Home | Community | Message Board


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Myyco.com Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   PhytoExtractum Maeng Da Thai Kratom Leaf Powder

Jump to first unread post Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | Next >  [ show all ]
OfflineAldous
enthusiast
Male User Gallery

Registered: 10/19/99
Posts: 980
Loc: inside my skull
Last seen: 17 days, 1 hour
Re: Mind & Brain [Re: Swami]
    #3911034 - 03/13/05 10:57 AM (19 years, 20 days ago)

Swami, this is getting pathetic. I'll answer this one last time (sorry people for kinda temporarily hijacking this thread) before leaving you with the caricature you have become.

Quote:

Swami said:
So you are unable to answer a simple and direct question about plants teaching about other plants even though you made a statement about such.



The original statement was not mine to start with. It came from a guy named PsiloPsychic, and it read as follows:
Quote:

well back to the ayahuasceros. they say that the plants taught them about the rest of the plants in the jungle and showed how they can be used, how they are to be prepared, and even what other plants may cause a synergy, like the two ayahuasca ingredients.


Obviously this is not a statement about plants teaching about other plants, this is a statement about ayahuasqueros and what they say.

You misunderstood the sentence, and thought they claimed that ayahuasca had taught them about the synergy of the two ayahuasca ingredients, in effect teaching them how to make ayahuasca, which they supposedly already knew.

That would be sophistic indeed, but it is not what was said. As I (and someone else) pointed out, you misinterpreted the word "like". It was meant to mean "in the same way as", and not "for example", or "among others".
So what you thought was claimed in fact wasn't. End of story. Read the thread again, and try to understand.

Instead of just admitting your mistake, you go about completely distorting statements and elementary logic just to prove that once again you're right.
It just seems impossible for you to admit, just for once, that you were wrong (even for such a minor misinterpretation), or just for once, to not have the last word (as your next reply will probably prove (I hope not, thanks)).

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/18/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: Mind & Brain [Re: ]
    #3911058 - 03/13/05 11:05 AM (19 years, 20 days ago)

Virola, even though a single plant, also requires a special preparation with four or five distinct steps. Which other plant gave this knowledge or is this an endless circle with no beginning?


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/18/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: Mind & Brain [Re: Aldous]
    #3911086 - 03/13/05 11:11 AM (19 years, 20 days ago)

"...the plants taught them about the rest of the plants..."

Obviously this is not a statement about plants teaching about other plants,

WTF? Guess I really misread that.  :rolleyes:


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/18/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: Mind & Brain [Re: neuro]
    #3911111 - 03/13/05 11:15 AM (19 years, 20 days ago)

This is because you are switching from possible pathways at any one instant in time and i'm considering possible different pathways at any time.

No, this is because you don't know the difference between multiplication and raising a number to the power of another number.

"A mind (with a thousand trillion pathways), is a terrible thing to waste!"


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineoahu
Stranger
Registered: 01/20/05
Posts: 10
Last seen: 19 years, 13 days
Re: Mind & Brain [Re: Swami]
    #3911161 - 03/13/05 11:35 AM (19 years, 20 days ago)

how bout when u die ur soul/mind gets sent or goes into the mind/body of an animal and ur soul goes into another animal and that's considered hell but the only way to get out of hell is to find ur soulmate as an animal and kill it to release ur soul/mind back to a human body around the age of 2, or at birth this is just a 'wild' guess but if ur mind is trapped and u don't end up finding ur soul as an animal u get lost&confused in ur new body and have no recollection of ur previous life because of that, that's how all the intermix of different races of humans have been collaberated

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineoahu
Stranger
Registered: 01/20/05
Posts: 10
Last seen: 19 years, 13 days
Re: Mind & Brain [Re: oahu]
    #3911169 - 03/13/05 11:37 AM (19 years, 20 days ago)

and if 'god' doesn't hate he/she should turn those who are racist toward another race into that race of human in their next life so they can realize we are all the same, i believe plants and 'still' life are made of thoughts as in letters and numbers intermixed with 3-d shapes and however many letters/numbers go into a life makes it unique and the more and more thoughts go into a life makes it able to adapt into a higher form, i also believe there is a star for every soul on the face of the earth and when u see a 'shooting star' i believe thats when a soul switches from one animal to another, mother animal takes care of its children until they are ready to go out on their own and the father hunts for food much like the mother stays at home takes care of children and the father works and provides money for the family, i believe it takes 4 souls of animals whether snake+rat+cat+dog to create a soul for a monkey and then once the monkey consumes enough knowledge it's soul is then sent back tohuman form

