The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?  (Read 307848 times)

Offline cheryl j

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1460
  • Thanked: 1 times
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #925 on: 24/11/2013 20:48:52 »


Quote
You'll have to be a little more specific about what those "mental psychological environmental implications and traits'' are in order for me to answer, unless you want a response that is as vague and ambiguous as the question. Which specific traits are you referring to?

Quote
Do tragic events such as wars , famine , holocaust , natural disasters and the like not have psychological and mental implications on the people who were / are unfortunate enough to be experiencing them ?

Yes, they do have psychological effects on people who experience them.
Quote
The physiological enviromental inherited  effects of such and other enviromental implications might be  not the only kind of heredetary implications  .The mental or psychological implications that are irreducible to the physical ,since reality cannot be just material or physical .

There are genes that code for psychological traits, mental abilities, and behaviors. Behavioral or mental traits tend to be complex, often involving combinations of genes.  The expression of these genes, or how they manifest themselves, often depends on the environment of that individual, as well. But mental and behavioral traits can be selected for, just as physical traits can be selected. I don't know if any epigenetic effects on them have been discovered yet.
Quote
Lamarck must have been right when he used to say that acquired characteristics or traits , due to the adaptations and habits of living organisms to the environment might be passed on as well to the next generations .

Why do you say he must have been right?
Epigenetics is not really the same idea as Lamarck's theory. Epigenetics still requires chemical changes to the DNA, or the genes being expressed or suppressed. Larmark's idea was that a giraffe, for example, got a longer neck simply by stretching it a lot, and somehow passed this on to the next generation of giraffes. He didn't account for natural selection, or any chemical mechanism directly affecting genes.

Quote
In my opinion, the physiological environmental heredetary side of the pic is not the whole pic : the mental and psychological implications of and adaptations to wars , famine,holocaust , black slavery  ...with all the stress and the rest that go with that ,with all the diseases that go with that ,  might be inherited by the next generations as well .

Absolutely, these adaptations are passed on through learning, through culture, through religion, through tradition, through books, through art, etc. But they are not permanent changes. That is, if you took an infant out of that culture, and raised him in a completely different one, and he had no access to that culture or its history and  traditions, he would not have a genetic memory of those things. Never the less, one should not, in my opinion, discount the effect of information or adaptations passed on through learning. If you are really interested, there is a book called "The Outliers," by Malcolm Gladwell, that discusses the how family, culture and individual experience effect behavior and achievement. You might enjoy it. It's a very non-materialistic book (or to be more accurate, materialism isn't relevant in it, one way or the other.)  He discusses something called the "10,000 hour rule," which states that it takes about 10,000 hours to become really great at something (whether it's playing the guitar, or becoming a computer expert) and sees this as being as important, if not more so, than innate or genetically determined ability.

« Last Edit: 25/11/2013 04:39:01 by cheryl j »
 

Offline DonQuichotte

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1763
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #926 on: 24/11/2013 20:50:02 »
"The Science Delusion " Video Lecture By Rupert Sheldrake :

Note that Sheldrake is extremely pro-science proper ,he just tries to liberate science from the false materialist mainstream scientific priesthood 's authority ,that's similar to that of the medieval church ,that's in fact worse than the latter , simply because it has been imposing its own false materialist conception of nature for so long now , as the 'scientific world view " :

When science will be free from the false materialist dogmatic belief system, whole new unimaginable -to-us-all yet vistas will open up for science : let's hope we will all be still alive and fortunate enough to witness that revolutionary event , as materialism's end is nearer than ever , as science has been superseding that false and outdated materialism ,that dates back all the way to the 19th century,ironically enough ,that has been ossifying science , by holding it imprisonned within the false dogmatic materialist prison, as to make it unable to progress  :

Enjoy, free folks : let's all work for science's deliverance  from dogmas , in order to make science less dogmatic , and more scientific, in order to make science more fun ,as it should be in fact ,in order to democratize science ,as to give it back to the people away from the exclusive monopoly of the materialist mainstream scientific priesthood 's authority:  science that's all about dispelling dogmas , lies , untruths , half-truths ....

Enjoy ,and have fun ,while you are at it :  science should be fun , not dogmatic,not hierarchial or authoritarian totalitarian  :

 

Offline dlorde

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1441
  • Thanked: 9 times
  • ex human-biologist & software developer
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #927 on: 24/11/2013 21:29:09 »
dlorde :
Gotta go: I've spent way too much  time here already , i can hardly afford to be spending :
Just answer my core questions,concerning the mental or non-physical side of the 'equation " of the whole pic of reality ,you cannot just ignore , via some irrational belief of yours , the mental that's irreducible to and more fundamental than the physical , even at the level of inheritance thus,   instead of telling me about things i already know via those  wiki  links of yours ( I never liked wiki anyway : way too a medium for every idiot to writte in ) ,instead of telling me materialist magical bed time stories  fairy tales ,for kids  .
Thanks, appreciate indeed .
Don mate, you're projecting - as usual. The irrational beliefs are yours (what did you say, "beyond science, reason, and logic"? something like that), and I suspect you know it, although you can't admit it - that's what makes you so grumpy and irritable. But you're right to question your core beliefs; I hope you find some material answers, they're out there if you look.

