News:

Welcome to our site!

Main Menu

What is consciousness?

Started by mediumaevum, October 06, 2013, 09:45:11 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

LikelyToBreak

Hydra wrote in part:
QuoteNo. Chemists started chemistry and astronomers started astronomy. The reason these scientific fields exist at all is because early scientists took a muddled mess of guesswork/superstition, systematized the data and checked it for accuracy.
I respectfully disagree.  As do many others.
QuoteAlchemy is recognized as a protoscience that contributed to the development of modern chemistry and medicine.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alchemy

Through most of its history, astrology was considered a scholarly tradition. It was accepted in political and academic contexts, and was connected with other studies, such as astronomy, alchemy, meteorology, and medicine.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astrology

Hydra009 wrote in part:
QuoteThe talking point of every charlatan. (And a few who actually did advance science) The key difference between the two is that the real deal can substantiate one's claim, while the charlatan can only pretend.
This is a statement I can agree with.  It is up to us to discern the differences when claims are made.
Quote
QuoteQuote:LTB
Just because people can misuse new information is no reason not to strive to gain new information. Have you considered that your personal prejudices against religion may be adversely affecting your abilities to rationally consider some ideas?
Well, let's see, do I reject the idea that the brain is at least partly non-physical because I'm personally prejudiced against it?

Survey says... X

The correct answer was because because it's a bald assertion with no evidence whatsoever.

Thanks for playing. Buh-bye.
By asserting I said things I didn't, I actually think you proved my hypothesis.  Thanks for playing.

Hydra wrote in part:
QuoteVolumes and volumes have already been written. Especially on mediumaevum's ghost in the machine idea (which btw, is something of a dead horse nowadays) but also your self-contradictory non-physical brain idea and oddly nonspecific predilection for "exploring the metaphysical".
What non-physical brain?  What I am trying to point out is we don't really have a handle on how the brain does its' thing.  By trying to find a "soul" scientists might actually learn better how the brain works.  Like how the scientist was able to better determine how we see, in the video I posted, after the naysayers said he couldn't do it.  

The brain is a complex device.  Looking at it from many different angles is necessary.  If we arbitrarily decide some angles are not worth looking at, we may miss things for a very long time.  Open your minds and consider if something can't be learned from mediumaevum's seeming ramblings.  If you can't do that, then don't tell me you are a free-thinkers.  Which admittedly no one has asserted.

Icarus

Quote from: "LikelyToBreak"What non-physical brain?  What I am trying to point out is we don't really have a handle on how the brain does its' thing.  By trying to find a "soul" scientists might actually learn better how the brain works.  Like how the scientist was able to better determine how we see, in the video I posted, after the naysayers said he couldn't do it.  

The brain is a complex device.  Looking at it from many different angles is necessary.  If we arbitrarily decide some angles are not worth looking at, we may miss things for a very long time.  Open your minds and consider if something can't be learned from mediumaevum's seeming ramblings.  If you can't do that, then don't tell me you are a free-thinkers.  Which admittedly no one has asserted.

What is a soul? How would one define it? To test for it, it must exist in the physical universe so what is it in the physical universe?

frosty

The soul, or the ghost in the machine, is a gap filler. Certain phenomenon are shady at best, and some people believe out of touch with mainstream science, so they jump to a conclusion that the soul must be the missing factor to explain what they otherwise aren't knowledgeable about/there is no explanation for.

LikelyToBreak

Icarus wrote:
QuoteWhat is a soul? How would one define it? To test for it, it must exist in the physical universe so what is it in the physical universe?
Good question.  My answer would be the function of the brain which makes us self aware.  I don't see it as something like a pituitary gland which can be observed and measured easily.  More like the information held in the hard discs of a computer.  How we access our memories and process them is what makes us what we are.  This would be our soul.  IMHO.

Icarus

Quote from: "LikelyToBreak"Icarus wrote:
QuoteWhat is a soul? How would one define it? To test for it, it must exist in the physical universe so what is it in the physical universe?
Good question.  My answer would be the function of the brain which makes us self aware.  I don't see it as something like a pituitary gland which can be observed and measured easily.  More like the information held in the hard discs of a computer.  How we access our memories and process them is what makes us what we are.  This would be our soul.  IMHO.

If it's not a gland or a non-neural cell, you're suggesting there is something in each neuron that is responsible for the soul. It's not an unknown organelle or a chemical as we are aware of most if not all of them in the brain (organelles definitely). The mechanisms are what we're currently working on and the soul couldn't be mechanistic because that would make the soul the brain, not something different. The soul can't be how we access our memories because that's just chemical impulses relaying stored sensory information to our prefrontal cortex (I think it's the prefrontal cortex, I'm not a neuroscientist).

