John Mazziotta - How Do Human Brains Think and Feel?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 26 кві 2024
- Watch more videos on brain structure and function: shorturl.at/vAEFN
Nothing means anything without our brains. Not science, not theology, not politics, not love. Everything we know and do-all the sense of human thought, all the feelings of human emotion, all the fullness of human achievement-all are the product of the brains in our heads. By what processes do human brains work? How much can science discover?
Subscribe to the Closer To Truth podcast with new episodes every Wednesday: shorturl.at/hwGP3
For member-only benefits, register for a free account today: shorturl.at/ajRZ8
John Mazziotta, MD, PhD, is the Executive Vice Dean of the David Geffen School of Medicine and Associate Vice Chancellor at UCLA. A distinguished researcher and prolific writer, Dr. Mazziotta is currently Chair of the Department of Neurology, Director of the UCLA Brain Mapping Center, Associate Director of the Semel Institute, and Professor of Neurology, Radiological Sciences and Pharmacology.
Closer To Truth, hosted by Robert Lawrence Kuhn and directed by Peter Getzels, presents the world’s greatest thinkers exploring humanity’s deepest questions. Discover fundamental issues of existence. Engage new and diverse ways of thinking. Appreciate intense debates. Share your own opinions. Seek your own answers.
One thing I’ve always wondered is whether plants, which have no brains, think. They do respond to their environments, tracking the sun and so forth, and they do share resources with one another. But how do they decide to do this? I don’t know, but I think this would be a fascinating thing to investigate.
It may be like breathing is for us. In that just “happens” but you can also control it to a certain extent.
Great question.
Mushrooms are even stranger. There's research into the possibility that electrical signals they produce being a form of language.
Google is our friend….
“Plants move in response to light. I think that is what my foxglove was doing, moving towards first the morning and then the afternoon sunlight. This movement is called phototropism. Specialized hormone cells, known as auxins, control growth by stimulating cell elongation. It is well accepted that phototropic bending of stems and roots results from cells on one side elongating faster than cells on the other side. This causes the plant to bend and direct its growth either toward available sunlight (positive phototropism) or away from it (negative phototropism).
Plants also move in response to touch or external stimulus. The mimosa tree (Albizia julibrissin) and oxalis houseplant (Oxalis regnellii and Oxalis triangularis) both fold their leaves when touched or disturbed. This type of movement is called nastic (from the Greek word meaning to press). Perhaps the most familiar response to touch is the Venus flytrap (Dionaea muscipula) snapping shut when an insect touches two of the flytrap's sensitive hair triggers. Other more benign movement occurs in some flowers, such as when the moss rose (Portulaca grandiflora) closes its petals at night.
Anyone who has seen a morning glory coiling around a support has observed thigmotropism in action. This response occurs following a "force contact," in which the direction of a tendril curves toward the rigid surface that it contacted. The tendril then coils around that surface. At the cellular level, a combination of cell elongation and changes in cell pressure are responsible for generating growth along or around a solid object. Some tendrils will begin to curve within less than a minute of a contact stimulus. Cell membrane protrusions transmit a signal that is rapidly acted upon by some unknown mechanism. Time-lapse photography has shown tendrils even waving around as though in search of a twining support…/..”
Fascinating. Regarding the mirroring aspect, the first time I consumed cannabis, I watched a movie and I literally couldn't stop myself from repeating what the characters said and acting out their movements.
Imaging seems to be giving much needed clarity to the role of physiology in explaining brain function and possibly the underpinning of mind.
memory of past, feeling / emotion in present, thought about future?
Great
15) The Paradoxes of Quantum Non-Locality
Contradictory:
- Violations of Bell's Inequalities
- The EPR "Spooky Action at a Distance" Paradox
- Quantum Entanglement and Measurement Paradoxes
Quantum phenomena appear to paradoxically allow for non-local influences and action-at-a-distance which conflict with relativistic locality.
Non-Contradictory Possibility:
Monadic Quantum Geometrodynamics
|Ψ> = Σn cn |Un> (Universal wavefunction)
|Un> = ⊗i |qn,i> (Monadic factorizations)
< Un|Um> ≠ 0 (Holographic correlation between perspectives)
Treating the universal wavefunction as a coherent superposition over monadic perspectives |Un> allows for holographic pluralistic correlations resolving non-locality paradoxes.
16) The Primordial Cosmic Singularity
Contradictory:
Classical Big Bang Cosmology
As t → 0, classical solutions become transcendentally ill-defined at an initial singularity where all known laws of physics break down.
This inevitably paradoxical breakdown of deterministic geometric description represents an impassable limit.
Non-Contradictory Possibility:
Infinitesimal Fractal Geometrogenesis
M0 = Σn |Un(t = 0)⟩ (Primordial fracted state)
|Un(t)⟩ = Un(t) |Un(0)⟩ (Evolution fractal operator)
ds2 = Σn,m cn,m Γn,m (Metric from mnadic correlations)
Treating the primordial geometric inception M0 as a superposition of infinitesimal fractal-evolving monadic perspectives avoids singular infinities from the start.