If not, science will simply continue its progress investigating the material anyway, and you'll continue your special pleading for the immaterial; going nowhere; talking about nothing. Your contribution will be immaterial - congratulations.
« Last Edit: 24/11/2013 21:33:06 by dlorde »
 

Offline RD

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8125
  • Thanked: 53 times
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #928 on: 24/11/2013 21:40:11 »
RD :
I am neither  interested in your materialist mechanical magic in science

You're the only one here suggesting magical forces are at work : i.e. forces outside the material world.
 If you're not interested in science why have you spent months in a science forum , if not just to troll ?.

Should we totally discard any scientist or thinker who happens to have used drugs ? 

If they were on drugs when they came up with the idea, then probably the answer is yes.
If when investigated there is no evidence to support their drug-induced idea then yes definitely ignore them.

What makes you think i have been saying what i have been saying , thanks to some kind of drugs ?

Reason #1. You being a disciple of Sheldrake, (quoting him extensively), who says in this YouTube video ...

Quote from:  Rupert Sheldrake
"... for me probably the first jolt out of the belief that materialism could explain everything was taking LSD ... some acid trips I had ..."

Reason #2. You saying that you , like Rupert , had taken LSD , and you exhibit the LSD "oneness" symptom.

Get real 

At the risk of stating the obvious, drug-users perception is further from reality than people who are not altered by drugs. 


... i never liked  you, and i still do not ,and i never will

You probably don't like having your incorrect views refuted by me or others in this forum,
That you say don't like me is irrelevant, apart from demonstrating how puerile your behaviour can be.
« Last Edit: 24/11/2013 22:11:13 by RD »
 

Offline dlorde

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1441
  • Thanked: 9 times
  • ex human-biologist & software developer
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #929 on: 25/11/2013 17:33:02 »
At the risk of stating the obvious, drug-users perception is further from reality than people who are not altered by drugs.
Not sure this is a particularly fruitful line to pursue; while under the influence, perception of reality will be different, but for most, the use of hallucinogens, particularly LSD, are typically occasional instances of early adulthood. Many people I know dabbled as students, but now have entirely conventional perceptions of reality (although they'll admit to a changed understanding of some popular cultural memes & themes of the time ;)). In the case of more frequent users (LSD is not generally considered addictive), it's not clear whether such use is more a cause than a symptom of more 'out there' exotic personalities & world views.
 

Offline RD

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8125
  • Thanked: 53 times
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #930 on: 25/11/2013 18:25:22 »
... are typically occasional instances of early adulthood ... (LSD is not generally considered addictive) ...

Repeated* LSD use isn't  necessary for a long-term effect : one use can be sufficient for permanent psychological injury ...
Quote from: wikipedia.org/LSD
There are some cases of LSD inducing a psychosis in people who appeared to be healthy before taking LSD.
In most cases, the psychosis-like reaction is of short duration, but in other cases it may be chronic.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lysergic_acid_diethylamide#Psychosis

The extreme hyper-real / traumatic ("bad trip") LSD experience , like an extreme exogenous experience , can permanently reshape the person's psyche thereafter , cf. PTSD ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posttraumatic_stress_disorder  [ which can also involve psychosis & flashbacks like LSD ]


[ * although Sheldrake does use the plural : "some acid trips I had ..." ]
« Last Edit: 25/11/2013 18:46:03 by RD »
 

Offline DonQuichotte

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1763
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #931 on: 25/11/2013 18:47:11 »
dlorde :
Gotta go: I've spent way too much  time here already , i can hardly afford to be spending :
Just answer my core questions,concerning the mental or non-physical side of the 'equation " of the whole pic of reality ,you cannot just ignore , via some irrational belief of yours , the mental that's irreducible to and more fundamental than the physical , even at the level of inheritance thus,   instead of telling me about things i already know via those  wiki  links of yours ( I never liked wiki anyway : way too a medium for every idiot to writte in ) ,instead of telling me materialist magical bed time stories  fairy tales ,for kids  .
Thanks, appreciate indeed .
Don mate, you're projecting - as usual. The irrational beliefs are yours (what did you say, "beyond science, reason, and logic"? something like that), and I suspect you know it, although you can't admit it - that's what makes you so grumpy and irritable. But you're right to question your core beliefs; I hope you find some material answers, they're out there if you look.
(Prior note :
You do have a weird and bizarre perception of what science might be , scientist,thanks to your own materialist false belief you do take for granted as science  :

Who or what said that science's realm is just the material or physical ? Oh yeah , materialism does .
Who or what said that 'everything " = nothing can be explained just in terms of physics and chemistry ? Yeah, right : materialism does .

