|
Yellow Pants


Registered: 05/14/17
Posts: 1,386
Loc:
|
Re: RGV's Consciousness 101 Basics [Re: sudly] 1
#27467047 - 09/13/21 04:29 PM (2 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Being conscious is not body. Influenced or even determined by body - sure. But not body. "out of body" does not inherently antagonize body. It's the eternal mind-body dualism. I am a dualist. There are so many examples of superimposed truths. the individual and the crowd. the local culture and the regional culture. the genetics and the conditioning. Real systems superimposed onto the same medium simultaneously.
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,530
|
|
I would avoid any "eternal" concepts, just because nothing is eternal.
though feel free to use the term to express the soothing poetry of everlastingness.
Probably my main hypothesis is that anything reported as consciousness is explicable by examining the structure and function of the brain in a consistent way.
The parts of the brain that I mentioned are doing what I have listed them doing, but they had not previously been described as functioning in concert as I have so described:
without accounting for interference of (detected) cerebral field energies triggering pyramidal neurons there is no recognizer/ pattern-matcher to generate associative (and progressive) recall of memory.
without accounting for pyramidal axon branches reaching many cortical neurons and only forming spikes on those cortical neurons that are currently active, no memory engrams would form. (white matter is known to include the branches of pyramidal cells and is often called the wiring of the brain)
without the thalamus in feedback with activated cortical neurons, neither the field energies would occur nor the activity state of neurons to make spikes and thus wire up the memory of what is happening together. (feedback between specific thalamus neurons and specific cortical neurons has been known to be built in for a century already)
without the hypothalamus providing suppression at the feedback loop in the thalamus, paying attention to one thing over another would be impossible (gabanergic neural circuit suppression at this point is known - My addition to this is to assert hypothetically that the hypothalamus is driven by the cortex in the same way that skeletal muscles are controlled, and we learn to focus attention in the same way that we learn to manipulate our fingers).
and without a residual hyper-responsiveness in cortical neurons that have been active in the last 5 minutes, we would have no short term memory (further study of the short term memory and the very concept of self as an ephemeral spirit could be fruitful as it points to a thing that many feel is the soul, though it is far from eternal, being 5 minutes at max, although always (during life) being the last five minutes).
these are the key aspects of consciousness working in flesh without interference from any other dimension, no magic.
according to the methods of science, this is my hypothesis for consciousness working in flesh, not exactly theory even though most of it is already established through experiments others have done. I have seen no other explanation for how we can exist and perceive at the same time using the biology that we are made of.
I see plenty of reasons people have proposed hypotheses that involve transmissions from another dimension, and entanglement, but have seen no end to end working theories that explain associative thought, associative learning, contextual awareness, etc. etc. etc. and these are the things that we see in consciousness.
and if there were involvement of systems in other places (dimensions, or deities) - things that could put ideas in our heads, well, how the fuck would those work anyway: would thought bubbles appear in our heads the same as the understandings of the words - all from somewhere else, is the understanding not ours, but elsewhere? and how would all the collected experimental data (which supports my hypothesis BTW) explain anything related to receiving signals etc.
--------------------
_ 🧠_
|
thealienthatategod
retrovertigo


Registered: 10/10/17
Posts: 2,642
Last seen: 4 months, 20 days
|
Re: RGV's Consciousness 101 Basics [Re: redgreenvines] 1
#27467151 - 09/13/21 05:57 PM (2 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
a black box experiment would be best to hypothesize about what consciousness is and/or is not. if you can test for something unseen in a reliable way and see a reliable output from something that contains the unseen, then you have a black box experiment.
is it possible that there is another coupling between sensation and action?
it is okay to admit that you cannot see the subject of interest, but you can see the container of it.
|
sudly
Darwin's stagger