Edited by oahu (03/13/05 11:48 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineoahu
Stranger
Registered: 01/20/05
Posts: 10
Last seen: 19 years, 13 days
Re: Mind & Brain [Re: oahu]
    #3911195 - 03/13/05 11:50 AM (19 years, 20 days ago)

unless different races of humans come from different species of animals, anyone know?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineoahu
Stranger
Registered: 01/20/05
Posts: 10
Last seen: 19 years, 13 days
Re: Mind & Brain [Re: oahu]
    #3911205 - 03/13/05 11:53 AM (19 years, 20 days ago)

i believe if ur roots are pure african u come from panther/gorilla, i also believe the first person was african so that would make everyone on planet earth african down the line but everyone gets so caught up in classifying they are afraid of the truth which is there is no more hell than that in which we live in today there are no other forms of life higher than humans unless ur trippin balls then humans can look pretty fucked up

Edited by oahu (03/13/05 11:56 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineAldous
enthusiast
Male User Gallery

Registered: 10/19/99
Posts: 980
Loc: inside my skull
Last seen: 17 days, 1 hour
Re: Mind & Brain [Re: Swami]
    #3911914 - 03/13/05 02:45 PM (19 years, 19 days ago)

Quote:

Swami said:
Guess I really misread that.  :rolleyes:


You guessed right.
Quote:

Aldous said:
It just seems impossible for you to admit, just for once, that you were wrong (even for such a minor misinterpretation), or just for once, to not have the last word (as your next reply will probably prove)


And so did I.  :nonono:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleredgreenvines
irregular verb
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 38,063
Re: Mind & Brain [Re: Aldous]
    #3911990 - 03/13/05 03:05 PM (19 years, 19 days ago)

the drunken brawling takes over
then a new thread emerges and
we start again.


--------------------
:confused: _ :brainfart:🧠  _ :finger:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinefresh313
journeyman
 User Gallery

Registered: 09/01/03
Posts: 2,537
Last seen: 12 years, 11 months
Re: Mind & Brain [Re: redgreenvines]
    #3912003 - 03/13/05 03:09 PM (19 years, 19 days ago)

its the circle of strife

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineneuro
Phytophiliac
 User Gallery

Registered: 08/10/99
Posts: 6,633
Loc: Rigel 7
Last seen: 4 months, 13 days
Re: Mind & Brain [Re: Swami]
    #3912336 - 03/13/05 04:34 PM (19 years, 19 days ago)

Quote:

Swami said:
This is because you are switching from possible pathways at any one instant in time and i'm considering possible different pathways at any time.

No, this is because you don't know the difference between multiplication and raising a number to the power of another number.

"A mind (with a thousand trillion pathways), is a terrible thing to waste!"





Wow! That's a powerful refutation! I love ex cathedra statements. How about we actually follow the practices of real philosophy and provide support for our statements. Please explain to us how the math is wrong and how yours is correct. Surely you must know about permutations, combinations, and other such mathematical processes. An answer of "No you don't know what you're talking about" never suffices in philosophy, however "You don't know what you're talking about and here's why.... ex 1, ex 2 etc.." does! If you're such the logical and philosophical genius you purport yourself to be surely you can follow philosophical tradition and engage in argumentation the correct way no? While you're at it being involved in correct philosophical argumentation also involves responding to examples given by the opponent debater and finding fallacies, inconsistencies, things that are just wrong, or stating why the example doesn't fit the situation. You've done none of that in any of your replies to anyone here, nor have you specifically addressed my example regarding the colored pins and how a non physical quantity relating to possibilities of physical quantities which doesn't include the entire set is not sufficient in the argument other than a remark to another poster who stated the example of 2^8 saying that is not sufficient in representing physical pathways, again an ex cathedra statement, I do not think you are such a genius that i should just believe everything you say without proof, example, or some other form evidence. C'mon swami you can't bully your way through arguments with snide remarks and put-downs! You need to practice for your eventual publications in the journal of philosophy or the journal of epistemology!

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/18/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: Mind & Brain [Re: neuro]
    #3912429 - 03/13/05 04:54 PM (19 years, 19 days ago)

I refuted it three times already. How many will suffice before your neural pathways grasp the basics? I spelled it out v-e-r-y clearly.

