/sci/ - Science & Math

>>2825221

"First realize this idea: think about how the brain processes information. Does the brain take every single piece of data and analyze it? No, it doesnt. The brain is accepting massive amounts of data from every sensory inputs 24/7 and ignoring a vast majority of it. You arent thinking about an infinite number of things, and you easily have the capacity to think about all of them. You have brain cells devoted to every memory of your life, you have every thermal and pressure sensor on your body telling your brain shit all day every day. The brain chooses to ignore all these pieces of data. There are colors who's vibrancy is dimmed every moment of your life because your brain knows it has to ignore non-relevant information in order to function. Your brain's purpose isnt constructing your reality for you, its purpose is to ignore information that reaches your brain, that would otherwise distract you from relevant activities.

People can realize this effect through drug usage. Its why people get goofy ideas when high, make poor decisions while drug, or sit there appreciating something stupid when on LSD. You are fucking with the mechanisms that regulate relevant information. It was the subject of Aldous Huxley's book,"The doors to perception." But this doesnt explain consciousness. It only explains that the function of the brain is not what we think it is. It explains the brain as a device built to ignore and not a device built to pay attention to, which I think it key to understand consciousness. The brain is not constructing reality, or consciousness, it is subtracting irrelevant data, that would distract us from pertinent things like working, or eating, etc."

Continued in next post

>>2825225

"Lets just say that is a 100% concsious system. Data down the nerve, data received, completely un-tampered with during the course of action, 100% conscious. Anything and everything behaves this way. Something is stimulated, thermally, chemically, kintetically, and that energy (or information) runs through that something. In that way throwing a rock is a 100% conscious system. Force enters the rock, the rock hits other rock, force is communicated into that rock. Or if you get a big glass of baking soda and pour vinegar into it. A chemical reaction runs through out the whole thing. This might seem like a crazy and stupid thing to suggest. But I think its an important point to make, if I am going to suggest the brain is less conscious than its surrounding environment.

The nerve sending a signal to a neuron was an example of a 100% conscious system. But the brain is not a 100% conscious system. When a signal piece of data reaches the brain, whole brain doesnt cascade in response. It physically ignores this, even though each neuron can action potential, and cause a subsequent neuron to action potential, it doesnt. The brain is impervious to the data that comes into it. A physical phenomenon hits the brain, and the brain remains largely unaffected, because the mechanisms in the brain work to detect, and then ignore that data. If you made a concrete room, that is not enough to make consciousness even if the area inside of isolated from the outside, because the inside would uniformly distribute heat and pressure."

Continued in next post

>>2825229

Aw shit I forgot a paragraph. It should go like this

"People can realize this effect through drug usage. Its why people get goofy ideas when high, make poor decisions while drug, or sit there appreciating something stupid when on LSD. You are fucking with the mechanisms that regulate relevant information. It was the subject of Aldous Huxley's book,"The doors to perception." But this doesnt explain consciousness. It only explains that the function of the brain is not what we think it is. It explains the brain as a device built to ignore and not a device built to pay attention to, which I think it key to understand consciousness. The brain is not constructing reality, or consciousness, it is subtracting irrelevant data, that would distract us from pertinent things like working, or eating, etc.

To talk about consciousness I think we need to start physical, and describe this mechanism of ignorance in physical terms. I dont understand neurology very well, so I would welcome someone who does to correct me if I am making poor assumptions. To me, the nerves and the brain are chemical reactions, like I think most of us believe. The signal runs down the nerve to the brain, where the brain accepts this data via relevant neurons. At that point the neurons can trigger other neurons. "

and then run into >>2825229

the word consciousness is nothing more, or less, than a word describing that some creatures, including us, can be aware that they are aware.
if you think that's so very weird, be my guest, it really isn't.

why are you harping on about a word?

>>2825264

I think thats very good of you to have such a simply definition. And when the definition is that simple I can use it. But when it comes to real discussion, I think you are just switching "conscious" with "self aware" and the question just gets changed to "What does it mean to be self aware?"

