Science have done all that studies of the anatomy of the brain and neurons but, until now, they still do not know what brain's chemistry or what neural current responsible for entertaining a belief in Supernatural GOD that has nothing to do with their material science... yes, of course, they opened their eyes wide but always ended up ruling their eyes clueless and frustrated...
The difficult part is trying to decide how the memory differentiates and stores the memory of colors. Colors are closer to a subjective fantasy than to basic reality. We have color receptors in our eye but what do we have in our memory? We can mentally imagine color and that is supplied by memory and we can mentally change the imagined color at will independent of having actually seen the imagined thing being that other color. We can mentally paste color into imagined objects or imagined events. How can the memory maintain the integrity of a particular memory while also being able to change to so many different quality variations? Our memory learns from our senses and our senses are differentiated by nerve pathways but where are those nerve pathways in the memory? Any attempt to identify those pathways will fail because we would have to disect a live person.
Who said memory of colour is in any way reliable? It's been shown that witnesses' memories of events can be substantially altered just by recalling them. It stands to reason that colour is probably added at the point of recall rather than encoded in the memory itself - for most people anyway.
I think colours are a representation of a sensory stimulus, and that representation can be stored in memory. The experience of colour is our introspection on the process of interpreting that representation. There is a lot of work being done on the neurological processes of memory, other mammals have neurons that function is the same way as ours.
Why would an Identity Theory be difficult to accept? The only thing we have to admit is that the brain is incredibly complex. That said, why wouldn't a memory be activated by a memory trace, via associations, being primed (calcium) and then at some point flooded by a hormone (attention)?
The lights don't come on when this module interacts with that module or this field interacts with that field. No that is counciousness, physical objects interacting and reacting to their environment this has been going onfor billions of years! The lights come on when language is introduced and the I/You self-awareness is born. Language is and always has been the answer to the hard problem. There is a huge difference between counciousness and self aware counciousness! A dog is aware and councious, but is not aware that it is big difference, you need language for that.
There is only one kind of stuff in this world - the physical stuff. Alex Rosenberg, show me consciousness that is not rooted in a physical stuff. Just because we cannot explain the emergence of consciousness does not mean it not rooted in the physical stuff. You need evidence that it is not rooted in physical stuff.
So, what's the problem again? The men of philosophia didn't think only of mind as a beings condition but the limitation of mind subject to an particular or individuals condition. They didn't get caught in the snare of modulated mind because they sought to understand the very principle of beauty itself, the good and the just, for that which in phenomena participates in or was confered such form in beauty and good etc. is not the principle of, therefore the men of philosophia broke out of the individual cocoon of mind to acknowledge the Super mind or platonic Nous and hindu Chit - Divine Mind. Philosophia is liberation and although men do want to have a down to earth logical explanation maybe the nature of it is to go upwards rather than trying to bring it downwards. Apprehending the human condition of mind is understanding the micro of macrocosm. Trying to prove or thinking that the signal is a property of the radio might not be right, especially not philosophia because true philosophy is liberative and not otherwise. For me, consubstantial is a key term and seeing the many modulations like clay which is molded into different forms but ultimately is really only clay, which india metaphysics uses as metaphor - the clay as substratum and the form of plate or vase as modulation.
Why do philosophers of mind and consciousness get hung up on "subjective experiences" (qualia)? Pain is a subjective experience as is joy, depression, "what it is like to view a color, feel a leaf or tree bark, etc. The brain creates models (representations) of the world (physical and abstract) using neurons and their interconnections. Nothing independent actually emerges from the virtual models such that it has an independent existence. The neocortex contains many tens of thousands of cortical columns and each column several hundred minicolumns. Models are constructed using this cortical arrangement. Thoughts, perceptions, mental images, and feelings (qualia) are produced by a complex of neuronal firings. There is prediction, minimizing errors, active inference, role of probability, and so on. It is too complex to explain. See Karl Friston, Jeff Hawkins, and others. The bottom-line is that there is only physical "stuff" that makes up the mind, self-perception, ideas, feelings, qualia, and everything we are; there is no immaterial, invisible "you" or "feeling" or "perceptions" or "emerged entities" swirling around in our crainiums.