You have to try to reconsider your own views regarding what science might be :

Science must try to deal with the aspects of the mental side of reality it can deal with empirically , science has no choice but to try to do just that , by starting to look for some more fundamental forms of causation, the non-physical ones at that , simply because reality is not just material or physical, not just a matter of physics and chemistry , and simply because the mental that's irreducible to the physical ,is more fundamental than matter can ever be : we don't know yet what even matter is exactly though , what physics and chemistry themselves are exactly : they might turn out to be totally different from what we perceive them to be .)

Well, on top of the above , there are in fact also "things or " rather processes that are   beyond science , reason, logic , beyond science's realm and beyond science's jurisdiction as well ,simply because there will always be some levels of reality that will remain out of reach of science , for example,and simply because reality is not exclusively material or physical as the false materialist mainstream "scientific world view " wanna make you believe it is : who's projecting now ? you or i ? : you're the one who does believe in that materialist false conception of nature, you have been taking for granted as the "scientific world view " , for so long now , am i wrong ? .

You cannot just keep on quoting that statement of mine out of context ,whenever that might suit you .

And no, reality is not just material or physical : the material that's in fact way less fundamental than the mental which is  irreducible to the physical or to the material ,once again , and hence science's realm will be extended when science will reject materialism, as to include the mental side of reality with which science can deal  empirically .

See Sheldrake's work on the subject , even though  the poor guy is ,relatively speaking at least , still vague in his views , regarding how science can deal with the mental empirically .

Other scientists in the future might take it from there , who knows then what they would be coming up with on the subject .

Could Newton ever predict Einstein's relativity theory ? : just an analogy : science will undergo a major and revolutionary shift of meta-paradigm , not just a paradigm shift , by rejecting that false materialist meta-paradigm in science : that would not turn out to be "nothing " : that would revolutionize science in ways that are still unimaginable to us all yet .

Science cannot remain ossified within the materialist prison, the latter that has been holding science back by making it unable to progress beyond the materialist false meta-paradigm  : science that must be totally free in exploring reality , whatever the latter might turn out to be : no one and no ideology such as materialism can dictate to science what specific areas of reality science must explore: science as a relatively still a young adventurer that will break free from any dogmas chains such as those of materialism that have been restricting the exploring power and nature of science .

Quote
If not, science will simply continue its progress investigating the material anyway, and you'll continue your special pleading for the immaterial; going nowhere; talking about nothing. Your contribution will be immaterial - congratulations.

Science will never be able to progress ,as long as it will continue being imprisonned within the false materialist conception of nature , within the false materialist meta-paradigm in science , and hence within the false current 'scientific world view " ,simply because reality is not just material or physical, once again .
So, science must undergo a major and revolutionary shift of meta-paradigm, not just a paradigm shift , by rejecting the materialist meta-paradigm in science , as to include the mental side of the whole pic .
Science that cannot keep on trying to explain "everything " = nothing , just in terms of physics and chemistry thus .
It is in fact absurd , surreal , extremely stupid ...you name it ...to try to explain the whole reality , just via one single side of it , while taking the latter for the whole real pic : that's exactly what science has been doing , thanks to materialism thus , the latter that has been turning science into a kind of secular dogmatic ossified religion ....science must be liberated from that materialist bullshit , and science will be ,simply because science is all about dispelling dogmas, lies , untruths , half truths ...

Condolences then and congratulations .

« Last Edit: 25/11/2013 19:58:50 by DonQuichotte »
 

Offline RD

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8125
  • Thanked: 53 times
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #932 on: 25/11/2013 19:33:03 »
science that must be totally free in exploring reality , whatever the latter might turn out to be : no one and no ideology such as materialism can dictate to science what specific areas of reality science must explore: science as a relatively still a young adventurer that will break free from any dogmas chains such as those of materialism that have been restricting the exploring power and nature of science .

Some scientists have explored your alleged "non-material" phenomena : decades of fruitless research by some ...
http://www.csicop.org/si/show/pear_lab_closes_ending_decades_of_psychic_research/ 
If anyone wants to waste years of their life on investigating these alleged phenomena again they are free to do so : no-one is "restricting" research in this area.

... lies , untruths ...
What's the difference between "lies" and "untruths" ?  [ a small example of your logical deficiencies ].
« Last Edit: 25/11/2013 19:39:55 by RD »
 

Offline DonQuichotte

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1763
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #933 on: 25/11/2013 19:35:27 »


Quote
You'll have to be a little more specific about what those "mental psychological environmental implications and traits'' are in order for me to answer, unless you want a response that is as vague and ambiguous as the question. Which specific traits are you referring to?

Quote
Do tragic events such as wars , famine , holocaust , natural disasters and the like not have psychological and mental implications on the people who were / are unfortunate enough to be experiencing them ?

Yes, they do have psychological effects on people who experience them.

What's then more fundamental and more far reaching than those  environmental psychological and mental effects ? the physiological environmental ones ?
The mental is the one that's more fundamental than the physiological ,not the other way around .The mental that's irreducible to the physical or to the material .