However, I dont think most people are like you. and usually people cant give satisfactory definitions for what consciousness it.

bump

>1. Human beings are conscious
>2. Human beings have brains
>3. In the event humans lose their brain, they lose consciousness
>4. Thus the brain makes consciousness.

Wrong. Brain is the medium, the operating system on which consciousness runs. When the brain dies out, consciousness is still there, but not being channelled through a single brain anymore.

The fact of the matter which everyone seems to be terrified with is that consciousness transcends the world of substance. It's consciousness that's making the world appear and not the other way around.

But you should just believe whatever you wish to. That's the only way you'll ever learn.

To be conscious, a system must contain and be able to call results from a function that predicts the system itself.

>>2825318

I dont think this does anything to help. Because if you say consciousness is just an operating system, you arent defining consciousness like we can define literal operating systems.

>>2825330

I never got this self referential problem with consciousness. So what if the brain thinks about itself. How does that change anything?

1. humans have blood
2. humans have legs
3. if humans lose their legs, they lose their blood
4. therefore, legs make blood

>>2825318
>>2825362
What evidence is there that consciousness exists beyond the brain?

>>2825362
lol

>>2825380
When it comes to consciousness, the evidence is irrelevant. Either you live and realize it or you ponder upon it until you get fed up.

>>2825318

>consciousness transcends the world of substance

Explain this please.

I'm writing a book so I won't share too many ideas, but i'll leave OP with a question that can get him going somewhere.

At what point in a brain does consciousness develop?

>>2825393

>When it comes to ketchup, the evidence is irrelevant. Either you eat and taste it, or you ponder upon it until you get fed up

>>2825398

OP here,

I would say consciousness is not black and white, and is vary analog varying from one system to another.

>>2825413

lol

>>2825318
How can the immaterial consciousness affect the material brain and ultimately, the body?

>>2825397
http://deoxy.org/shaman.htm

>>2825416
>>2825398

OP here,

Am I on the right idea?

>>2825416

>and is vary analog varying from one system to another.

>mfw

>>2825425

>>2825429

Oh my bad, I meant "and is analog, varying from one system to another"

>>2825354
> I never got this self referential problem with consciousness. So what if the brain thinks about itself. How does that change anything?
It's the behavior in question. Rocks don't contain such a model. Neither do insects, to the best of our knowledge. It seems to be the result of social organisms attempting to work as a group. Each one models a prediction of what the other organisms will do, in order to coordinate. When this predictive ability is turned inwards, the organism can model what it will do, it can think about being itself. The distinction is that in the case of itself, it has the full data set and the model is the same as the thing being simulated. That's where self-awareness comes from. You can think about what you will think, because you have access to what you are thinking through that model.

>>2825416

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sorites_paradox

Humans are not the only conscious animals...

>>2825424
If you mean material as in made of matter, then immaterial things such as energy, velocity, position, and forces all affect material things all the time.
If you mean immaterial as in not real or supernatural, then consciousness isn't those things. It's a pattern of motion and impulses being run on a biological electrochemical matrix of neurons.

>>2825398
>> writing a book
>> won't share ideas

choose one

>>2825439

Well how do you know the brain has a full data set of what it will do? Thats not a metaphysical paradox, thats like, a physical paradox. The human being doesnt have a perfect understanding of their own behavior. I fact, I dont know why anyone would assume a human being could. Its contrary to some of the pyschology Ive learned in school, about people not understanding their own intentions, and things like cognitive dissonance.

>>2825437
Care to elaborate?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consciousness_Explained

I haven't read this in a while, though.

>>2825459
Well how do you know the brain has a full data set of what it will do?
It's the thing deciding what it will do. It's the system being simulated. It runs in real time.

> Thats not a metaphysical paradox, thats like, a physical paradox.
It is not a paradox for a set to contain all of its elements. If I write a computer program and allocate 4kb of memory to loading it and pass it the address range, it can access all of its own code and variables. There's no paradox.

