, what if the Hard Problem is not hard at all, what if it's an Easy solution to all our apparent problems?

Listen to this Sam Harris video ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fajfkO_X0l0

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8008
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: The Inter Mind

Postby Poodle » Fri Jul 07, 2017 1:16 pm

Welcome back, placid. I hope everything's cuddly and soft for you.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26077
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: The Inter Mind

Postby Matthew Ellard » Sat Jul 08, 2017 1:01 am

placid wrote:Steve, what if the Hard Problem is not hard at all, what if it's an Easy solution to all our apparent problems?
This is going to be interesting......

Placid is a religious dualist and claims only his version of dualism is correct. Steve Klinko claims he is a scientific dualist and only his version of dualism is correct. Let the match of wits begin.....
:mrgreen:
midget wrestling.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1914
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: The Inter Mind

Postby Nikki Nyx » Sat Jul 08, 2017 5:11 am

Matthew Ellard wrote:
placid wrote:Steve, what if the Hard Problem is not hard at all, what if it's an Easy solution to all our apparent problems?
This is going to be interesting......

Placid is a religious dualist and claims only his version of dualism is correct. Steve Klinko claims he is a scientific dualist and only his version of dualism is correct. Let the match of wits begin.....
:mrgreen:
midget wrestling.jpg

:pc:
...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: 221
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 5:14 pm
Contact:

Re: The Inter Mind

Postby SteveKlinko » Sat Jul 08, 2017 1:37 pm

Nikki Nyx wrote:
SteveKlinko wrote:I write using my rules.
So, were you taking Poodle to task for violating your rules, or the actual, accepted rules?
SteveKlinko wrote:The capitals are for emphasis.
It's much better to use the text variations for emphasis.
SteveKlinko wrote:Pretty good Music.
I like Chevelle. They're like a combination of Tool and Shudder to Think.
Sober — Tool
https://youtu.be/hglVqACd1C8

Red House — Shudder to Think
https://youtu.be/HwHHs42caCA

My rules are for me. Your rules are for you. Etc.

Good Music. Thank You.

User avatar
gorgeous
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4060
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2015 2:25 pm

Re: The Inter Mind

Postby gorgeous » Sat Jul 08, 2017 2:12 pm

so the brain has a mind of it's own huh?....interesting.....still no evidence of the neurons making decisions...
Science Fundamentalism...is exactly what happens when there’s a significant, perceived ideological threat to one’s traditions and identity.

SteveKlinko
Poster
Posts: 221
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 5:14 pm
Contact:

Re: The Inter Mind

Postby SteveKlinko » Sat Jul 08, 2017 2:17 pm

Nikki Nyx wrote:
SteveKlinko wrote:As in all these kinds of studies there was no capability to measure actual Consciousness. This is because we don't know how to do that yet.
Now you're being silly. One doesn't measure concepts. Can you measure love? How about boredom? Ethics? Can emotional pain be measured? What about chicness? Creativity?

Love is not just a Concept. It is a Feeling. It is a Conscious experience. How do you Feel the Love? You need to concentrate on the Feeling itself to see that it is not just a Concept but it is some kind of actual thing that must be explained.

Nikki Nyx wrote:Even if you measured the activity of every single neuron that fired while a person was sitting completely still looking at a red square, what would that tell you? Nothing. Why? Because the signal-to-noise ratio is far too weak. Check it out...
1. Subject is sitting still. Neurons are firing to contract his muscles to keep him upright, and to keep his autonomic functions working.
2. Subject is focusing his vision on the red square. Neurons are firing on red, square, and red square; Googling his memory banks for red, square, and red square; and taking note of every single visual image in his peripheral vision, even though he's not focusing on them.
3. Subject is not paying direct attention to sounds, smells, tastes, or touches. But his brain is, so neurons are firing to note every aural, olfactory, gustatory, and somatosensory input.
4. Subject is concentrating on the red square. Meanwhile, he is thinking a random sequence of thoughts. Did I remember to turn off the coffee maker? I need to pay my electric bill. My car could use an oil change. I hope Diane remembers to pick up the kids after soccer practice. And on and on. Neurons firing endlessly.
How do you, as the scientist, filter out all that noise to determine which neurons are responsible for red, square, red square, and every episodic memory associated with those three images?

You are measuring the Neural Correlates of Conscious Red experience. You are not measuring the Red experience itself.

Nikki Nyx wrote:
SteveKlinko wrote:The only thing that was measured were more Neural Correlates of Consciousness and anecdotal responses from the subject.
1. What was proven beyond a shadow of a doubt is that consciousness is organic in nature and lives in the brain.
2. They were not anecdotal responses from the patient, but specific tested responses.
it Even if Consciousness is Organic in nature we still need to explain the Conscious experience. The Feeling of Love itself. The Red experience. How do these experiences happen? They are not just Concepts or Ideas they are actual things that exist in the Universe, so it should be Scientific to talk about them this way. But you do have to recognize the existence of Conscious experiences as separate things that can be studied.


Nikki Nyx wrote:
SteveKlinko wrote:But even if this does show the absolute dependency of Consciousness on Neural Activity it does not answer the Problem. It is a diversion.
A diversion? Science discovers the region of the brain where consciousness lives, and you call it a diversion? It's not a diversion; it absolutely crushes your idea of an intermind.