Why can't there be some sort of inheritance of those more fundamental effects,non-physically thus  ? : the environmental psychological and mental ones .
Why do you think that  the environmental physiological can be inherited ,and the mental not ,in the sense that  the mental is irreducible to the physical or to the material .

What makes you rather think that the mental can be inherited only physiologically just via genetics or via epigenetics ? How can that happen then ,since the mental is irreducible to the physical ?

Are you aware of this paradox ?

What makes you rather think that the mental or psychological can only be inherited physically physiologically ? the mental and psychological that are in fact irreducible to the physical or to the material, once again .

In short :

What makes you think that inheritance can only be material , that it can only either be  genetic or epigenetic  ?

What makes you exclude any non-physical form of inheritance then ?

What makes you exclude the non-physical ,non -genetical ,non-epigenetical form of inheritance ?

Yeah , right , the false materialist mainstream "scientific world view " does , not science proper thus .

Why can't you rather say that the physiological effects of the environmental mental and psychological implications of past tragic events can be inherited epigenetically ,but ,materialistic science cannot say anything about the possibility that the  enviromental mental and psychological implications of past tragic events ,might be inherited in their turn non-physically ,since the mental and psychological are irreducible to the physical or to the material ?

What makes you think that science proper will not be able to discover those non-physical forms of inheritance , after rejecting materialism thus ?


Quote
Quote
The physiological enviromental inherited  effects of such and other enviromental implications might be  not the only kind of heredetary implications  .The mental or psychological implications that are irreducible to the physical ,since reality cannot be just material or physical .

There are genes that code for psychological traits, mental abilities, and behaviors. Behavioral or mental traits tend to be complex, often involving combinations of genes.  The expression of these genes, or how they manifest themselves, often depends on the environment of that individual, as well. But mental and behavioral traits can be selected for, just as physical traits can be selected. I don't know if any epigenetic effects on them have been discovered yet.

See above : what makes you think that inheritance can be exclusively material = genetic or epigenetic only ?

How can the mental that's irreducible to the physical or to the material be inherited physiologically ? how ? via some sort of materialist magic ?

What makes you exclude the possibility that there might be non-physical forms of inheritance out there ,together with the genetical or epigenetical ones ? materialism does, not science proper thus .

Quote
Lamarck must have been right when he used to say that acquired characteristics or traits , due to the adaptations and habits of living organisms to the environment might be passed on as well to the next generations .

Quote
Why do you say he must have been right?
Epigenetics is not really the same idea as Lamarck's theory. Epigenetics still requires chemical changes to the DNA, or the genes being expressed or suppressed. Larmark's idea was that a giraffe, for example, got a longer neck simply by stretching it a lot, and somehow passed this on to the next generation of giraffes. He didn't account for natural selection, or any chemical mechanism directly affecting genes.

Lamarck and Darwin used to think that environmental acquired characteristics or adaptations habits can be inherited , Darwin even tried to explain that sort of inheritance : that's   what  i was talking about : epigenetics has proved that fact to be true , even though that seems to happen physiologically under pressure of the environment , by switching on or off certain genes : but ,that might not be the only process of inheritance of acquired characteristics or inherited adaptation at work,as mentioned above  .


Quote
Quote
In my opinion, the physiological environmental heredetary side of the pic is not the whole pic : the mental and psychological implications of and adaptations to wars , famine,holocaust , black slavery  ...with all the stress and the rest that go with that ,with all the diseases that go with that ,  might be inherited by the next generations as well .

Absolutely, these adaptations are passed on through learning, through culture, through religion, through tradition, through books, through art, etc. But they are not permanent changes. That is, if you took an infant out of that culture, and raised him in a completely different one, and he had no access to that culture or its history and  traditions, he would not have a genetic memory of those things. Never the less, one should not, in my opinion, discount the effect of information or adaptations passed on through learning. If you are really interested, there is a book called "The Outliers," by Malcolm Gladwell, that discusses the how family, culture and individual experience effect behavior and achievement. You might enjoy it. It's a very non-materialistic book (or to be more accurate, materialism isn't relevant in it, one way or the other.)  He discusses something called the "10,000 hour rule," which states that it takes about 10,000 hours to become really great at something (whether it's playing the guitar, or becoming a computer expert) and sees this as being as important, if not more so, than innate or genetically determined ability.