>>2825465

>Claim consciousness transcends into a non-material world.
>sounds an awful lot like a soul.
>I think you actually have something worthwhile despite my initial skepticism.
>I ask you to explain what you mean.
>You in turn provide a link expressing/explaining the contentions of shamanism and other metaphysical/magical aspects.

You're a troll. But you could also be very gullible and read into their contentions. Im not sure which just yet.

>>2825501

Decision making doesnt imply self awareness. You dont have to be aware of your own behavior or to know your own decision making process, to make a decision.

Its not a paradox for a set to contain all its elements, its a paradox for a set to contain the set itself. set ( 1, 2, set ( 1, 2, set ( 1, 2 set... etc

If you have a brain, and that is a physical manifestation, and a part of that brain knows whats in the whole brain, then that part of the brain must in some way contain all the data of what that whole brain is.

Maybe I dont know what you are saying?

Every explanation I've ever read concerning the conscience is as good as fiction when viewed simply for what it is.

It's all bullshit.

The fact that you know you are alive suggest that there is a distinct separation between you and the world around you , no , this is not an assumption , it is a fact and it requires an explanation that is not known yet.

>>2825503
If I'm a troll, I'm a poor one lol.

And yes that's exactly what I meant. Shamanic description of the world is aeons ahead of our modern "hurr we know everything durr" way of thinking. But as I said earlier, just go ahead and believe anything you wish. I'm just making conversation.

>>2825559
You might be right about it being ahead or more advanced that our late and retarded thinking but only because these words have more than one definition.

>>2825559
Wait

Wait

How is your 'hurr we know everything durr' better than our 'hurr we know everything durr'

>>2825596

Yeah really.

>>2825550

Just a few questions I'll toss out there.

1. ) What exactly separates us from the world around us? What makes you, you, and me , me? and not a single entity? I believe the answer to this from a scientific standpoint is time. and as existence moves from one point or another it grants us the illusion that we are separate as opposed to a single thing , and we are all working in relativity. like planets orbiting a sun.

2.) what is life? What makes something alive and not alive? Please do not even say that this is irrelevant , we have death penalties , we have prisons , we have ethics concerning the sanctity of life yes we are alive and there is a difference between life and inanimate and I want you to explain in full detail what that difference is.

I'm sorry if this comes off the wrong way.

It just fucks with me all the damn time , a big bang happens a fucking universe expanded all this shit was created and now there are actual fucking life forms observing it happen something about this just comes off as extremely bizarre and strange.

You ever ask yourself what if it were all different?

What if things weren't defined the way they are , what if there were no things , there was no nothings no somethings it was all different? why and how is it the way it is now.

>>2825609

OP here,

1. I think this might sound silly. But our skulls. Our skulls, and those other protective membranes prevent physical outside influence from reaching our brain. But to some extent the entirety of everything is a single entity.

whats that bill hicks quote? "We are all part of one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively"

2. Im going to ascribe to those biological qualifications about homeostasis, and replication, and such.

>>2825609
> 1. ) What exactly separates us from the world around us?
Nothing. You're not separated form the world around you. You're in it and occasionally you make dents in it and sometimes it sticks pointy bits into you and you bleed.

> What makes you, you, and me , me? and not a single entity?
Your neurons lack a physical connection to mine. Thus you do not have mental control over me nor me over you.

> I believe the answer to this from a scientific standpoint is time.
> I believe
> scientific
tl;dr >>>/x/

>>2825632

I believe in Gravity... better go to /x/!!

>>2825632

Ok. Now explain to me in further detail exactly what it is you are referring to when you say "you" ; what exactly is it , you are talking about?

>>2825609

from a god standpoint, we are one.

what you do on to each other is roughly equal, the differences in peoples gains and losses are manifest in what they are able to achieve "irl"

well the only thing i would exclude from being alive are things like rocks.. and even they were probably alive at some point.
they house things which are alive.
also things exist on a ?metaphysical? plane, how to define these planes is like that painting with the clocks on the trees.. they are familiar and yet abstract, populated with things which are normal and yet absurdly bizarre

OP here,

Im not complaining, because I think these discussions are great, but I feel like nobody is reading what I originally wrote, perhaps because it was so goddamn long.

