Individual experience for The One

[lifegazer]

If I ask you - with regards to circumstances or any conceptual enquiry - how you feel now, or what you observe/sense now, or what you think now; only one conclusion is certain (assuming you comprehend the question and have the ability to process it):

Your answer will be singular.

This is true even if there is ambiguity or indecision inherent within your answer. For example, ponder this question:
Who will win the World Cup on Sunday?

My heart did want Italy to win (don't ask why). My head says that France should win if they play to their full potential. However, my head also says that individuals (not to mention teams!) rarely reach their full potential (let's not mention England). Therefore, my head concludes that either team could win and - after deeper analysis - my heart admits that it is childish to desire that Italy should win and has now decided that it doesn't really care.
Therefore, my answer to the question:
"I don't know and I don't really care."

The last paragraph is more important [to this particular debate] than you might instantly recognise. Why? Because it shows how an individual explores all potential decisions and feelings open to him/her yet still makes a singular (definite) decision regarding any particular experience or enquiry.
Even my decision to be indecisive and indifferent is, ultimately, an absolutely singular or definite response (mentally and emotionally) to a complex question. (And the question requires complex consideration, believe it or not).

But why is this significant?
... Because if definite thoughts and feelings result from every experience or ponderance, then the conclusion is that:
... A singular entity embraces experience.

But why is that significant?
... Because attribution of singular (definite) thoughts & feelings to 'the many' (especially, very very very many - reference to the countless individual parts of the brain), does not compute.
This would negate the brain from being the source of such definite response.

... Given the potential diversity of answers and feelings to any experience or question, what theories exist that allow us to attribute definite answers & feelings - on a moment-to-moment basis - to 'The Many'?

Before you answer, please comprehend that the brain is not a predictable mechanism. If it were, all 'people' would have the same responses to specific questions or experiences.

I want to see some responses before I delve any deeper. Also, I should be busy over the weekend so don't assume that my absence = indifference.
I'll be back.

 

[wollery]

Umm, okay, I see you've decided to abandon the thread about reforming science.

Oh well, I guess I'll address your post, but I expect you'll just call me thick, and tell me to up the quality.

If I ask you - with regards to circumstances or any conceptual enquiry - how you feel now, or what you observe/sense now, or what you think now; only one conclusion is certain (assuming you comprehend the question and have the ability to process it):

Your answer will be singular.

This is true even if there is ambiguity or indecision inherent within your answer. For example, ponder this question:
Who will win the World Cup on Sunday?

My heart did want Italy to win (don't ask why). My head says that France should win if they play to their full potential. However, my head also says that individuals (not to mention teams!) rarely reach their full potential (let's not mention England). Therefore, my head concludes that either team could win and - after deeper analysis - my heart admits that it is childish to desire that Italy should win and has now decided that it doesn't really care.
Therefore, my answer to the question:
"I don't know and I don't really care."

The last paragraph is more important [to this particular debate] than you might instantly recognise. Why? Because it shows how an individual explores all potential decisions and feelings open to him/her yet still makes a singular (definite) decision regarding any particular experience or enquiry.
Even my decision to be indecisive and indifferent is, ultimately, an absolutely singular or definite response (mentally and emotionally) to a complex question. (And the question requires complex consideration, believe it or not).

Stating the bleeding obvious. Any decision, thought or feeling that any person has is, by definition, a single decision, thought or feeling. What a stunning insight.

But why is this significant?
... Because if definite thoughts and feelings result from every experience or ponderance, then the conclusion is that:
... A singular entity embraces experience.

Utter non-sequitor. That any individual question/problem/ponderance results in an individual conclusion says absolutely nothing more than one individual entity is having an experience. It does not preclude the existence of other entities or other experiences. You may have come to the decision that you neither know nor care who wins the World Cup, but other individuals reach different conclusions. This means that the question has multiple answers, and possibly more significantly, different individuals have different depths of feeling about it. By your logic this must prove that there are multiple entities.

