|
BrendanFlock
Stranger
Registered: 06/01/13
Posts: 4,310
Last seen: 1 hour, 20 seconds
|
|
Well I have a pretty good idea of the higest thought I can have.. but I was curious as to the root of the thought itself.. hence min/max..
So I'm asking what is the beginning of the thought conjuration.. like where does the beginning of thought start..? Is it a cellular reaction? Or does it come from the DNA itself?
And as por attention.. I guess I'm wondering if you can actually focus on everything rather than get stuck on each object as you object focus..
|
BrendanFlock
Stranger
Registered: 06/01/13
Posts: 4,310
Last seen: 1 hour, 20 seconds
|
|
Now that I think about it... I think I'm actually asking what is the difference between a micro state and a macro state..
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb
Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 38,061
|
|
these questions reveal that either you have not been following my comments in the discussion or that my comments have not been understandable but I will address the questions directly:
Quote:
BrendanFlock said: Now that I think about it... I think I'm actually asking what is the difference between a micro state and a macro state..
It is a good and relevant question - the word "state" used as a biological observance of a small and large section of the brain perhaps?
take a small (micro) site on the somato-sensory part of the cerebral cortex that can receive signals from your left middle finger, this section of the cortex will be mostly quiet unless a change is detected by nerves in your left middle finger. All sensations for that part of your skin go there immediately from afferent nerves in your hand - through the thalamus - to the cortical micro site. This micro activation causes an electrical field to pulse through the cortex outward from that point like a ripple in a pond from a raindrop.
the recollection of this sensation will also activate the same microsite, but rather than coming from the thalamus (and the nerve and the finger) it comes from a linkage in the brain, somethign formed at an earlier time during which that finger had an excitation and some other brain activity (another microsite) was activated, which can be sensory or recollective, pleasurable or painful, etc.
All of the sensory or recollective activity in the cortex is the macro aspect of the totality of activity, but it is also compeltely specific to the activity pattern that is unique to the unique set of micro areas that have become activated. The macro activity is in the nature of interference, the peak energy paths of the overlapping circular energy fields. The peak energy excites linkage nerves that form mini-synapse connections like little activation wounds on each cell that is active at the moment, and when this linkage cell is reactivated again later (by interference) it will drive all the mini-synapses that had been formed earlier causing the recollection of the memory.
each little memory has both the macro and micro aspects. when anything is like enough to the previous combination a similar interference will occur, and the linkage previously made will be invoked doing two things: increasing the strength of the memory and facilitating the recollection of that memory over others that are also cued up by the momentary similarity.
the thought that you are thinking of is like a cat in a photo of a living room full of furniture and light streaming in from the curtained windows past potted plants and other adornments and aspects of life. Just the cat may pop out as significant by virtue of it being unusual in the scene, but the entire scene is experienced as a totality first. Each individual thought or perception emerges as a figure from the ground of your experience as the most salient thought due to the relative difference from a norm, or due to the highest repetition or conformance (resonance). I believe that people consider any and all thought that remains in the ground to be sub-conscious, I would just call it sub-salient. everything experienced is conscious, only the more significant things are considered salient or worth tracking.
This reply is probably different than what you are looking for as I am not talking at all about a "highest thought" which is not a term I would tend to use except for high as in stoned, and the highest thought you can have is the one with the most interference over the longest duration (i.e. thoughts with sustained resonance of more than 3 seconds without apparent fading or alteration) - that would be a macro state related thing in which the entire cortex is in a state that extends the duration of field activations.
-------------------- _ đ§ _
|
BrendanFlock
Stranger
Registered: 06/01/13
Posts: 4,310
Last seen: 1 hour, 20 seconds
|
|
Near to perfect ebbing!
|
sudly
Quasar Praiser
Registered: 01/05/15
Posts: 11,237
|
|
The concept of there being biological mechanics behind the phenomena of sustained attunement/resonance is becoming a pillar-stone of my beliefs.
In my own interpretation, it may be that top-down attention is a form of sustained attunement, and that behind this is a bio-mechanism which has the same potential as any muscular system to be improved over time with use.
-------------------- I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb
Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 38,061
|
Re: Ebbing [Re: sudly]
#25466478 - 09/17/18 06:48 AM (5 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
my guess is everything top down is associative reflex to context and stimuli. and both stimuli and context are reducible to stimuli, since time and space are experienced as a stream of stimuli including perceptions (i.e. all the top down stuff). this includes the mirage of morals and will.
-------------------- _ đ§ _
|
sudly
Quasar Praiser
Registered: 01/05/15
Posts: 11,237
|
|
How can you stop the rain falling down?
-------------------- I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.
|
BrendanFlock
Stranger
Registered: 06/01/13
Posts: 4,310
Last seen: 1 hour, 20 seconds
|
Re: Ebbing [Re: sudly]
#25497335 - 09/29/18 04:07 AM (5 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
By evaporating the clouds!