>>2825640
You shouldn't believe in gravity. A true scientist is willing to consider the possibility that evidence could be found that gravity does not indeed exist.

It may be hard to imagine how this might come about but if compelling evidence were offered you do not want your belief to get in the way of being able to change your mind.

Maybe you really should go to /x/

>>2825687
If it helps you feel better I tried to read it all but I stopped because it was mostly nonsense. I even started to fear for your ability to recover from having gone done such a long road alone.

Lots of people have thought about this and its obvious you haven't relied on their judgement to filter out what is clearly wrong.

>>2825596
An incredibly good question my dear sir.

See the basic difference is that while shamanism acknowledges that the world is a mystery, the modern mind tries to demystify it, translate it into terms of boxes and lines, things we can observe and analyse. What the modern mindset misses out though, is that out rationality is but a tiny little fraction of our existence. Shamanism teaches that you are not your thoughts and our civilization teaches just the opposite.

where am I when I'm lucid dreaming , and I'm walking down streets that aren't physically real?

What is that sublime feeling I feel when I look up at the stars and wonder?

What is that feeling I have difficulty expressing whenever I create a work of art?

You ever created a piece of music that sounded strange and dream-like? ever , ever felt that feeling when you realized that YOU are the one that created it? And that it came from you and no one else.

what is projecting that image too me?

What is the physical explanation for the beauty in my dreams .

Why do I find certain things beautiful and other things ugly? why do I make music as a hobby?

Why do humans die for frivolous ideas like peace and liberty?

I want to understand what it means to meann c'mon /sci/ tell me what a qualia is

>>2825722

Okay fair enough.

bump

>where am I when I'm lucid dreaming , and I'm walking down streets that aren't physically real? What is that sublime feeling I feel when I look up at the stars and wonder? What is that feeling I have difficulty expressing whenever I create a work of art? You ever created a piece of music that sounded strange and dream-like? ever , ever felt that feeling when you realized that YOU are the one that created it? And that it came from you and no one else. what is projecting that image too me? What is the physical explanation for the beauty in my dreams .Why do I find certain things beautiful and other things ugly? why do I make music as a hobby Why do humans die for frivolous ideas like peace and liberty?

>>2825859

Most of your questions can be answered by two simple words. The first is serotonin. The second is dopamine.

>>2825982
>>2825731

Sorry linked the wrong one.

>>2825859
>>2825859
nope.jpg

I don't care if you don't take it seriously.

This means something too me and I refuse to let it go.

>>2826013

>>2825723

Rationality isn't a part of our minds. Humans aren't "built" to be rational, rationality is a tool we use to distinguish truth from fantasy, the reason that we believe we can understand the world by process of rational analysis is because this truly IS the only way that we can understand our world from the way we percieve it.

If you're going to deny 1000s of years of rational, scientific research, research based on the assumption that we truly know nothing, that we can never truly percieve the universe as it truly exists but through a long, complecated process of analysing the world around us in the way we percieve it we can understand the world, for your "Isn't life mysterious" view on life then... Well then that's fine but just don't expect me to keep quiet about why it's bullshit, you ungrateful sod.

>>2826023

Ugh I derped so bad, I need to sober up. You see what I'm getting at though, I understand I could be a bit more eloquent.

>>2826023

Not same as guy you were refering to.

I would say rationality is as inherent in people as language. Meaning, we are well built to handle it, but it is still learned. But I think I more or less agree.

My criticism with all these rationality-fags, is that rationalism is only at determining information. There comes a point in solving a problem when you arent in need of more information. And when you get value judgement involved very often rationality is useless.

Life is mysterious in that we dont have an immediate understanding of our life, and we dont immediately understand our own compulsion to do various things in life. The mystery is in that lag between what we know, we want to know, what we realize we dont know, what we should know. Questions like that.