17) The Paradox of the Circular Plane
Contradictory:
In Euclidean Plane Geometry, defining a circle as the set of points equidistant from a center point is paradoxically circular:
C = {(x,y) : sqrt((x-a)^2 + (y-b)^2) = r} (Circle of radius r)
This defines C using the algebraic distance function invoking C itself.
Non-Contradictory Possibility:
Infinitesimal Pluritopic Homotopy Theory
C = {p : ∃q ∈ S1, p =r q} (Circle as monadic group quotient)
Tπ = ⨀p ⨂q Γp,q(r) (Winding homotopy over relations)
Defining circles C topologically as quotients of the monadic group S1 by pluralistic infinitesimal monadic relations Γp,q avoids circularity using homotopic methods.
18) Paradoxes of Subjective Experience
Contradictory:
- The Explanatory Gap and Hard Problem of Consciousness
- Integrating First/Third-Person Accounts of Mental States
- The Binding Problem of Unified Perceptual Experience
Classical theories struggle to coherently model the existence of subjective first-person experience from their third-person formalisms.
Non-Contradictory Possibility:
Monadic Idionamic Phenomenology
|ωn⟩ = Rn|Ψ⟩ (Witnessed State from Universal Wavefunction)
|Ωn⟩ = ⊗i |ωn,i⟩ (Bound Unified Perceptual State)
Qualia(|Ωn⟩) = Feel(|Ωn⟩) (Qualitative Experience)
Grounding subjective experience in witnessed monadic perspectives |ωn⟩ on the universal wavefunction, with unified percepts |Ωn⟩ as bound tensor factorizations, allows modeling qualia phenomenology.
19) The Epoch Philosophy Problem
Contradictory:
Given a succession of philosophical epochs/paradigms, the following paradox arises:
1) Any paradigm is conceivably subject to revision/rejection
2) So all current paradigms are open to revision
3) But (2) is self-undermining, suggesting all knowledge is revisable
This formulation paradoxically renders all knowledge, including the above, radically unstable.
Non-Contradictory Possibility:
Stratified Reflection Metaparadigms
Let L be a paradigmatic language/logic
Let T = {φ | L ⊨ φ} be its paradigm theory
Define M = {φ | φ ∈ T & ¬Prov_T(φ)} (The Metalogic of T's Unprovability)
Representing paradigms as stratified metaparadigms, with self-revisions accounted for in irreducible metalogical propositions M, resolves the paradox of universal revisability.
20) The Epimenides Liar's Paradox
Contradictory:
The statement "This statement is false" is paradoxical:
If true, it's false. If false, it's true.
This simple self-referential statement undermines the very notion of bivalent truth from within classical logic.
Non-Contradictory Possibility:
Idempotent-Separated Algebraic Logic
Let A be the proposition algebra
Define A+ = {a + a | a ∈ A} (Idempotent subspace)
Vall : A → {0,1} (Bivalent valuation map)
Define Vall(a + b) = Vall(a) ⊕ Vall(b) for a,b ∈ A+ (Separated valuation)
By valuating paradoxical self-referential propositions in an idempotent-separated subalgebra A+, the liar's paradox can be rendered consistent and dissolve the threat posed to classical bivalent logic itself.
In all of these examples, the classical formulations encountered paradoxes or inconsistent self-contradictions because they depended on flawed premises like:
- Absolute separability of observables rather than relational pluralisms
- Mathematical and geometricover-idealizations
- Undue bivalence and binary truth valuations
- Neglecting or inability to represent first-person subjectivity
The proposed non-contradictory infinitesimal/monadological alternatives resolve the paradoxes by:
- Treating observations/geometry as relative between interacting monadic perspectives
- Using infinitesimals, realizability relations rather than over-precise continua
- Adopting pluralistically-valued paralogics and metalogical stratifications
- Explicitly representing and grounding phenomenal subjective experience
By systematically upgrading our descriptive formalisms to accurately reflect the primordial unified pluralities and first-personal facts underlying reality, these paradox-free frameworks promise to extend our knowledge into new fully self-coherent analytic regimes.
The vision is an entire Renaissance - reconceiving mathematics and physics from infinitesimal monadological roots, thereby extinguishing paradox by restoring unfractured symbolic resonance with experiential metaphysical truth. An audacious ambition, but nothing less can achieve humanity's aspiration for a universal unified coherence encompassing physical and conscious reality.
I wish we would move away from using terms like “normal” when discussing such a wide spectrum.
Our emotions and behaviour patterns are evolving and they have perhaps become so evolutionary complex that to perhaps aberrant mirror neurons can be somewhat evolutionarily advantageous leading to rise in the cases of autism. #A_hypothesis
Abbott and Costello
Dude still uses Windows XP!?