LikelyToBreak

Icarus wrote in part:
QuoteIf it's not a gland or a non-neural cell, you're suggesting there is something in each neuron that is responsible for the soul. It's not an unknown organelle or a chemical as we are aware of most if not all of them in the brain (organelles definitely). The mechanisms are what we're currently working on and the soul couldn't be mechanistic because that would make the soul the brain, not something different. The soul can't be how we access our memories because that's just chemical impulses relaying stored sensory information to our prefrontal cortex (I think it's the prefrontal cortex, I'm not a neuroscientist).
I'm not a neuroscientist either.  I think of the brain as a computer.  Not the best way I am sure. But consider how a computer accesses memories off of the hard drives.  it points at a particular location address and then loads the information into the RAM for quick access to the CPU which outputs in some matter.  How does our brain actually address and locate stored information?

Yeah, there are chemical processes going on which undoubtedly effect the way we think, but we are the ones who put on the "addresses" as to where and how we access the stored memories.  Now it is not necessarily physical, just like the information on our hard drives is not actually physical.  It is just a bunch of bits configured in a specific way and held there by magnetic coding.  There are physical connections, but the computer and our brain operate differently depending on how and what software or memories are being used and are stored.  The how is the "soul" of a being.  Maybe not the dictionary definition, but something I can conceive of.  Goes back to the vocabulary thing I talked about earlier.

Icarus

Quote from: "LikelyToBreak"I'm not a neuroscientist either.  I think of the brain as a computer.  Not the best way I am sure. But consider how a computer accesses memories off of the hard drives.  it points at a particular location address and then loads the information into the RAM for quick access to the CPU which outputs in some matter.  How does our brain actually address and locate stored information?

Yeah, there are chemical processes going on which undoubtedly effect the way we think, but we are the ones who put on the "addresses" as to where and how we access the stored memories.  Now it is not necessarily physical, just like the information on our hard drives is not actually physical.  It is just a bunch of bits configured in a specific way and held there by magnetic coding.  There are physical connections, but the computer and our brain operate differently depending on how and what software or memories are being used and are stored.  The how is the "soul" of a being.  Maybe not the dictionary definition, but something I can conceive of.  Goes back to the vocabulary thing I talked about earlier.

http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/1234 ... al-neurons

I still don't know what a soul is so I'm having problems understanding how you can conceive of one.

LikelyToBreak

My idea of a soul came from the story of a young girl who had an accident and completely lost her memory.  All of it.  Not partial amnesia, she had to relearn everything.  She had to learn how to talk, walk, feed herself, I mean everything.  Once she learned how to talk well enough, she complained to her family that they seemed to think she was the girl they knew before the accident.  She knew she occupied the same body, but she didn't think of herself as the other girl.  The other girl lost her "soul" in the accident.  Now the body had a new "soul" and the girl was a different girl.  Not the other girl before the accident.

It would be like if your hard drive got reformatted.  You would put new information in, maybe a new operating system.  Then you would have to reload programs, leaving some out and adding new ones.  While the computer is physically the same, it is a new computer in a way.  Does that help at all?

MrsSassyPants

A "soul" is just a possibility. The game of "your so stupid" is childish. Everyone has been respectful and reasonable.  Good topic med. And I didnt even like you b4. :).  Continue on
If you don't chew big red then FUCK YOU!

TrueStory

Quote from: "LikelyToBreak"My idea of a soul came from the story of a young girl who had an accident and completely lost her memory.  All of it.  Not partial amnesia, she had to relearn everything.  She had to learn how to talk, walk, feed herself, I mean everything.  Once she learned how to talk well enough, she complained to her family that they seemed to think she was the girl they knew before the accident.  She knew she occupied the same body, but she didn't think of herself as the other girl.  The other girl lost her "soul" in the accident.  Now the body had a new "soul" and the girl was a different girl.  Not the other girl before the accident.

It would be like if your hard drive got reformatted.  You would put new information in, maybe a new operating system.  Then you would have to reload programs, leaving some out and adding new ones.  While the computer is physically the same, it is a new computer in a way.  Does that help at all?
While that is an interesting story, which I would be interested in hearing the whole thing, that seems to go against the point you are trying to make.  Here you've shown that physical damage to the brain causes it to act out of the normal range, not a surprise.
Please don't take anything I say seriously.

LikelyToBreak

TrueStory wrote:
QuoteWhile that is an interesting story, which I would be interested in hearing the whole thing, that seems to go against the point you are trying to make. Here you've shown that physical damage to the brain causes it to act out of the normal range, not a surprise.
I don't think it goes against the point I am trying to make at all.  The "soul" to me is the memories and how we access those memories which make who we are.  It is our consciousness.  Not the religious "soul" which is pushed at churches, mosques and such.  It is not a forever thing living in our heart.  It is just how our consciousness works making us who we are.

I do not think science has a good grasp of how all of it works.  They just know how it is wired, not how we address and locate memories to do what we do.  This is the "soul" which needs to be found and understood in my opinion.  The answer may not come from neuroscientists, but maybe from psychologists or astronomers.  Maybe some amateur radio operator will come up with an idea which blows us all away.  Like that patent clerk did way back when.

the_antithesis

Quote from: "LikelyToBreak"It would be like if your hard drive got reformatted.  You would put new information in, maybe a new operating system.  Then you would have to reload programs, leaving some out and adding new ones.  While the computer is physically the same, it is a new computer in a way.  Does that help at all?