...or stating why the example doesn't fit the situation...
As I did. Go back and re-read. Sub-systems cannot be more numerous than the particles that make it up. Concise and to the point.

nor have you specifically addressed my example regarding the colored pins.
Colored pins are not brain connections nor is the maximum mathematically possible connections in any way related to actual physical connections.

Two billion to the two billionth power is the theoretical maximum whereas you stated the ACTUAL connections are two billion to the 10,000th power, when IN REALITY they are two billion * 10,000 / 2.

If you cannot grok this factoid then I cannot help you. I can't break it down any further. I am not here to teach basic math, statistics and neuro-topology.

I do not think you are such a genius that i should just believe everything you say without proof, example, or some other form evidence.
Even though I am a professional poker and backgammon player and programmed an AI milestone in backgammon game theory, you should not take my word for anything. Triple-check your numbers and do some research before your emotions force you to repost yet more errors.


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.

Edited by Swami (03/13/05 05:04 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/18/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: Mind & Brain [Re: Aldous]
    #3912508 - 03/13/05 05:13 PM (19 years, 19 days ago)

I have no problem admitting an error, but you contradict your own statement.


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinePed
Interested In Your Brain
 User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 08/30/99
Posts: 5,494
Loc: Canada
Last seen: 7 years, 3 months
Re: Mind & Brain [Re: Swami]
    #3912945 - 03/13/05 07:01 PM (19 years, 19 days ago)

MASTER SHAKE IS IN DA HOOOOOUUSSSE


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineGomp
¡(Bound to·(O))be free!
Male User Gallery

Registered: 09/11/04
Posts: 10,888
Loc: I re·side [primarily] in...
Last seen: 1 year, 28 days
Re: Mind & Brain [Re: Ped]
    #3913008 - 03/13/05 07:14 PM (19 years, 19 days ago)



--------------------


--------------------
Disclaimer!?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineneuro
Phytophiliac
 User Gallery

Registered: 08/10/99
Posts: 6,633
Loc: Rigel 7
Last seen: 4 months, 13 days
Re: Mind & Brain [Re: Swami]
    #3913649 - 03/13/05 09:16 PM (19 years, 19 days ago)

Quote:


...or stating why the example doesn't fit the situation...
As I did. Go back and re-read. Sub-systems cannot be more numerous than the particles that make it up. Concise and to the point.





Sorry swami but stating the conclusion by not explaining why isn't a very detailed explanation. Being concise insofar as stating a conclusion without evidence doesn't get you very far.

Quote:


Colored pins are not brain connections nor is the maximum mathematically possible connections in any way related to actual physical connections.




Now you're getting there! Now hows about an explanation with some evidence, again these are conclusions without support. Well again, i suppose this how you seem to trick feeble minds. Confusing the terms in an example, quite clever! However I stated the pins were particles in an attempt to demonstrate your erroneous claim that there can't be more possible combinations than particles that make up set. Which again is completely false. So hows about we support our claims with some evidence. I mean you being such a philosphy buff you should be abreast on evidentialist theories of knowledge, no?


>>Two billion to the two billionth power is the theoretical maximum whereas you stated the ACTUAL connections are two billion to the 10,000th power, when IN REALITY they are two billion * 10,000 / 2.

More conclusions without evidence. I had greater expectations of you swami. I mean you've been banned for being quite the cunning philosphical logician but so far i'm not impressed. You're not convincing at all, just a bunch of conclusions without support. And now you seem to be back tracking. And again you're selectively leaving out terms. I stated actual possible but not perhaps existing connections are such, because the limit of connectivity is 10,000, so thus the possible connections that the brain can conform to. SO what exactly supports your reality of two [hundred] billion * 10,000/2 i mean you've now revised your original claims. What's changed?


>>If you cannot grok this factoid then I cannot help you. I can't break it down any further. I am not here to teach basic math, statistics and neuro-topology.

So are you an expert in these fields? If so i'm humbled to be conversing with such an expert. See in a debate as such you are expected, and i'll repeat this a third time, to use evidence to back up your claims, whether the evidence is hard fact, that is if your conclusion is a supposed fact there should be other facts or evidence that support it, supervening properties so to speak.