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb
Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 38,061
|
Re: Ebbing [Re: sudly] 1
#25497432 - 09/29/18 06:31 AM (5 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
sudly said: How can you stop the rain falling down?
rain falls some rain is delicate like mist refreshing and nourishing some rain intensely washes the streets clearing the cafes of tourists some rain is heavy enough to wash everything out to sea exposing the fragility and pretense of our dealings.
we don't stop rain but use umbrellas as required
-------------------- _ đ§ _
|
sudly
Quasar Praiser
Registered: 01/05/15
Posts: 11,237
|
|
Quote:
redgreenvines said: my guess is everything top down is associative reflex to context and stimuli. and both stimuli and context are reducible to stimuli, since time and space are experienced as a stream of stimuli including perceptions (i.e. all the top down stuff). this includes the mirage of morals and will.
Alternatively, there could be invisible stimuli that act as agents of goal orienting.
When orienting a goal it is important to be able to grasp its feasibility relative to the time required. This is because once time is factored in the feasibility of the goal becomes more clear.
It's come to my attention that successfully invoking invisible stimuli may be related to the feasibility of goal orienting.
Quote:
While top-down attention can operate without giving rise to consciousness, many open questions remain. For example, what is the nature of attentional selection of invisible stimuli? Can the representation of an invisible âobjectâ be modulated by any type of attention or only indirectly via temporal, spatial or feature-based attention, yet not object-based attention (De Brigard and Prinz, 2010; Prinz, 2010; Tapia et al., 2010)?
It would be important to understand what kind of stimuli, tasks, and techniques result in strong attentional effects on perceptually invisible stimuli and what these effects entail. For example, synchrony or coherence in a population of spiking neurons (Womelsdorf and Fries, 2007) may be responsible for the attentional selection of invisible stimuli but not for consciousness. Another critical question is why the attentional enhancement of neuronal activity is not sufficient for conscious perception (Braun, 2007). Insufficient stimulus strength is probably an important factor (Dehaene et al., 2006).
This also,
Quote:
Is there an obligatory modulation of control signals by sensory signals?
Alternatively, is action-perception coupling soft and modifiable by the brain? Can the brain allow the control signals to be independent of or driven by perception?
-------------------- I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb
Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 38,061
|
Re: Ebbing [Re: sudly]
#25500685 - 09/30/18 12:08 PM (5 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
the questions by Dehaene et al do not come from solid understanding, he is making distinctions between classes of mental forms as if there were a clear correlate for the same classes in the neuro anatomy, which is not the case.
i.e. the question whether sensation can "modulate" other mental content suggests that there is a clear separation between sensation neurons and other neurons and that the behavior of one is modulatory to another.
all mental content impinges (and becomes modulatory) to all other mental content in an ongoing stream of consciousness.
additionally a model is presumed that tries to separate sensation, memory formation, attention, consciousness, and recollection (perception), while the reality is that they have to be seen as running coincidentally, like the air intake, the carburation, spark plug timing, crank shaft positioning etc. are all facets of the gas engine that work together or not at all.
attention being a subset of perception which is a subset of memory recall. sensation and perception are equal in the experience of consciousness and equal to memory formation.
clearly the focus should be on memory formation and recall, and the other terms can be discovered as referencing subtleties related to memory formation and recall and related to sensation and perception (a kind of recall).
timing is a sense, and motility of the body are a kind of recall/reflex that uses timing.
-------------------- _ đ§ _
|
sudly
Quasar Praiser
Registered: 01/05/15
Posts: 11,237
|
|
Quote:
âEveryone knows what attention isâ is one of the most oft-quoted remarks ever made by William James (1890). As times goes by, researchers are becoming more and more sceptical of the veracity of this claim, and some have even argued that âit would be closer to the truth to say that ânobody knows what attention isââ (Styles, 1997, p. 1. See also Pashler, 1998). I think philosophers of mind could benefit from this scepticism. The reviewed studies suggest that there is little agreement, in so far as our commonsense psychology is concerned, about the relation between attention and consciousness. Although there may be some consistency to the way in which most people use these terms in common parlance, there are definitively certain situations in which our preference for one or another is context-dependent, i.e. dependent on the category against which each term is contrasted.
The crying baby case may be only one among many. Our commonsense notion of attention is more complicated than we thought. My recommendation is that, following the example of some philosophers who have been studying the folk notion of consciousness (e.g. Knobe and Prinz, 2008; Huebner, 2010; Sytsma and Machery, 2009; forthcoming), philosophers of mind interested in the folk notion of attention should be wary of unsupported claims regarding the folk psychological use of such term. In fact, I think they should be cautious when making claims about the commonsensical use of other folk psychological terms. After all, the evidence presented in this paper could be but an instance of a more pervasive phenomenon: folk psychological terms may be inherently vague and context-dependent. Meanwhile, our best strategy to study the relationship between attention and consciousness may be resorting to our good-old scientific tactics: to make use of operational working-definitions, based-off pretheoretical conceptions of what attention and consciousness are taken to be in common parlance, but further defined in cognitive and/or behavioural terms in conformity to verifiable evidence. No matter how philosophically sophisticated the analysis of our folk psychological terms may be, precise operational definitions are likely to be necessary in order to understand the relationship between attention and consciousness. And so long as we keep using them, we may be in the clear.
Jesus Christ died for nothing I suppose.
-âwhat are other peopleâs lives like?â
Rather similar I suppose.
Isnât that why we say I feel you bro?
-------------------- I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.
Edited by sudly (10/05/18 03:43 AM)
|
|