Registered: 01/05/15
Posts: 10,797
|
Re: RGV's Consciousness 101 Basics [Re: redgreenvines] 1
#27467166 - 09/13/21 06:09 PM (2 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
redgreenvines said:
Quote:
sudly said: Evolution has literally been observed..
If a theory is not a scientific proof, what is a scientific proof and/or do they even exist?
Again, I think people can claim something out of body if they secede a full view in evolution.
I do not understand what you are talking about, probably you have been confused by the alienthatategod. like talking with a random word generator
I'm just saying, if anyone should mention out of body, that mention is out of the scope of evolution, and to have the view that there is out of body, is anti-evolution, something that suggests evolution stopped at one point in humans, and out of body took over.
-------------------- I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.
|
sudly
Darwin's stagger

Registered: 01/05/15
Posts: 10,797
|
|
Quote:
Moses_Davidson said: Talk about the human soul (an eternal consciousness) as being 100% purely physical versus existing apart from the human body should not be a scary or potentially offensive topic for anyone. Faith (any faith) and science can go hand-in-hand quite well, as long as one does not hold to a scientific belief (such as the old "steady state universe" theory or the "brontosaurus") religiously.
You can claim anything is out of body if you don't believe we evolved.
Is magnetism physical? I believe so.
If that's what you consider out of body sure, but beyond the natural, you are leaving sense behind.
What do you mean by existing apart from the human body? Because if you're talking about some interdimensional essence, that is frankly nonsensical.
And in some point in that view, we are detached from our evolutionary ancestry, and if that's you're view I'd appreciate it if you specified where you think we detached from our evolutionary history.
-------------------- I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.
|
sudly
Darwin's stagger

Registered: 01/05/15
Posts: 10,797
|
|
There is evidence of evolution because evidence has literally been observed.
Etc. Lenski E.coli.
-------------------- I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.
|
BrendanFlock
Stranger


Registered: 06/01/13
Posts: 4,216
Last seen: 2 days, 13 hours
|
Re: RGV's Consciousness 101 Basics [Re: sudly] 1
#27467435 - 09/13/21 09:47 PM (2 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Is the observer a body?
|
Moses_Davidson
Non-Prophet



Registered: 05/21/20
Posts: 613
Last seen: 3 months, 28 days
|
Re: RGV's Consciousness 101 Basics [Re: sudly] 1
#27467450 - 09/13/21 10:03 PM (2 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
sudly said:
You can claim anything is out of body if you don't believe we evolved.
Is magnetism physical? I believe so.
If that's what you consider out of body sure, but beyond the natural, you are leaving sense behind.
What do you mean by existing apart from the human body? Because if you're talking about some interdimensional essence, that is frankly nonsensical.
And in some point in that view, we are detached from our evolutionary ancestry, and if that's you're view I'd appreciate it if you specified where you think we detached from our evolutionary history.
I never claimed anything conscious is or is not out of body... but I probably lean toward that it is not (out of the body). But that is my own bias.
Leaving sense behind-- no leaving science behind. Let's just say that I agree with your point that our consciousness is physical-- I am pointing out that your rhetoric is not scientifically supportable. It is rhetorical. There is a pretty big difference.
I don't know why you keep going back to evolution on this. Maybe Alien is saying that animals and plants and all forms of life and rocks and minerals possess some sort of spiritual side that is beyond the body. I don't believe there is anything spiritual about a rock but I can't prove or disprove that with science.
-------------------- "In finance, everything that is agreeable is unsound and everything that is sound is disagreeable." --Sir Winston Churchill "The world may not only be stranger than we suppose, it may be stranger than we can suppose." J.B.S. Haldane "Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't." Mark Twain
|
Moses_Davidson
Non-Prophet



Registered: 05/21/20
Posts: 613
Last seen: 3 months, 28 days
|
|
For example, if I say that my dog is Zeus incarnate, masquerading as a dog... and that he created the universe last Tuesday, and that all of your memories prior to that and all signs of prior age were artificially created by my dog Zeus to trick you into thinking the universe is old, Science cannot disprove that. It isn't testable. You can't disprove a statement like that using science. You have to use rhetoric, which is fun but not to be confused with science.
-------------------- "In finance, everything that is agreeable is unsound and everything that is sound is disagreeable." --Sir Winston Churchill "The world may not only be stranger than we suppose, it may be stranger than we can suppose." J.B.S. Haldane "Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't." Mark Twain
|
sudly
Darwin's stagger