Thanks for the tip , but , that's not what i was talking about :
The inheritance of certain mental illnesses ,for example, cannot be just the work, so to speak, of genes or epigenetics ,simply because the mental is irreducible to the physical or to the material : there might be some extra form of inheritance of the mental out there thus .I dunno : it just does not make sense to reduce everything,including the mental and psychological thus ,  to just the material or physical , to just genes physics and chemistry ,as the false mainstream "scientific world view " has been doing ...
You're reducing everything , including the mental and psychological that are irreducible to the physical , to just physics and chemistry ,as materialism has been doing ,and hence as science has also been doing , thanks to materialism = that's no science = that's just materialism in science: see the difference ? Hope so  .
Think about that .
« Last Edit: 25/11/2013 19:57:12 by DonQuichotte »
 

Offline DonQuichotte

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1763
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #934 on: 25/11/2013 19:52:10 »
science that must be totally free in exploring reality , whatever the latter might turn out to be : no one and no ideology such as materialism can dictate to science what specific areas of reality science must explore: science as a relatively still a young adventurer that will break free from any dogmas chains such as those of materialism that have been restricting the exploring power and nature of science .

Some scientists have explored your alleged "non-material" phenomena : decades of fruitless research by some ...
http://www.csicop.org/si/show/pear_lab_closes_ending_decades_of_psychic_research/ 
If anyone wants to waste years of their life on investigating these alleged phenomena again they are free to do so : no-one is "restricting" research in this area.

I was not talking about any psychic phenomena , just about the fact that reality is not just material or physical, as the current false materialist mainstream "scientific world view " wanna make you believe it is , and hence we are not just physical bodies or just physical brains, DNA....we are not just biology , we are not just physics and chemistry  , and therefore our minds are non-physical or non-material = our immaterial minds cannot be  in our physical brains = our immaterial minds cannot be the "products " of our physical brain's activity  .
Quote
... lies , untruths ...
What's the difference between "lies" and "untruths" ?

Stop playing the wise guy, ok ?
Good : the current false mainstream materialist haha "scientific world view " is an untruth = untrue = false .

A premise can be false or can be true .
Mathematically : x can be false , x can be true , or x can neither be false nor true ....many possibilities ,depends on the premise ,and some true premises cannot be proven to be true , and vice versa ...

Saying that i am a troll is a lie ,and an untruth = untrue = false .

If you wanna be philosophical about this ,then :

a lie is false = an untruth = untrue .
An untruth = untrue = false ,and is also a ...lie  .

Lies are untruths , and untruths are lies .

Whatever ...

 

Offline RD

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8125
  • Thanked: 53 times
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #935 on: 25/11/2013 20:00:37 »
I was not talking about any psychic phenomena ...

You were claiming telepathy was possible. Telepathy is an alleged psychic phenomenon.

Lies are untruths , and untruths are lies .

Correct : "Lie" and "untruth" are synonyms , and you are guilty of tautology by listing them consecutively as if they were different things ...

... dispelling dogmas, lies , untruths , half truths ...

Your repeated tautology is just an example of the lack of logic in your posts.
« Last Edit: 25/11/2013 20:10:34 by RD »
 

Offline DonQuichotte

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1763
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #936 on: 25/11/2013 20:07:17 »
Lies are untruths , and untruths are lies .

Correct : "Lie" and "untruth" are synonyms , and you are guilty of tautology by listing them consecutively as if they were different things. [ Your repeated tautology is just an example of the lack of logic in your posts ].
[/quote]


Just focus on the core issues here , not on insignificant irrelevant details :
Details can blind you in relation to the whole pic sometimes :
I do not use them as if they were different things , i just do use them to make things clearer ,as to emphacise   a statement , as many writers and thinkers do .
You've got no imagination, i see .

Desert people ,for example , do have many synonymes and words for the same thing : sand,as people of the north do have many words for ...snow ....

as there are many words regarding the same 'thing "  = materialism haha = false , a lie , a make-believe , a delusion, an illusion, absurd  surreal , a fairy tale   ...you name it .
« Last Edit: 25/11/2013 20:14:01 by DonQuichotte »
 

Offline RD

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8125
  • Thanked: 53 times
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #937 on: 25/11/2013 20:16:48 »
Just focus on the core issues here , not on insignificant irrelevant details

logic is not irrelevant in a reasoned argument: it is essential.

... people of the north do have many words for ...snow ....

Another example of you not engaging your critical faculties when reading stuff on t'internet ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eskimo_words_for_snow
« Last Edit: 25/11/2013 20:19:38 by RD »
 

Offline DonQuichotte

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1763
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #938 on: 25/11/2013 21:39:34 »
Quote from: RD link=topic=48746.msg425039#msg425039 [quote
date=1385410608]
Just focus on the core issues here , not on insignificant irrelevant details

logic is not irrelevant in a reasoned argument: it is essential.
[/quote]

Using synonymous words is a logical attempt to make things clearer .

Quote
... people of the north do have many words for ...snow ....

Another example of you not engaging your critical faculties when reading stuff on t'internet ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eskimo_words_for_snow

Whatever : sue me .