The computer is not completely physically the same. The hard drive was reformatted. Computer programs are stored physically on the hard drive. It is physically different.

TrueStory

Quote from: "LikelyToBreak"TrueStory wrote:
QuoteWhile that is an interesting story, which I would be interested in hearing the whole thing, that seems to go against the point you are trying to make. Here you've shown that physical damage to the brain causes it to act out of the normal range, not a surprise.
I don't think it goes against the point I am trying to make at all.  The "soul" to me is the memories and how we access those memories which make who we are.  It is our consciousness.  Not the religious "soul" which is pushed at churches, mosques and such.  It is not a forever thing living in our heart.  It is just how our consciousness works making us who we are.

I do not think science has a good grasp of how all of it works.  They just know how it is wired, not how we address and locate memories to do what we do.  This is the "soul" which needs to be found and understood in my opinion.  The answer may not come from neuroscientists, but maybe from psychologists or astronomers.  Maybe some amateur radio operator will come up with an idea which blows us all away.  Like that patent clerk did way back when.

That seems like a fun way to think about it but it doesn't seem to me that a "soul" adds anything to how memory or consciousness actually works.  Do you have a good grasp of what science thinks about it?  What level of understanding are you looking for?
Please don't take anything I say seriously.

LikelyToBreak

the_antithesis wrote:
QuoteThe computer is not completely physically the same. The hard drive was reformatted. Computer programs are stored physically on the hard drive. It is physically different.
It's an analogy.  Besides, from second to second our brains are physically changing too.

TrueStory wrote:
QuoteThat seems like a fun way to think about it but it doesn't seem to me that a "soul" adds anything to how memory or consciousness actually works. Do you have a good grasp of what science thinks about it? What level of understanding are you looking for?    
 
Another way to look at it, is that I am using the "soul" to mean an individual's memory, consciousness, and how they all work together.  Just a shorthand, like saying the CPU, RAM, hard drives, GPU, etc. are a "computer."  Which is not what "computer" originally meant.

As far as having a good grasp of what science thinks about it, hell no.  What I know I learned by reading a few articles and watching some documentaries.  As far as the level I am looking for, I want to know exactly how it works.  I know it is unlikely I or anyone else will completely understand how the brain works, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try.  Look how far we have advanced in alchemy, by trying to better understand it.

entropy

Quote from: "LikelyToBreak"TrueStory wrote:
QuoteWhile that is an interesting story, which I would be interested in hearing the whole thing, that seems to go against the point you are trying to make. Here you've shown that physical damage to the brain causes it to act out of the normal range, not a surprise.
I don't think it goes against the point I am trying to make at all.  The "soul" to me is the memories and how we access those memories which make who we are.  It is our consciousness.  Not the religious "soul" which is pushed at churches, mosques and such.  It is not a forever thing living in our heart.  It is just how our consciousness works making us who we are.

I do not think science has a good grasp of how all of it works.  They just know how it is wired, not how we address and locate memories to do what we do.  This is the "soul" which needs to be found and understood in my opinion.  The answer may not come from neuroscientists, but maybe from psychologists or astronomers.  Maybe some amateur radio operator will come up with an idea which blows us all away.  Like that patent clerk did way back when.

I wonder if what you are looking for is what it is that makes the neural activity coherent. There clearly are times when neural activity lacks in coherence; e.g., epileptic seizures. I have a conjecture about the coherence of mentality arising from synchronized firings of neurons; e.g., the alpha and beta brainwave coherent patterns.

Aside from that conjecture, I also have an intuition that looking at the development of the embryonic to fetal neural system development from the individual cell level to the tissue level to the organ level will give us valuable insights into how the neural system becomes coherent - that coherence being the genesis of coherent mentality. To put it in terms of the personal meaning of that coherence, I wouldn't object to the use of the term "soul" (sans overt religious denotations and connotations).

In a poetic sense, I tend to think of the neural activity that gives rise to the phenomenon of mentality as being a swirl of energy distribution in a sea of energy. What's fascinating about the swirl is that it can model what sensory inputs are "saying" the world is like - the energy swirl creates a model of itself in the world. That model takes on the perspective given to it by the sensory inputs that are the data for creation of the model. It's like the energy swirl gives the universal sea of energy of which it is a part the ability to see itself - but see only through the limited perspective provided by our senses.

It may not be possible to have a universal perspective - maybe to be a coherent swirl of awareness, the perspective has to be from some particular perspective of space and time.

It could be that the spatial/temporally localized energy swirl of mentality is a pattern within a universally coherent pattern of energy (metaphorically, a soul that is in union with all). I don't know how it could be determined that that is the case. I'm not sure what science can tell us about the question of whether or not there is a universally coherent pattern of energy (in which there are subpatterns of energy swirls). It seems as though quantum indeterminacy and things like the Second Law of Thermodynamics might imply an answer one way or the other, but maybe not.

I may have missed the import of your questions. If so, I apologize... but it was fun to think about.