@@Krod4321 The brain solves the so-calld "hard problem" of consciousness, that is, qualia, though building mental and emotional model over the years as we have experiences, and as we perceive ourselves as a unique self. We gradually build perceptions and feelings of the outer and inner worlds. I know what a strawberry tastes like to me, but I don't know and can't know what a strawberry tastes like to you or anyone else. I can see that your physical sensory structures are very similar to mine, and can see some brain activity correlates when you and I taste strawberries, but that doesn't inform me about how tasting strawberriw feels like to you. We each have hundreds of thousands (or more) models of "what it's like" in our brains.
No language, no hard problem! The question shouldn't be what's it like to be a bat? It should be what's it like to have language? Language is an always has been the problem!
@hbahr028 Yes, but you do not need Ludwig, we can all experience this for ourselves very easily. Try and have a experience that doesn't require physical language. I'll wait!
@Krod4321 would that include expériences of sadness and Joy desire, the feeling of eating pomegranates in the fall in Tunisia etc. Before even formualting the feelings with words? Do we need language for that? I dont think so but maybe I am missing something
different lifeforms seem to have gradually adapted or specialized to the environmental conditions they've been a part of ... i.e fish used their fins untill gradually transforming into birds that use wings... wings, in this case, were developed only when conditions were favorable and/or required as an advantageous necessity... it seems as every lifeform is clearly acting with a sense of purpose/objective 🤔
... so the theory of Natural INVOLUNTARY Process of Evolution is now a process with a purpose, not anymore random, emergent, accidental, etc. ? r2c3, when one says opposite things both sides of his mouth to defend evolution garbage, is obviously CLUELESS , or just simply a fraud..
when looking at the tree of life, it's impossible to not notice the obvious fact that life has an origin... but some "things" are not as obvious as we'd want them to be, though, such as its purpose... without excluding the possibility of being totally wrong on my current understanding, Eva...
@@Krod4321imo, the "survival objective" refers to the aim of a complex analytical process which is also equivalent to being purposeful... "objective" might be a bit more ambivalent than "purposeful" in this case... so, to me, it seems as life is clearly acting purposefully towards a result that could or not be as immediate as just its survival, because most lifeforms only have a temporary form of their existence 🤔
The third-person point of view is always fundamentally a first-person point of view. The question is whether it is so naïvely or whether it is so delusionally.
How do we know subjective experience is subjective? We could be hard-wired to think and only think we are feeling an extra something, just like bats don't know they are bats. Bats use sonar without knowing what sonar is all about. For thousands of years, we thought we had souls, ask Descartes, and souls turned out to be a dream of our brains.
angel4, being curious to ask such question is a subjective experience in your part.... if you can not even recognize it, you may need a good surgeon for a complete brain overhaul..😊
@Krod4321 ...before you look for a language to describe your subjective experience, your subjective experience comes first... ... Krod, your mother DID NOT DELIVER a language but delivered you.... try having faith in a loving GOD, it might help restore your missing IQ... bye now...
There is an obvious disconnect between having a life and living it. Let's hope that the molecules also get to live it, but will we ever get hear their stories.
living a life means choosing to have faith in a Loving GOD where your life becomes meaningful, happy with peace of mind.. .. while "living it" means you are an unaccountable animal just driven by evolution beyond your control - a meaningless depressing Godless life full of guilt...
Identity theory? You mean like language cteating a sense of self? EASY! Language creates self-awareness. No language, no you! The self is an illusion created by language!
@evaadam3635 If language isn't needed, how will I be aware that I've made it to the spiritual realm? I only know I exist in this reality because I have language! P.S. I/You don't really exist!
@@Krod4321..language IS NOT NEEDED when experiencing the world around you that you can bring in the spiritual realm when your temporary life is over.... ...we only invented language to describe or to represent what we experienced when we convey it to others for a purpose... a man can live alone and survive without learning any language to experience everything around him...