All i know is that Arabs of the desert do use many synonymous and different words to say the same thing = sand,to mention just that , not to mention love .... : i am an Arab : i should know that , as i actually do : sue me .
« Last Edit: 25/11/2013 21:42:03 by DonQuichotte »
 

Offline DonQuichotte

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1763
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #939 on: 25/11/2013 21:55:09 »
RD :

See this : even though it's just a  materialist "geographic "  liberal secular view :

"Geography of thought : or how Asians and westerners think ,and why ? " By Richard E.Nisbett :

http://www.amazon.com/The-Geography-Thought-Westerners-Differently/dp/0743255356

 

Offline cheryl j

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1460
  • Thanked: 1 times
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #940 on: 25/11/2013 22:03:24 »

The mental is the one that's more fundamental than the physiological ,not the other way around .The mental that's irreducible to the physical or to the material

Your statement that the mental is irreducible to the physical is an assertion, not a fact.  It's based on your  impression that they "seem" different or "feel" different to you, and therefore cannot be the same things, or causally related. It would be equally difficult to convince someone who didn't know anything about physics that different forms of energy (radiant energy, chemical energy, electrical energy etc.) were in any way related, or could be converted from one form to another because they "seem" so different. It would be difficult to convince someone with no understanding of photosynthesis how a plant pulls off "the materialist magic trick" of converting radiant energy from the sun to chemical energy in a tomato.

Water, ice, and steam all have very experientially different properties but are the same thing. Even a non-scientist accepts this because  as children, we all watched this transformation take place, and verified that no one substituted a cup of water for an ice cube while our back was turned. But if one were never actually able to observe the process, it might be difficult to believe water could be changed in something that looks, feels, and behaves so qualitatively different.

I often wonder what the average person's response to Einstein's ideas were in the early 1900s. The idea that time is not constant is about as counter-intuitive as it gets. I doubt even physicists who understand relativity can actually personally "experience" time in any other way than all humans do. It's only the theories, the math, and reproducible, empirical evidence that tells them that their perception of it is wrong, or at least limited.

It's just my opinion, which you are free to reject, but I think your reliance on your own experience of  "thoughts" "ideas" "emotions" as being intangible, ethereal, somehow substance-less, is a major reason why you reject  any explanations involving neurons and biochemistry.

Quote
What makes you rather think that the mental can be inherited only physiologically just via genetics or via epigenetics ? How can that happen then ,since the mental is irreducible to the physical ?

Are you aware of this paradox ?

It's not a paradox to me because I don't agree that the mental and physical are two completely separate things. I'm not a dualist.

Quote
What makes you think that inheritance can only be material , that it can only either be  genetic or epigenetic  ? What makes you exclude any non-physical form of inheritance then ?What makes you exclude the non-physical ,non -genetical ,non-epigenetical form of inheritance ?

 I don't exclude it. Science doesn't exclude it. But you'd have to have some kind of direct evidence to show that can be. Just saying "what if" or "how do you know it doesn't happen" isn't enough. It's not enough to make an idea like immaterial inheritance a scientific theory. It's stuck at being just a fanciful idea, without some kind of evidence for it.

Quote
What makes you think that science proper will not be able to discover those non-physical forms of inheritance , after rejecting materialism thus ?[/i]

Who knows, maybe it will. Science doesn't exclude the possibility. There's just no evidence for it so far. I don't understand your need to reject everything that has been explained so far by chemistry and physics, because of that possibility. A discovery like that wouldn't necessarily invalidate every other scientific finding, any more than epigenetics destroyed Natural Selection - it simply added more knowledge and better understanding.



« Last Edit: 26/11/2013 00:52:16 by cheryl j »
 

Offline dlorde

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1441
  • Thanked: 9 times
  • ex human-biologist & software developer
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #941 on: 25/11/2013 23:16:02 »
Repeated* LSD use isn't  necessary for a long-term effect : one use can be sufficient for permanent psychological injury ...
Sure, but chronic psychosis is extremely rare.

Quote
The extreme hyper-real / traumatic ("bad trip") LSD experience , like an extreme exogenous experience , can permanently reshape the person's psyche thereafter...
Yup, as can any traumatic experience, like a car accident, or a mugging. With psychedelics it's pretty rare. Naturally, the media ensure we hear about those instances. Ironically, LSD is a promising candidate for PTSD treatment (as is ecstasy).
 

Offline dlorde

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1441
  • Thanked: 9 times
  • ex human-biologist & software developer
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #942 on: 25/11/2013 23:42:38 »
You have to try to reconsider your own views regarding what science might be :
I've reconsidered my views about it many times, and continue to do so. If you could provide some coherent argument I'd take that into consideration too, but I'm still waiting to hear it.
 