Registered: 01/05/15
Posts: 10,797
|
|
There's a probability that the Sun will rise tomorrow, and there's a probability that from hence we came was evolution.
All I'm more or less asking is, if 'out of body' evolved, or is mystical.
-------------------- I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.
|
Icon
Bloomer


Registered: 05/15/14
Posts: 2,866
Last seen: 2 hours, 40 minutes
|
Re: RGV's Consciousness 101 Basics [Re: sudly] 1
#27467871 - 09/14/21 10:21 AM (2 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Right? Just because something can't be disproven doesn't mean we should believe it to be true. I assume unprovable cases are like most cases in that proof is not needed, you can discern the right answer from probability. If I present a wart to a doctor they don't have to test for contact with witch DNA or ask if I've been cursed recently before treating it as a viral infection.
When I found a quarter under my pillow as a kid, I innocently calculated that it was probably one of my parent's quarters that they placed there when they disturbed my pillow shortly before waking me up. When my parents admitted the tooth fairy wasn't real, I didn't demand proof and cling to the idea.
The way people borrow each other's mysticism is evidence to me that it's indoctrinated foolishness. If non-reality had any influence on reality we'd see random chaos instead of cause and effect. Rick and Morty is maybe a good example of a magical, fictional reality. Instead, the magic phenomena people report is limited to a specific, historical set of indoctrinated interpretations and mythologies. Points to a probability of mysticism being a product of nurture rather than our nature.
And in the tiny reality of a chance that consciousness isn't a physical phenomena, what would that imply? It just opens more unanswerable improbabilities than the evolution theory. It's not an attractive idea unless you believe that having a fictional relationship with the supernatural can give you rockstar powers or eternal life.
|
Yellow Pants


Registered: 05/14/17
Posts: 1,386
Loc:
|
Re: RGV's Consciousness 101 Basics [Re: sudly] 1
#27468243 - 09/14/21 03:08 PM (2 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
sudly said: I'm just saying, if anyone should mention out of body, that mention is out of the scope of evolution, and to have the view that there is out of body, is anti-evolution, something that suggests evolution stopped at one point in humans, and out of body took over.
At some point humanity went beyond a purely instinct existence. That's when I'd say we left classical evolution.
My logical proof for this is that consciousness is greater than the sum of it's parts when it moves beyond pure instinct. And this greater-ness alters reality in a way where it (consciousness) is primary and not reality. Because the essence of evolution is that reality is the primary driving force. It's a ground up approach. And fair enough until you get into the realm of animals that possess certain forms of conscious experience that are capable of the above.
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,530
|
Re: RGV's Consciousness 101 Basics [Re: Yellow Pants] 1
#27468307 - 09/14/21 03:47 PM (2 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
A) Evolution is a different topic from consciousness
B) Animals have consciousness to the same degree that I have so far described it for humans (I have merely alluded the complexity of coordinated movements, singing, talking etc while focusing on basic associative memory). you may call it instinctive consciousness but it is not free from a sense of self which the contextual inertia of the last 5 minutes (i.e. short term memory) - Many Animals (all mammals and birds and many others) definitely have associative memory and short term memory.
C) Humans have not gone beyond instinct consciousness at all - nothing specifically evolution-wise (although adaptive ingenuity is related somewhat - largely we have needed it mostly to adapt to the threats that other humans present as a subset of all of nature in our niche - the rest of the threats are absorbed mostly by social organization (of which science and medicine contribute a lot))
D) When we dwell in word thought or language thought or technical thinking, it is like an animal day dreaming in their spatial imagination (which they do do; you can see them snap out of it.) we share that imagination with animals but we also do it with complex language and abstract ideas, we create inner theatre on topics of interest that are not present in the contextual environment.
E) Abstract Language (and thinking) on not contextually relevant matters is a complex associative skill that we developed using the extra brain real estate that we have been endowed with through our evolutionary history. We are still just learning how to use it.
F) We do not all have the same powerful ability of shakespear or einstein or plato, but some of us might sometimes, and that gives some hope. Unfortunately many of us do not even understand vaccines.
Is that due to not using our potential or is it about not having the potential to understand vaccines?
--------------------
_ 🧠_
|
sudly
Darwin's stagger