>>Even though I am a professional poker and backgammon player and programmed an AI milestone in backgammon game theory, you should not take my word for anything. Triple-check your numbers and do some research before your emotions force you to repost yet more errors.

Emotions, oh yes i guess that's what also forced you to start with the snide comments and put downs in your first post in reply to me you know, the one that says "maybe you should use more than 20% of your brain BEFORE posting!" If i didn't know better isn't that attacking the person and not the argument? Isn't that not only bad argumentation style but against the forum rules? Well done, I must say. Projection is an amazing human capacity.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/18/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: Mind & Brain [Re: neuro]
    #3913759 - 03/13/05 09:46 PM (19 years, 19 days ago)

However I stated the pins were particles in an attempt to demonstrate your erroneous claim that there can't be more possible combinations than particles that make up set. Which again is completely false.

Fourth and last time and I will wager ANY AMOUNT you like on the veracity of my claim. There cannot be more PHYSICAL PHYSICAL PHYSICAL PHYSICAL connections (not HYPOTHETICAL (imaginary) connections than there are particles that make up said connections.

Keep changing my words to pretend I said something else and keep failing to read and digest them.

You now have three options.

1. Admit your error.

2. Keep repeating your error. (This is most likely and has a probability of 99%.) At least show your sources on the number of brain connections to support your ludicrous claim. (You won't be able to.)

or

3. Take up my wager.

In some 350 wagers on these boards every single person has backed down, except one who lost and reneged. Maybe you will be the first.


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineneuro
Phytophiliac
 User Gallery

Registered: 08/10/99
Posts: 6,633
Loc: Rigel 7
Last seen: 4 months, 13 days
Re: Mind & Brain [Re: Swami]
    #3914073 - 03/13/05 10:50 PM (19 years, 19 days ago)

You are quite good at responding to only certain parts of posts, i guess this is how you work your magic.

>>There cannot be more PHYSICAL PHYSICAL PHYSICAL PHYSICAL connections (not HYPOTHETICAL (imaginary) connections than there are particles that make up said connections.


Well no shit there can't be more existing connection at any time t than there are particles that make them up, but if you rearrange them the rearrangement constitutes a different set of possibilities that could exist however what does exist at now time t1 is still less than the particles that make them up. You are missing this point. The pin example easily portrays this with more managable numbers.

If there are 6 pins(particles) RYBOPG and i can only match them 2 at a time RY BO PG can exist at one time and thus the sets RY BO PG constitue 3 pathways, directly evident that there are less pathways than the particles at this time, but they now rearrange to RG PO BY, that's now still 3 arrangements exsting at this new time t1, now they rearrange again to RO BP YG, that's now 9 different arrangments making more possibilities than the number of elements, but again at any one time the number of utilized arrangements out of the possibilities is less. Shall i repeat this more times or will you finally address this without the response buttons are not neurons, which again is not what i stated, it was a response to your assertion about particles. And yes there can be more physical paths than the neurons that make them up because if each neuron has more than 1 possible connection and neuron A connects to neuron C B and D (3 pathways), and neuron D connects to C and B but not A (that's 2 more) , and C to B (that's 1 more) that's 6 total pathways with only 3 neurons, so even if you'd like to use neurons and not particles as you've so cleverly switched, the example holds. Now you can actually address this example with support for you conclusion "this is not true" other than just the stand alone conclusion. Again this simply isn't good philosophy.


>>Keep changing my words to pretend I said something else and keep failing to read and digest them.

There's no pretending here, i've tracked your dropping of the word "possible" several times, and your switches between particles and neurons. It's hard to digest when the words change. But I think i'm on to you, it's quite clever, i must admit.

As i suspect you'll only respond to part of this post i guess it's futile, and essentially i do not feel like going in circles, but if you'd like i will provide sources for the number of neurons and connections each neuron produces.

200 billion as i stated, and as you deftly restated the obvious, was using the highest estimate there's no denying, and I never did.

The number of connections between each neuron is on average 10,000.

These are things that you learn in said psychology, neuroscience, cognitive science courses. And as I know since we're arguing on the internet, nothing will suffice other than links.

So this first source, skip to the bottom pages, is from a lecture given at arkansas university since i had to google up the information to satisfy. Now you have some options again try to explain the math rather than just the conclusion or bad mouth arkansas university as a hick college. They state the number of connections, specifically only in the cortical regions as 20 - 30,000; my number 10,000 is an average across the whole brain.

here's your first: http://comp.uark.edu/~jstripli/CogSci-JS-L1-web.pdf


Well I didn't expect to find an exact quote explicating what i was talking about the number of particles in the universe, but i infact did!