The Inter Mind Model allows for everything to possibly be in the Physical Brain. This is stated several times on the website. But the Hard Problem is still there. When it can be shown how Consciousness arises from Brain Activity then that aspect of the Physical Brain should be called the Inter Mind aspect of the Brain.

Nikki Nyx wrote:
SteveKlinko wrote:Lets focus on a properly functioning Brain. When the Neural Activity is occurring what is the mechanism or process that creates the Conscious experience? That is the Hard Problem that still remains.
That problem does not remain; the experiment resolved it: the claustrum integrates information from all regions of the cortex into a unified conscious experience. Disable the claustrum, and the conscious experience is gone. Reactivate the claustrum, and the conscious experience begins again. The anatomy of the claustrum makes this possible, as Crick and Koch noted in their 2005 paper.

You are just proposing more Neural Correlates of Consciousness. How does Neural Activity in the Claustrum produce the Conscious experience? it's a big Explanatory Gap and it is the Hard Problem of Consciousness.

SteveKlinko
Poster
Posts: 221
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 5:14 pm
Contact:

Re: The Inter Mind

Postby SteveKlinko » Sat Jul 08, 2017 2:40 pm

Matthew Ellard wrote:
SteveKlinko wrote:But you have to explain how the experience of Red arises from the Brain.
It doesn't arise from the brain Steve. It is the brain. That's what brains do. Your language gives away your fundamental religious preconception.

SteveKlinko wrote: I don't have to explain anything. .
We have noticed that you don't explain anything.

You can't just say that it's what Brains do and the Hard Problem just goes away.

No Religion involved, just a pure Observation of Conscious experience. Conscious experience is a Phenomenon of Nature that you are completely ignoring.

I don't have to explain anything because The Inter Mind Model says that Humanity has not figured out how Consciousness happens. It is the whole premise of http://TheInterMind.com website. The Inter Mind Model is a Framework for studying Consciousness, not a theory of Consciousness. This post was intended to rattle the cages of people that think they know how Consciousness works. The Hard Problem remains. I see no answer to the basic question for Red experience. Given that:

1) Brain Activity for Red is happening
2) A Red Experience is happening

How does 1) make 2) happen?

SteveKlinko
Poster
Posts: 221
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 5:14 pm
Contact:

Re: The Inter Mind

Postby SteveKlinko » Sat Jul 08, 2017 3:08 pm

placid wrote:
SteveKlinko wrote:Sorry I am unable to convince you that the Hard Problem is real.


Steve, what if the Hard Problem is not hard at all, what if it's an Easy solution to all our apparent problems?

Listen to this Sam Harris video ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fajfkO_X0l0

Interesting video. I did not see how he solved the Hard Problem. He just said there are Neural Correlates of Consciousness. He did not explain how the Conscious experience happens when the NCC happen. He eventually used the old dodge of saying that Consciousness experience and therefore the "Conscious I" were all an illusion. All he did was say it was an illusion. He didn't explain how it's an illusion. That Red experience I have is not an illusion. I See it. it's something that exists in the Universe, It must be explained. Of course it's a special Kind of Problem because it seems to exist inside our Conscious Minds. But it exists nevertheless.

I don't know anything about the Transcendental Mind. I still want to know how I See Red.
Last edited by SteveKlinko on Sat Jul 08, 2017 3:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.

SteveKlinko
Poster
Posts: 221
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 5:14 pm
Contact:

Re: The Inter Mind

Postby SteveKlinko » Sat Jul 08, 2017 3:14 pm

Matthew Ellard wrote:
placid wrote:Steve, what if the Hard Problem is not hard at all, what if it's an Easy solution to all our apparent problems?
This is going to be interesting......

Placid is a religious dualist and claims only his version of dualism is correct. Steve Klinko claims he is a scientific dualist and only his version of dualism is correct. Let the match of wits begin.....
:mrgreen:
midget wrestling.jpg

My argument is with the Physicalists on this thread who can not explain their claims that Consciousness is an illusion and is only about Brain Activity. Physicalists might be correct but they can not yet explain themselves.

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1914
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: The Inter Mind

Postby Nikki Nyx » Sat Jul 08, 2017 4:14 pm

SteveKlinko wrote:
Nikki Nyx wrote:
SteveKlinko wrote:I write using my rules.
So, were you taking Poodle to task for violating your rules, or the actual, accepted rules?
SteveKlinko wrote:The capitals are for emphasis.
It's much better to use the text variations for emphasis.
SteveKlinko wrote:My rules are for me. Your rules are for you. Etc.

Good Music. Thank You.

Interesting. You don't capitalize "rules," but you do capitalize "music." Then, you didn't capitalize "you" when it followed a preposition, but you did when it was the object of a verb. They must be incredibly convoluted rules, worse than the actual, accepted rules.

If the capitalization is for emphasis, then you should have written the above sentences like so:
I write using My rules.
The capitals are for Emphasis.
My rules are for Me. Your rules are for You.
Good music. Thank you.

I think you're making this up as you go along just like your dualistic mind theory, since the rules of both continually change depending on the input of others.
...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


Return to “Brain, Mind, & Consciousness”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Confidencia and 1 guest