But why is that significant?
... Because attribution of singular (definite) thoughts & feelings to 'the many' (especially, very very very many - reference to the countless individual parts of the brain), does not compute.
This would negate the brain from being the source of such definite response.

I'm not entirely certain what you mean by 'The Many', but it's totally irrelevant. Why would you expect an individual to respond to a single question with anything other than a singular response. However, since each individual reaches a different singular response is this not evidence for a multiplicity of experiences, and thus a multiplicity of experiencers?

... Given the potential diversity of answers and feelings to any experience or question, what theories exist that allow us to attribute definite answers & feelings - on a moment-to-moment basis - to 'The Many'?

This is a pointless question. If you don't reach definite answers and feelings then you would be incapable of functioning. You'd be incapable of asking questions, posting on this forum, eating........

Before you answer, please comprehend that the brain is not a predictable mechanism. If it were, all 'people' would have the same responses to specific questions or experiences.

Again, a non-sequitor. Computers are predictable mechanisms, but two different computers with two different programs and you will get different results for the same input. Everyone has a different brain (computer) and a different set of life experiences (programming), so it follows that they respond differently to the same questions or experiences.

I want to see some responses before I delve any deeper. Also, I should be busy over the weekend so don't assume that my absence = indifference.
I'll be back.

Delving deeper?

 

[Ryokan]

Oh well, I guess I'll address your post, but I expect you'll just call me thick, and tell me to up the quality.

I'll call you thick, for bothering to discuss with Lifegazer

 

[RandFan]

Before you answer, please comprehend that the brain is not a predictable mechanism. If it were, all 'people' would have the same responses to specific questions or experiences.

You don't know what you are talking about.

The second statement does not follow from the first. I suggest you brush up on complex systems and predictability. A course in complex modeling or chaos theory would help you understand a bit the problem with your statement.

In brief, the brain is a complex system. It has been argued that it is the most complex system in the universe. The brain (mind) is the result of genetics and environmental factors. The variables are huge.

1.) Humans do not have the same brain structures at birth.
2.) Humans have different experiences which causes their brains to form different connections.

The variables are incomprehensibly large.

However, if we could model all of the variables it would be a predictible mechanism.

 

[RandFan]

Number of Neurons in a Human Brain

The human brain holds about 100 billion nerve cells

One of the most remarkable aspects of the adult nervous system is the human brain. The human brain controls memory, vision, learning, thought, consciousness and other activities. By means of electrochemical impulses the brain directly controls conscious or voluntary behavior. It also monitors, through feedback circuitry, most involuntary behavior and influences automatic activities of the internal organs.

During fetal development the foundations of the mind are laid as billions of neurons form appropriate connections and patterns. No aspect of this complicated structure has been left to chance. The basic wiring plan is encoded in the genes. It has been shown from previous studies that in developing embryos of animals, nerve cells are created in or travel to designated regions of the brain, and once in place send out axons along preprogrammed paths to make contact with specific targets.

The brain's billions of neurons connect with one another in complex networks. All physical and mental functioning depends on the establishment and maintenance of neuron networks. A person's habits and skills -- such as nail-biting or playing a musical instrument -- become embedded within the brain in frequently activated neuron networks. When a person stops performing an activity, the neural networks for the activity fall into disuse and eventually may disappear.

That is 100 Billion.

 

[Dr Adequate]

Another ****ing stupid lifegazer thread. With colored ink.

 

[wollery]

I'll call you thick, for bothering to discuss with Lifegazer

It's a fair cop!

 

[RandFan]

Another ****ing stupid lifegazer thread. With colored ink.

Argument by emphasis.

 

[Wudang]

and Lifegazer still hasn't told us the results of his experiment, remember?

 

[RandFan]

and Lifegazer still hasn't told us the results of his experiment, remember?