@evaadam3635 Please explain how you can experience the world around you without language. In order to have an experience, you must be aware of that experience, and you can't be aware without language. It's one thing to be conscious. It's a whole other thing to be aware that you're aware.
This is an empty claim. Nonverbal people have a sense of self just like some apes, dolphins etc. The "self" requires a recognition of the social "other" and the medium used to achieve or express it isn't crucial.
He definies conseuscionss ativities but is consistency with rambling experiences. How he figure out conseuscionss if neurosience keep out how It proceendings ? He shows philosophy of biology proceendings is NOT evidence though unpredictable consciousness. Senseless.
Philosophy of mind is my next class! Sweet!
I would urge everyone to study the anatomy of the brain and the neurons. Eyes will be opened.
Science have done all that studies of the anatomy of the brain and neurons but, until now, they still do not know what brain's chemistry or what neural current responsible for entertaining a belief in Supernatural GOD that has nothing to do with their material science... yes, of course, they opened their eyes wide but always ended up ruling their eyes clueless and frustrated...
I endorse this.
Why stop at neurons? When does reductionism end??
I would urge everyone to ask good questions.
The difficult part is trying to decide how the memory differentiates and stores the memory of colors. Colors are closer to a subjective fantasy than to basic reality. We have color receptors in our eye but what do we have in our memory? We can mentally imagine color and that is supplied by memory and we can mentally change the imagined color at will independent of having actually seen the imagined thing being that other color. We can mentally paste color into imagined objects or imagined events. How can the memory maintain the integrity of a particular memory while also being able to change to so many different quality variations? Our memory learns from our senses and our senses are differentiated by nerve pathways but where are those nerve pathways in the memory? Any attempt to identify those pathways will fail because we would have to disect a live person.
Who said memory of colour is in any way reliable? It's been shown that witnesses' memories of events can be substantially altered just by recalling them. It stands to reason that colour is probably added at the point of recall rather than encoded in the memory itself - for most people anyway.
I think colours are a representation of a sensory stimulus, and that representation can be stored in memory. The experience of colour is our introspection on the process of interpreting that representation.
There is a lot of work being done on the neurological processes of memory, other mammals have neurons that function is the same way as ours.
dudes, im still solving it too... digging into this subjective temporality and all the cogito stuff...
I’m at a loss for words. ( here)
Why would an Identity Theory be difficult to accept? The only thing we have to admit is that the brain is incredibly complex. That said, why wouldn't a memory be activated by a memory trace, via associations, being primed (calcium) and then at some point flooded by a hormone (attention)?
The lights don't come on when this module interacts with that module or this field interacts with that field. No that is counciousness, physical objects interacting and reacting to their environment this has been going onfor billions of years! The lights come on when language is introduced and the I/You self-awareness is born. Language is and always has been the answer to the hard problem. There is a huge difference between counciousness and self aware counciousness! A dog is aware and councious, but is not aware that it is big difference, you need language for that.
I noticed that mr. Alex Rosenberg seems nervous in this interview. Why is that? Anyway, great discussion.
There is only one kind of stuff in this world - the physical stuff. Alex Rosenberg, show me consciousness that is not rooted in a physical stuff. Just because we cannot explain the emergence of consciousness does not mean it not rooted in the physical stuff. You need evidence that it is not rooted in physical stuff.
Maybe the fact that we can never solve the Hard Problem, is telling us something!!!
Simple minded of you to assume that we can never solve the hard problem..
the hard problem is just a illusion …..and not a problem at all..
@jimliu2560 the whole existence is an illusion! Space-Time doesn't exist. It is constructed by every individual's mind for them.
So, what's the problem again?