Registered: 01/05/15
Posts: 10,797
|
Re: RGV's Consciousness 101 Basics [Re: redgreenvines] 1
#27468577 - 09/14/21 07:20 PM (2 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
If consciousness evolved, your model makes a lot more sense imo.
I like how you've put memory formation into context, I do think this below quote of yours really speaks too!
Quote:
redgreenvines said: without the hypothalamus providing suppression at the feedback loop in the thalamus, paying attention to one thing over another would be impossible (gabanergic neural circuit suppression at this point is known - My addition to this is to assert hypothetically that the hypothalamus is driven by the cortex in the same way that skeletal muscles are controlled, and we learn to focus attention in the same way that we learn to manipulate our fingers).
Your model of consciousness seems to me like a model of a black hole, it's not directly modeling consciousness but is infering it's there, it's just that extra hypothesis of hypolothalamic interference that intrigues me so!
-------------------- I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,530
|
Re: RGV's Consciousness 101 Basics [Re: sudly] 1
#27468607 - 09/14/21 07:56 PM (2 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
sudly said: If consciousness evolved, your model makes a lot more sense imo.
I like how you've put memory formation into context, I do think this below quote of yours really speaks too!
Quote:
redgreenvines said: without the hypothalamus providing suppression at the feedback loop in the thalamus, paying attention to one thing over another would be impossible (gabanergic neural circuit suppression at this point is known - My addition to this is to assert hypothetically that the hypothalamus is driven by the cortex in the same way that skeletal muscles are controlled, and we learn to focus attention in the same way that we learn to manipulate our fingers).
Your model of consciousness seems to me like a model of a black hole, it's not directly modeling consciousness but is infering it's there, it's just that extra hypothesis of hypolothalamic interference that intrigues me so!
you like what you like about it because it looks like will, and is a very close cousin to it. combined with the contextual self reference in short term memory this is the sense of self that people might imagine is the meat of consciousness, or ego. the self, or soul. both are nothing without the sensation, memory formation, and perception that makes it go and worth going for.
--------------------
_ 🧠_
|
BrendanFlock
Stranger


Registered: 06/01/13
Posts: 4,216
Last seen: 2 days, 13 hours
|
Re: RGV's Consciousness 101 Basics [Re: redgreenvines] 1
#27468686 - 09/14/21 09:16 PM (2 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
This moment captured properly is the highest form of evolution all around!
|
Ferdinando


Registered: 11/15/09
Posts: 3,664
|
Re: RGV's Consciousness 101 Basics [Re: redgreenvines] 1
#27468879 - 09/15/21 03:15 AM (2 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
redgreenvines said: many of us do not even understand vaccines.
Is that due to not using our potential or is it about not having the potential to understand vaccines?
the latter I think the sea is not there the hills are there
-------------------- with our love with our love we could save the world
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,530
|
Re: RGV's Consciousness 101 Basics [Re: Ferdinando] 1
#27468907 - 09/15/21 03:57 AM (2 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
so the water level is too low comparatively speaking.
--------------------
_ 🧠_
|
Ferdinando


Registered: 11/15/09
Posts: 3,664
|
Re: RGV's Consciousness 101 Basics [Re: redgreenvines] 1
#27469123 - 09/15/21 09:15 AM (2 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
that must be true when you say it if they were more awakened they would have as function in their consciousness to understand vaccines
-------------------- with our love with our love we could save the world
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,530
|
Re: RGV's Consciousness 101 Basics [Re: Ferdinando] 1
#27469138 - 09/15/21 09:32 AM (2 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
do you think it is too much distractedness, or unhealthy mental habits such as an unhealthy reliance or interest in being accepted by the group or club mentality or party politics even.
I have been avoiding being part of any congregation except where I have a strong specific interest like this thread.
--------------------
_ 🧠_
|
|