IT'S TRUE! (see emphasis)

 

[UndercoverElephant]

IT'S TRUE! (see emphasis)

(LOL)

 

[nescafe]

This is a pointless question. If you don't reach definite answers and feelings then you would be incapable of functioning. You'd be incapable of asking questions, posting on this forum, eating........

The interesing thing is that there has been at least one person with the right sort of brain damage to have this sort of problem. In the book Animals in Translation, the authors describe the case of a man who had brain damage such that his emotions no longer had any measurable impact on his conscious thought processes. His ability to survive in day to day life went straight down the tubes because he had to rationally think through every step in planning what to do. The example used in the book was of of not being able to pick a time to schedule an appointment with his therapist -- he was in his therapist's office after a session, and asked him to choose a time next wek for their session. He went over all the free time in her and his calendars for 15 minutes without being able to pick a time. His wife basically had to plan his life for him. (I am sure there is a better reference for this story, but I cannot seem to find it right now).

 

[c4ts]

Colored fonts are proof of genius!

 

[lifegazer]

The link between everything.

Most people always incorrectly assume that I think that there is no link between 'the brain' and thinking, or emotion.
People incorrectly assume, for example, that I do not believe that thought & emotion can be manipulated when 'tinkering' with the brain.

I know that my thoughts and feelings can be altered with drugs or via brain surgery.

Moving on...
I also know that thoughts and feelings have the potential to drastically alter brain and body states.
It works both ways.

What we really have evidence of here, is that there is a relationship between
brain/body, thought, and feeling... whereby any one has the potential to alter the state of the other two.
Examples:

Emotion: Fear, for example, can drastically alter my thoughts and body/brain state.

Thought: Pondering life/experience can induce hitherto absent emotions to surface, thus altering brain/body state in the process.

Brain/body: The example in the 2nd paragraph suffices.


Anyone who understands philosophy knows that we have no evidence for the reality of anything, including the brain. In fact, anyone who has read my threads should understand that we do not observe a real world - we observe ordered sensations that give the impression of a world.
... This of course, includes the impression of 'brains'.

The truth is that we only (emphasis definitely deserved) have a relationship between thought; feeling; and sensations.

Our sensations portray the experience of world/body/brain.
There is order amongst those sensations... and there is order between the experience of world/body/brain.
And of course, there is order (relationship) between thought/feeling/sensation.

We must not forget that the world is actually sensation. It's an experience.
So too are thought & feeling experiences.
All three occur within awareness.

And so, my position is not in the slightest diminished by the fact that my thoughts and feelings can be altered with drugs or via brain surgery.

Tomorrow, I'll move-on to addressing the actual content of my first post.
Hopefully, there will be no more nonsense from people who think that there is definite evidence of real brains creating and controlling experience.

 

[UndercoverElephant]

Most people always incorrectly assume that I think that there is no link between 'the brain' and thinking, or emotion.
People incorrectly assume, for example, that I do not believe that thought & emotion can be manipulated when 'tinkering' with the brain.

I know that my thoughts and feelings can be altered with drugs or via brain surgery.

Moving on...
I also know that thoughts and feelings have the potential to drastically alter brain and body states.
It works both ways.

What we really have evidence of here, is that there is a relationship between
brain/body, thought, and feeling... whereby any one has the potential to alter the state of the other two.
Examples:

Emotion: Fear, for example, can drastically alter my thoughts and body/brain state.

Thought: Pondering life/experience can induce hitherto absent emotions to surface, thus altering brain/body state in the process.

Brain/body: The example in the 2nd paragraph suffices.


Anyone who understands philosophy knows that we have no evidence for the reality of anything, including the brain. In fact, anyone who has read my threads should understand that we do not observe a real world - we observe ordered sensations that give the impression of a world.
... This of course, includes the impression of 'brains'.

The truth is that we only (emphasis definitely deserved) have a relationship between thought; feeling; and sensations.