The men of philosophia didn't think only of mind as a beings condition but the limitation of mind subject to an particular or individuals condition. They didn't get caught in the snare of modulated mind because they sought to understand the very principle of beauty itself, the good and the just, for that which in phenomena participates in or was confered such form in beauty and good etc. is not the principle of, therefore the men of philosophia broke out of the individual cocoon of mind to acknowledge the Super mind or platonic Nous and hindu Chit - Divine Mind. Philosophia is liberation and although men do want to have a down to earth logical explanation maybe the nature of it is to go upwards rather than trying to bring it downwards. Apprehending the human condition of mind is understanding the micro of macrocosm. Trying to prove or thinking that the signal is a property of the radio might not be right, especially not philosophia because true philosophy is liberative and not otherwise.
For me, consubstantial is a key term and seeing the many modulations like clay which is molded into different forms but ultimately is really only clay, which india metaphysics uses as metaphor - the clay as substratum and the form of plate or vase as modulation.
Why do philosophers of mind and consciousness get hung up on "subjective experiences" (qualia)? Pain is a subjective experience as is joy, depression, "what it is like to view a color, feel a leaf or tree bark, etc. The brain creates models (representations) of the world (physical and abstract) using neurons and their interconnections. Nothing independent actually emerges from the virtual models such that it has an independent existence. The neocortex contains many tens of thousands of cortical columns and each column several hundred minicolumns. Models are constructed using this cortical arrangement. Thoughts, perceptions, mental images, and feelings (qualia) are produced by a complex of neuronal firings. There is prediction, minimizing errors, active inference, role of probability, and so on. It is too complex to explain. See Karl Friston, Jeff Hawkins, and others. The bottom-line is that there is only physical "stuff" that makes up the mind, self-perception, ideas, feelings, qualia, and everything we are; there is no immaterial, invisible "you" or "feeling" or "perceptions" or "emerged entities" swirling around in our crainiums.
Subjective experience, QUALIA is nothing more than language.
Literally none of what you said addresses the hard problem of consciousness
@@Econoguy Please explain how not.
@Econoguy Is the hard problem not how does an physical body/brain produce subjective experience? Easy it doesn't, language does!
@@Krod4321 The brain solves the so-calld "hard problem" of consciousness, that is, qualia, though building mental and emotional model over the years as we have experiences, and as we perceive ourselves as a unique self. We gradually build perceptions and feelings of the outer and inner worlds. I know what a strawberry tastes like to me, but I don't know and can't know what a strawberry tastes like to you or anyone else. I can see that your physical sensory structures are very similar to mine, and can see some brain activity correlates when you and I taste strawberries, but that doesn't inform me about how tasting strawberriw feels like to you. We each have hundreds of thousands (or more) models of "what it's like" in our brains.
No language, no hard problem! The question shouldn't be what's it like to be a bat? It should be what's it like to have language? Language is an always has been the problem!
Wittgenstein is in the house
@hbahr028 Yes, but you do not need Ludwig, we can all experience this for ourselves very easily. Try and have a experience that doesn't require physical language. I'll wait!
@Krod4321 would that include expériences of sadness and Joy desire, the feeling of eating pomegranates in the fall in Tunisia etc. Before even formualting the feelings with words? Do we need language for that? I dont think so but maybe I am missing something
@hbahr028 please explain how you have a feeling without language.
@hbahr028 ALL experience is through language! Please give me ANY experience ANY living being can have without language. I'll wait.
❤❤❤❤❤
different lifeforms seem to have gradually adapted or specialized to the environmental conditions they've been a part of ... i.e fish used their fins untill gradually transforming into birds that use wings... wings, in this case, were developed only when conditions were favorable and/or required as an advantageous necessity... it seems as every lifeform is clearly acting with a sense of purpose/objective 🤔
... so the theory of Natural INVOLUNTARY Process of Evolution is now a process with a purpose, not anymore random, emergent, accidental, etc. ?
r2c3, when one says opposite things both sides of his mouth to defend evolution garbage, is obviously CLUELESS , or just simply a fraud..
@r2c3 The objective is survival. Purpose is conceptual, brought to you by language. No language, no purpose!
when looking at the tree of life, it's impossible to not notice the obvious fact that life has an origin... but some "things" are not as obvious as we'd want them to be, though, such as its purpose... without excluding the possibility of being totally wrong on my current understanding, Eva...