>>2826023
We truly know nothing. And scientific advance has nothing to do with that. I'm all for exploring the outside, but the inside needs to be explored as well. I don't expect you to understand this, really. I'm just writing it to see what response I'll get this time.

>>2826057

I think we understand something. Dont you think so?

>>2826057

>I don't expect you to understand

I've never understood why anyone's based their world view on anything other than what we can reasonably deduce to be true through application of the scientific method, so no I guess you shouldn't.

As for exploring the inside, I do, it's called biology.

>>2826156
But of course we do. It's just that what we know is ridiculously tiny in comparison to what we don't know. There are some things that we will learn, still. But there are some things that we will never learn because we are far too limited in this regard.

>>2826194
Well maybe some day you will understand. The realm of feeling is far vaster and far more magnificent than that of human constructs (like logical deduction).

>>2826222

What is an example of something we will never understand?

How do you know that what we do know is a minority of everything there is to know?

Captcha: Evidence Look

>>2826229
Well you would see all that as well. The real difference is that I've learned to shut off the "self". When I do this, I see how the world works. I don't deduce it, it's simply there for me to observe and learn from.

>What is an example of something we will never understand?
Life.

>>2826256

>mfw when "Ive learned to shut off the 'self'"

How do you define life? How do you define self?

>>2826267
Let me lend you a great piece of wisdom here my friend. The "self" is your thoughts. Thoughts are what's making reality real. If you learn to shut them off, then you see what "real" looks like.

Until then, you'll just keep on repeating the same patterns until the end of time ... and that's boring.

>>2826295
The self is a being-in-itself; it just is. There is no "shutting off" of it -- except in death. The self, also, isn't the reality -- which is what you're implying; it's a thing encountering the lifeworld.

>>2826295
>>2826320

Whoa you guys are really deep do you guys like go to school or something

>>2826295

>you'll just keep on repeating the same patterns until the end of time ... and that's boring.

It seems to be to be contradictory to advocate something because the alternative is boring.

"Meditate and cut yourself off from material desires because its super fun, and not boring" -buddha

>>2826267
>mfw when
>my face when when

>mfw

>>2826320
http://www.heypasteit.com/clip/VQA
(the wordfilter won't let me post it no matter what i do)

>>2826342
>"Meditate and cut yourself off from material desires because its super fun, and not boring" -buddha
Lol, but that's actually a very good description.

>>2826358

No its fucking not. Those monks eat shit and spend 8 hours a day staring a wall. The life expectency is like 50 years old for those real practicing monks. You faggots who act like a spiritual quest is fucking kicking it at the star bucks in your suburbania.

>>2826364
Well I'm sorry you see it that way.

>>2826372

Yeah... well Im not.

bump

OP here

bumpin for new interest

can someone give me a link to thread?

doesn't matter if it 404ed, can just view it with green oval

>>2825318
What if the brain is a receiver? Like a television receiver?

>>2825629
"Always that same LSD story, you've all seen it. 'Young man on acid, thought he could fly, jumped out of a building. What a tragedy.' What a dick! Fuck him, he’s an idiot. If he thought he could fly, why didn’t he take off on the ground first? Check it out. You don’t see ducks lined up to catch elevators to fly south—they fly from the ground, ya moron, quit ruining it for everybody. He’s a moron, he’s dead—good, we lost a moron, fuckin’ celebrate. Wow, I just felt the world get lighter. We lost a moron! I don’t mean to sound cold, or cruel, or vicious, but I am, so that’s the way it comes out. Professional help is being sought. How about a positive LSD story? Wouldn't that be news-worthy, just the once? To base your decision on information rather than scare tactics and superstition and lies? I think it would be news-worthy. 'Today, a young man on acid realized that all matter is merely energy condensed to a slow vibration. That we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively. There is no such thing as death, life is only a dream and we're the imagination of ourselves' . . . 'Here's Tom with the weather.'"