Our sensations portray the experience of world/body/brain.
There is order amongst those sensations... and there is order between the experience of world/body/brain.
And of course, there is order (relationship) between thought/feeling/sensation.

We must not forget that the world is actually sensation. It's an experience.
So too are thought & feeling experiences.
All three occur within awareness.

And so, my position is not in the slightest diminished by the fact that my thoughts and feelings can be altered with drugs or via brain surgery.

Tomorrow, I'll move-on to addressing the actual content of my first post.
Hopefully, there will be no more nonsense from people who think that there is definite evidence of real brains creating and controlling experience.

 

[wollery]

I know that my thoughts and feelings can be altered with drugs or via brain surgery.

Really? You've tried them have you?

 

[RandFan]

Most people always incorrectly assume that I think that there is no link between 'the brain' and thinking, or emotion.

People incorrectly assume, for example, that I do not believe that thought & emotion can be manipulated when 'tinkering' with the brain.

I know that my thoughts and feelings can be altered with drugs or via brain surgery.

Ok, cool.

I also know that thoughts and feelings have the potential to drastically alter brain and body states.
It works both ways.

We could do without the emphasis but ok, agreed.

What we really have evidence of here, is that there is a relationship between brain/body...

Now, by "brain" and "body", you are talking about the underlying order, right? I mean, there is no physical reality beyond what we see so there is no "brain" and there is no "body". There is only an order of perceptions and these perceptions have a relationship to our brain, right?

Emotion: Fear, for example, can drastically alter my thoughts and body/brain state.

Yeah, we get it, no need to belabor the point.

Thought: Pondering life/experience can induce hitherto absent emotions to surface, thus altering brain/body state in the process.

Ok, ok, we really, really do get it.

Anyone who understands philosophy knows that we have no evidence for the reality of anything, including the brain. In fact, anyone who has read my threads should understand that we do not observe a real world - we observe ordered sensations that give the impression of a world.
... This of course, includes the impression of 'brains'.

Ok, yeah, this was my understanding.

The truth is that we only (emphasis definitely deserved) have a relationship between thought; feeling; and sensations.

{sigh} Can we get to the point? Yes, you are right. There is some thinking going on and that is linked to feeling and sensations.

FWIW, the emphasis becomes trite after awhile whether you think it is definitely deserved or not.

Our sensations portray the experience of world/body/brain.
There is order amongst those sensations... and there is order between the experience of world/body/brain.

And of course, there is order (relationship) between thought/feeling/sensation.

Oh merciful god, out with it, what the hell is the point? We've been through all of this time and again.

We must not forget that the world is actually sensation. It's an experience.

So too are thought & feeling experiences.

All three occur within awareness.

How many ways can you make this same tired point? Yes, we get it. We have read the ancient Greek philosophers we understand the problems inherent in a percieved world. We've read Descartes and Berkley. We know. Ok? We know... and?

And so, my position is not in the slightest diminished by the fact that my thoughts and feelings can be altered with drugs or via brain surgery.

WHAT?!?!?!? Thats IT? All that for that?

Tomorrow, I'll move-on to addressing the actual content of my first post.

Oh I just can't wait. This has all the drama of drying paint.

Hopefully, there will be no more nonsense from people who think that there is definite evidence of real brains creating and controlling experience.

Yeah, you told them, those smarty pants who think that there is definite evidence of real brains creating and controlling experience. Ok, and?

Gazer, verbosity is not argument.

 

[wollery]

I want to see some responses before I delve any deeper.

But apparently you aren't going to address any of the responses.

 

[fuelair]

Most people always incorrectly assume that I think that there is no link between 'the brain' and thinking, or emotion.
People incorrectly assume, for example, that I do not believe that thought & emotion can be manipulated when 'tinkering' with the brain.

I know that my thoughts and feelings can be altered with drugs or via brain surgery.