Offline dlorde

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1441
  • Thanked: 9 times
  • ex human-biologist & software developer
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #943 on: 26/11/2013 00:36:41 »
The inheritance of certain mental illnesses ,for example, cannot be just the work, so to speak, of genes or epigenetics ,simply because the mental is irreducible to the physical or to the material : there might be some extra form of inheritance of the mental out there thus .I dunno : it just does not make sense to reduce everything,including the mental and psychological thus ,  to just the material or physical , to just genes physics and chemistry ,as the false mainstream "scientific world view " has been doing ...
My bolding. You're right; you don't know, and your incredulity is irrelevant. The genes involved in many heritable diseases have been identified, including some mental illnesses. Only a small minority of genetic diseases or disabilities are easily identifiable by a single dominant or recessive allele; the majority involve the interactions of many genes, and may require particular environmental contexts to be expressed. But when the pattern of inheritance of a mental disability matches the pattern of inheritance of a known genetic disease, a reasonable person suspects a similar genetic mechanism at work. In some cases, particular genes will predispose to certain behavioural tendencies, depending on the environment; for example the expression of a certain gene will predispose an individual to violent behaviour, but only if they have an abusive childhood. We should also expect random mutation to cause mental disabilities just as it causes physical disabilities; in this case, we would not expect to find a family history of it, but the incidence should be fairly consistent within the population.

We know that those abused as children often go on to abuse their own children, and without a detailed genetic analysis of many such instances, it's not possible to know how much genetics is directly involved, if any. So here is a potential non-genetic inheritance of undesirable behaviour. But there is also a reasonable and adequate well-established material explanation, i.e., conditioning. How you are treated as a child affects how you treat your children. These ideas are easy enough to test by looking at siblings raised by foster parents, identical twins raised by different parents, etc. Much work has been, and is being done, in these areas.

If you can provide an example of a mental disability that has no apparent genetic component and clearly does not originate from developmental influences, let me know, and we can... assess how likely it is to be of 'immaterial inheritance'? how would we do that? Surely the only reasonable path is to look for material causes because we can't look for immaterial causes. If we find no material cause, science will say, "unexplained", and you can say "see? it's immaterial!" (but only until science finds the material cause) :)

Of course it's possible that we will discover new mechanisms that can account for inheritance of traits and characteristics otherwise unaccounted for, science doesn't rule novelty out, but for serious consideration, you either need evidence of a new mechanism, or some data that isn't explained by the current model.

Go for it - let us know when you've got something interesting.
 

Offline dlorde

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1441
  • Thanked: 9 times
  • ex human-biologist & software developer
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #944 on: 26/11/2013 00:56:30 »
... I often wonder what the average person's response to Einstein's idea were in the early 1900s. The idea that time is not constant is about as counter-intuitive as it gets.
Indeed - and consider Einstein's response to quantum mechanics; he could never accept the underlying ideas, yet they turned out to be behind the most precise theory we ever constructed.

Don's intuitions are understandable, but as Gladwell explains in 'Blink' and 'Outliers', intuition without expertise in complex situations is asking for fail. Apparently Don has it in spades.
 

Offline Ethos_

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1277
  • Thanked: 14 times
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #945 on: 26/11/2013 00:57:50 »
Medically speaking, this forum has been infected with the DonQuicho-virus. I think it's time for some serious treatment!!!!!
 

Offline dlorde

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1441
  • Thanked: 9 times
  • ex human-biologist & software developer
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #946 on: 26/11/2013 00:58:15 »
Medically speaking, this forum has been infected with the DonQuicho-virus. I think it's time for some serious treatment!!!!!
:)
 

Offline DonQuichotte

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1763
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #947 on: 26/11/2013 17:49:57 »
Quote
Medically speaking, this forum has been infected with the DonQuicho-virus. I think it's time for some serious treatment!!!!!
[/quote]

It's about time to apply the materialist inquisitions, you mean , by burning the heretic Don, right ? 
You do like this kind of barbecue , i see .
Got some sort of refutations of what i have been saying ? Guess not .
Bon appetit,Mr . Cannibal  .
« Last Edit: 26/11/2013 17:52:54 by DonQuichotte »
 

Offline DonQuichotte

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1763
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #948 on: 26/11/2013 18:14:49 »
... I often wonder what the average person's response to Einstein's idea were in the early 1900s. The idea that time is not constant is about as counter-intuitive as it gets.
Indeed - and consider Einstein's response to quantum mechanics; he could never accept the underlying ideas, yet they turned out to be behind the most precise theory we ever constructed.

Don's intuitions are understandable, but as Gladwell explains in 'Blink' and 'Outliers', intuition without expertise in complex situations is asking for fail. Apparently Don has it in spades.
[/quote]

Ironically enough , i have read yesterday a part of this interesting book written by Chris Carter " Science and psychic phenomena : the fal of the house of skeptics " ,concerning the nature of science where Karl Popper was quoted by saying that he was fascinated by what Einstein said in a conference ,concerning his relativity theory ,that it took him years to come up with a solution to Hume's logical paradox concerning induction :
Einstein said something like the following :
No amount of verification or falsification of my theory ,now or in the future , can ever prove it to be true .
Karl Popper then went on talking about Hume's rejection of induction ,and about Bertrand Russell' s  attempts to address the latter while failing to do so .
Karl Popper's solution for Hume's logical rejection of induction was marvellous,induction without which science cannot exist or function  ,and therefore there would be no way to differentiate science from insanity or from pseudo-science  :
Karl Popper proposed that universal induction can only exist logically ,if we would take into consideration that it can only be temporary , in a form of a conjecture , not in a form of absolute truth :
A certain scientific theory ,or scientific knowledge as a whole , can thus only be conjectural ,not definite truths .
Scientific theories must  be falsifiable and can thus be proven to be false , but can never be proven to be true definitely : scientific theories and paradigms can compete with each other , and the ones which do happen to have more explanatory power take the upperhand, temporarily  ,thinks like that .