@@Krod4321imo, the "survival objective" refers to the aim of a complex analytical process which is also equivalent to being purposeful... "objective" might be a bit more ambivalent than "purposeful" in this case... so, to me, it seems as life is clearly acting purposefully towards a result that could or not be as immediate as just its survival, because most lifeforms only have a temporary form of their existence 🤔
@r2c3 Temporary form that interacts and reacts to its environment, causing effects that can look like a purpose.
Language is responsible for subjective experience.
The third-person point of view is always fundamentally a first-person point of view. The question is whether it is so naïvely or whether it is so delusionally.
How do we know subjective experience is subjective? We could be hard-wired to think and only think we are feeling an extra something, just like bats don't know they are bats. Bats use sonar without knowing what sonar is all about. For thousands of years, we thought we had souls, ask Descartes, and souls turned out to be a dream of our brains.
angel4, being curious to ask such question is a subjective experience in your part.... if you can not even recognize it, you may need a good surgeon for a complete brain overhaul..😊
@@evaadam3635 Subjective experience is nothing more than language!
@Krod4321 ...before you look for a language to describe your subjective experience, your subjective experience comes first...
... Krod, your mother DID NOT DELIVER a language but delivered you.... try having faith in a loving GOD, it might help restore your missing IQ... bye now...
@@Krod4321 Pretty sure creatures without linguistic capabilities also have a subjective experience.
@@saianvesh3753 Please explain how any lifeform could have a subjective experience without language.
There is an obvious disconnect between having a life and living it. Let's hope that the molecules also get to live it, but will we ever get hear their stories.
living a life means choosing to have faith in a Loving GOD where your life becomes meaningful, happy with peace of mind..
.. while "living it" means you are an unaccountable animal just driven by evolution beyond your control - a meaningless depressing Godless life full of guilt...
@evaadam3635 I love you too.
@@SillyHumons😊
Jumper.
Hi
"Scientific progress started with Newton"? What was Galileo, chopped liver!? 🥸
My channel dives into the world of supernatural abilities/Siddhis/miracles-if you're intrigued by these, you might enjoy the footage I’ve found
Identity theory? You mean like language cteating a sense of self? EASY! Language creates self-awareness. No language, no you! The self is an illusion created by language!
.. your soul(self) will soon realize that language is not needed in the Spiritual Realm, when your temporary life's chance is over....
@evaadam3635 If language isn't needed, how will I be aware that I've made it to the spiritual realm? I only know I exist in this reality because I have language! P.S. I/You don't really exist!
@@Krod4321..language IS NOT NEEDED when experiencing the world around you that you can bring in the spiritual realm when your temporary life is over....
...we only invented language to describe or to represent what we experienced when we convey it to others for a purpose... a man can live alone and survive without learning any language to experience everything around him...
@evaadam3635 Please explain how you can experience the world around you without language. In order to have an experience, you must be aware of that experience, and you can't be aware without language. It's one thing to be conscious. It's a whole other thing to be aware that you're aware.
This is an empty claim. Nonverbal people have a sense of self just like some apes, dolphins etc. The "self" requires a recognition of the social "other" and the medium used to achieve or express it isn't crucial.
He definies conseuscionss ativities but is consistency with rambling experiences. How he figure out conseuscionss if neurosience keep out how It proceendings ? He shows philosophy of biology proceendings is NOT evidence though unpredictable consciousness. Senseless.
..your "proceendings" is amusing.... 😊
@evaadam3635 your answers are rubbish.
@@Maxwell-mv9rx..you must have been overdosed with "proceendings" to say that.... 😊
@Maxwell-mv9rx Excellent analysis 😂💀
@evaadam3635 rambling gibberich
The Messiah 👑 has already arrived. His second trip is a conquest of the rulers of DARKNESS. 😂😂😂 no joke! 📜REVELATION 6 verse 2 🏹
U2 think mind 😅😅😅 the my ? 😂😂😂😂
Don't wait to long for jesus
Philosophy is dead.
and what is alive?