Moving on...
I also know that thoughts and feelings have the potential to drastically alter brain and body states.
It works both ways.

What we really have evidence of here, is that there is a relationship between
brain/body, thought, and feeling... whereby any one has the potential to alter the state of the other two.
Examples:

Emotion: Fear, for example, can drastically alter my thoughts and body/brain state.

Thought: Pondering life/experience can induce hitherto absent emotions to surface, thus altering brain/body state in the process.

Brain/body: The example in the 2nd paragraph suffices.


Anyone who understands philosophy knows that we have no evidence for the reality of anything, including the brain. In fact, anyone who has read my threads should understand that we do not observe a real world - we observe ordered sensations that give the impression of a world.
... This of course, includes the impression of 'brains'.

The truth is that we only (emphasis definitely deserved) have a relationship between thought; feeling; and sensations.

Our sensations portray the experience of world/body/brain.
There is order amongst those sensations... and there is order between the experience of world/body/brain.
And of course, there is order (relationship) between thought/feeling/sensation.

We must not forget that the world is actually sensation. It's an experience.
So too are thought & feeling experiences.
All three occur within awareness.

And so, my position is not in the slightest diminished by the fact that my thoughts and feelings can be altered with drugs or via brain surgery.

Tomorrow, I'll move-on to addressing the actual content of my first post.
Hopefully, there will be no more nonsense from people who think that there is definite evidence of real brains creating and controlling experience.

I know this is pointless, but take a degree worth of courses on philosophy and on psychology before you continue doing these pointless things. We are all sorry you don't get it, we keep trying to help you get it, you apparently have no interest in getting it. Goodbye and have an interesting life.

 

[nescafe]

Moving on...
I also know that thoughts and feelings have the potential to drastically alter brain and body states.
It works both ways.

What we really have evidence of here, is that there is a relationship between
brain/body, thought, and feeling... whereby any one has the potential to alter the state of the other two.
Examples:

Emotion: Fear, for example, can drastically alter my thoughts and body/brain state.

Thought: Pondering life/experience can induce hitherto absent emotions to surface, thus altering brain/body state in the process.

Paging Captain Obvious, you are needed in the latest LG thread...

Given that (no matter what your philosophical stance is) the fact that the brain, the body, the mind, subjective reality, intersubjective reality, and objective reality are part of the same system, what you are saying is patently obvious to anyone who has done even a minimal amount of thinking on the topic.

Anyone who understands philosophy knows that we have no evidence for the reality of anything, including the brain.

Um, no. We have a staggering amout of evidence that reality actually exists. What we do not have is any absolute, 100% logically certian proof that reality as we experience it exists. A subtle detail, to be sure. I am sure it does not affect your philosophical stance at all.

In fact, anyone who has read my threads should understand that we do not observe a real world - we observe ordered sensations that give the impression of a world.

... This of course, includes the impression of 'brains'.

The truth is that we only (emphasis definitely deserved) have a relationship between thought; feeling; and sensations.

um, no. Emphasis definitly not deserved. If we have no relationship with objective reality (no matter how defined), how do you explain the apparent coherence of other people's experiences with yours? Your definition above is that of solipsism.

Our sensations portray the experience of world/body/brain.
There is order amongst those sensations... and there is order between the experience of world/body/brain.
And of course, there is order (relationship) between thought/feeling/sensation.

We must not forget that the world is actually sensation. It's an experience.
So too are thought & feeling experiences.
All three occur within awareness.

For what definition of world?

And so, my position is not in the slightest diminished by the fact that my thoughts and feelings can be altered with drugs or via brain surgery.

Somehow, I doubt that your position could be altered by anything except the causal agents you just mentioned, and it sounds like causal agent #1 was heavily involved in the formulation of your worldview.

Tomorrow, I'll move-on to addressing the actual content of my first post.
Hopefully, there will be no more nonsense from people who think that there is definite evidence of real brains creating and controlling experience.