We could be part of one zero dimensional point where one second seems like one second. A physical system like a hurricane or falling line of dominos could be an intelligent being and be part of another zero dimensional point where one week feels like one second. The zero dimensional points we are part of and the zero dimensional point the physical system are part of can be two seperate zero dimensional points both separated by time, but both still existing simultaneously. If we are a zero dimensional point where one second feels like one second, and another intelligence is part of another zero dimensional point separated by time, where one week feels like one second, it makes sense for both points to be separated by time but still both exist simultaneously.
It is totally Perspective-confusion,
Kuhn is obsessed with brains.
but forgot to ask his brain,
how it thinks and feel.
How old is this? Look at the size old that laptop!
Does all of this social BUSINESS mean that it is just less cost effective to communicate with autistic people or are they genuinely lacking wisdom?
And what do we call those people that strictly reason by social vibes, irregardless of the definitions of statements.
Researchers and brain scientists have first to answer the fundamental question: how does a conscious self arise from the working of the neurons? And if such is really the case. Only after tackling this fundamental question should they proceed to solve the other problems. This only is the most logical and sensible approach to take.
Nah the primary goal should be to understand neurological and psychiatric diseases and how to treat them. Understanding conciousness is secondary.
@@henk-3098 No doubt that's important. But if you have not the slightest idea regarding the nature of the entity that's suffering, then how can the treatment be effective in any real sense.
Brain and the mind is not the same thing
You’re asking me?
Well, you're doing it. Care to tell us how? 😉
Did I write this?
I am here for the comments. 🤣
Brains don't think. People do. Mr. Kuhn's guest commits the mereological fallacy. He says a part of an object does something that the whole object does instead.
Its not the brain that thinks, feels, smells, hears, sees.....it is consciousness that does, & the latter is neither the brain nor is it the product of brain activity. Its brain correlates are just its mediums through which it functions. The brain is just a trans-receiver (transmitter-receiver) of consciousness.
In other words,
Its about time to let go of the false materialistic "scientific world view."
Nont only a paradigm-shift is needed to do just that, but also & mainly a META-paradigm-shift, in order to send materialism to Alice's wonderland where it belongs, to liberate science from its bigotry & to let the scientific free inquiry take its course...
How do you know the brain has nothing to do with consciousness? And what is it about the brain that makes it receptive to consciousness, but no other part of the body?
Nobody is stopping you. If anyone has better ideas that are more productive and lead to more effective research and medical treatments, I'd be a big fan. Science is about results more than it is about ideas.
@@simonhibbs887no. Science is about understanding and realization. A particular man who utilizes science might be after results. Science itself doesn't care.
Nice try with your nullshit again simon
@@S3RAVA3LM OK, quantitative empirical science such as neuroscience which is the subject of this video then. My apologies. I look forward to seeing you objecting equally strenuously to posts here denouncing science and scientists.
That's quite a big talk considering that the issue is philosophical here and there is room for rational disagreement. Don't act like you have some kind of definitive proof. Also granting the irreducibility of the mind, the ontological dependence of the mind upon the brain is the most plausible stance to take. It best explains the evidence.
...Gentlemen, it is just marvelous how you can determine the functions of the brain, as well as what areas are stimulated during responses. The actual mechanical process. I am reminded that every person will respond a little differently as well. Life style, nutrition, bodily chemical balance. So many variables. Even identical twins have different fingerprints. Remembering that each person is special and individual. Also the wonderful concepts of Time/Space, reality, social behaviors, conscienceless. So much knowledge, and yet so many more discoveries. Each person is so wonderfully created. Thank you GOD, respectfully, Chuck...captivus brevis...you tube...Blessings...
RLK for president!
take your meds Keith ;)
Because of God...jk
Guys says about Alzheimer It in brains is NOT difficulte to understand . Guys It is stupid sentences. He definies consciousness though reality but keep out how figure out consciousness inside brains activities he consciousness definitions is nil evidence . Again he shows important question about brains It is wortheless because he arrogances keep him out of serious neurosience.
>" keep him out of serious neurosience"
Well, apart from leading the foremost brain imaging academic research team in the world, leading the international programme to map the human brain, publishing 260 research papers and 8 books on neuroscience used to teach the subject around the world. Imagine what he could have achieved if he hand't been 'kept out' of *serious* neuroscience.
Dunning Kreuger on full display. Mazziotta''s contributions to neuroscience are vast and invaluable. You, however, can't seem to string together a coherent sentence.
I have the mind of Jesus Christ of Nazareth...
You have a fictitious brain?
"How Do Human Brains Think and Feel?"
How you think and feel rely on the choice of belief that your free immortal soul made :
If you had chosen to believe in a loving God, this can inspire you to love and care for all God's children to live in peace, harmony, and genuine happiness..
...but, if you are Godless, there is nothing to hold you to do anything to fulfill all your desires regardless who gets hurt.. you'll likely become the deadly cancer of any civilized society driving this world down into the abyss of no return...