Quote:


Well, "best estimates" indicate that there are around 200 billion neurons in the brain alone! And as each of these neurons is connected to between 5,000 and 200,000 other neurons, the number of ways that information flows among neurons in the brain is so large, it is greater than the number atoms that exist in the entire universe!

http://www.mind.ilstu.edu/curriculum2/neuro/neuron_1.html

Illinois state university






Now these are just some quick findings as before I was talking about what I know, i didn't look this stuff up ahead of time before posting originally in this thread - but it's funny how the truth corroborates my claims. Now you have maybe one option open, claiming that the number of ways information flows does not constitute a connection since it wasn't specifically stated here, but I think this is a rather futile project. Good luck explaining how it is not, but then again you never do, instead you state conclusions without evidence. I guess you have another option, not accepting it cause it's not harvard or yale, but i'd venture to say that if you go to harvard or yale they teach the same biology at yale or harvard as they do at lousiana or even at a lowly community college. I mean just cause it's prestigious place doesn't mean you are taught "real biology" versus "fake biology" cause the state school isn't in the same league as yale or harvard. Oh wait, maybe you have another: I guess you can just try to descredit brain science all together by appealing to the inexactness of pretty much all sciences. However I have more faith in you than that.

How many more sources would you like and what would you like to wager?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/18/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: Mind & Brain [Re: neuro]
    #3914355 - 03/14/05 12:05 AM (19 years, 19 days ago)

Well no shit there can't be more existing connection at any time t than there are particles that make them up,
Then why did you have a problem with that the first three times I pointed it out?

but if you rearrange them the rearrangement constitutes a different set of possibilities that could exist
Which has nothing to do with current brain topology.

And yes there can be more physical paths than the neurons that make them up because if each neuron has more than 1 possible connection and neuron A connects to neuron C B and D (3 pathways), and neuron D connects to C and B but not A (that's 2 more) ,
:Applause: So physical pathways are not made out of particles (molecules)? What are they made out of?

Well, "best estimates" indicate that there are around 200 billion neurons in the brain alone! And as each of these neurons is connected to between 5,000 and 200,000 other neurons, the number of ways that information flows among neurons in the brain is so large, it is greater than the number atoms that exist in the entire universe!
Well we finally get to the bottom of the error. "The number of ways that information flows" is not equivalent to "the number of neuronal connections".

Now you have maybe one option open, claiming that the number of ways information flows does not constitute a connection since it wasn't specifically stated here, but I think this is a rather futile project.
I did not see this part until now as I respond sequentially, but there is a huge difference. There is one major road (or neural pathway, if you will) from Las Vegas to Los Angeles. It there are 100,000 travelers going between the cities on any given day, the possible car arrangements would be one roughly one hundred thousand to the one hundred thousandth power even though there is only one pathway.

You have been commingling possible messages with pathways and the two are quite distinct.

Case solved.


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | Next >  [ show all ]

Shop: Myyco.com Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   PhytoExtractum Maeng Da Thai Kratom Leaf Powder


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Mind and Brain Nomad 961 6 11/06/02 11:28 PM
by Sclorch
* global brain encounter pattern 1,265 7 09/12/02 01:55 AM
by pattern
* The Brain Cherk 779 7 02/28/03 05:16 AM
by Earth_Droid
* Do you belive you are your brain?
( 1 2 3 4 5 all )
David_Scape 4,451 85 12/24/02 06:16 PM
by Swami
* The post that never dies
( 1 2 3 4 all )
Dogomush 7,739 62 08/29/03 11:23 AM
by fireworks_god
* 10% of brain usage myth
( 1 2 3 all )
Swami 5,945 57 10/09/01 08:51 AM
by Crobih
* Arent drugs proof the mind is created by the brain?
( 1 2 all )
SHiZNO 3,898 20 04/16/03 11:32 AM
by The_Clash_UK
* Scrambled Neurons
( 1 2 3 all )
raytrace 6,013 50 07/18/02 04:39 AM
by Xlea321

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
9,366 topic views. 1 members, 16 guests and 15 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.022 seconds spending 0.005 seconds on 13 queries.