Which also means that the current materialist false -meta-paradigm that has been taken for granted as an absolute truth , that has been ossifying itself into a dogma thus ,by becoming unfalsifiable and thus unscientific , are reasons enough to abandon it .

The rise of anomalies such as consciousness , for example , are sometimes reasons enough to bandon the existing paradigm or meta-paradigm in science ,or at leat to try to modify them  somehow : in the case of materialism : no amount of modification can solve its falsehood : materialism must be thus rejected by all sciences thus .

 

Offline DonQuichotte

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1763
    • View Profile
Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #949 on: 26/11/2013 18:24:28 »
The inheritance of certain mental illnesses ,for example, cannot be just the work, so to speak, of genes or epigenetics ,simply because the mental is irreducible to the physical or to the material : there might be some extra form of inheritance of the mental out there thus .I dunno : it just does not make sense to reduce everything,including the mental and psychological thus ,  to just the material or physical , to just genes physics and chemistry ,as the false mainstream "scientific world view " has been doing ...
My bolding. You're right; you don't know, and your incredulity is irrelevant. The genes involved in many heritable diseases have been identified, including some mental illnesses. Only a small minority of genetic diseases or disabilities are easily identifiable by a single dominant or recessive allele; the majority involve the interactions of many genes, and may require particular environmental contexts to be expressed. But when the pattern of inheritance of a mental disability matches the pattern of inheritance of a known genetic disease, a reasonable person suspects a similar genetic mechanism at work. In some cases, particular genes will predispose to certain behavioural tendencies, depending on the environment; for example the expression of a certain gene will predispose an individual to violent behaviour, but only if they have an abusive childhood. We should also expect random mutation to cause mental disabilities just as it causes physical disabilities; in this case, we would not expect to find a family history of it, but the incidence should be fairly consistent within the population.

We know that those abused as children often go on to abuse their own children, and without a detailed genetic analysis of many such instances, it's not possible to know how much genetics is directly involved, if any. So here is a potential non-genetic inheritance of undesirable behaviour. But there is also a reasonable and adequate well-established material explanation, i.e., conditioning. How you are treated as a child affects how you treat your children. These ideas are easy enough to test by looking at siblings raised by foster parents, identical twins raised by different parents, etc. Much work has been, and is being done, in these areas.

If you can provide an example of a mental disability that has no apparent genetic component and clearly does not originate from developmental influences, let me know, and we can... assess how likely it is to be of 'immaterial inheritance'? how would we do that? Surely the only reasonable path is to look for material causes because we can't look for immaterial causes. If we find no material cause, science will say, "unexplained", and you can say "see? it's immaterial!" (but only until science finds the material cause) :)

Of course it's possible that we will discover new mechanisms that can account for inheritance of traits and characteristics otherwise unaccounted for, science doesn't rule novelty out, but for serious consideration, you either need evidence of a new mechanism, or some data that isn't explained by the current model.

Go for it - let us know when you've got something interesting.
[/quote]

You can try to sing all night and day long about my presumed ignorance or incredulity , but , you can't make the fact go away that you all have been unable so far to understand my point of view ,regarding the inheritance of mental illnesses and regarding the possible inheritance of the psychological and mental effects of  past tragic events by the next generations and beyond .

Mental illnesses , for example , that can be inded inherited , do have 2 sides to them : the physiological and the mental, the latter that's irreducible to the physical :
So, the inheritance of those mental illnesses does happen physiologically and mentally : the physiological part of those mental illnesses is a matter of biology genes, and the mental aspect of those mental illnesses thus might be passed on non-physically , i guess .
But , since , you cannot but reduce everything to just physics and chemistry , thanks to materialism thus , you cannot but reduce the inheritance of mental illnesses  and the rest  ,and all other forms of inheritance , including the epigenetic enviromental one , to just ...physiology thus .
Get that ?

In short :
Only when science will reject materialism , only then ,science will be able to discover non-physical forms of causation , including non-physical forms of inheritance that  are just the other side of the genetic or epigenetic forms of inheritance , since everything in nature is both material physical ,and non -material non-physical, including life that's both a material physical biological process , and a non-physical non-material mental one , the latter that cannot be reduced to the physical .

Is that so difficult to understand , scientist ?
« Last Edit: 26/11/2013 18:30:59 by DonQuichotte »
 

The Naked Scientists Forum

Re: What, on Earth, is The Human Consciousness?
« Reply #949 on: 26/11/2013 18:24:28 »

 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums