0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Quote from: DonQuichotte on 25/11/2014 18:42:54In short :The physical brain is just a medium through which consciousness 'flows " or expresses itself , the brain as a transceiver ,so when certain areas of the brain are damaged or don't work properly due to diseases , genetic defects , ... consciousness gets disconnected at those levels ... and hence does not get through : that does absolutely not mean that the physical brain produces consciousness . Got it ? I "get" that you're basing your theory on a bad analogy about the brain being a receiver, for which there is not a shred of evidence in support, and a great deal of evidence that indicates it's not true, not even "metaphorically." I can repost the evidence if you need to review it.
In short :The physical brain is just a medium through which consciousness 'flows " or expresses itself , the brain as a transceiver ,so when certain areas of the brain are damaged or don't work properly due to diseases , genetic defects , ... consciousness gets disconnected at those levels ... and hence does not get through : that does absolutely not mean that the physical brain produces consciousness . Got it ?
In short :
Quote from: alancalverd on 25/11/2014 18:29:43So are you admitting that nonmaterialist science doesn't actually predict anything? I am rather actually saying that you are such a lazy scientist without any imagination whatsoever ,let alone any sense of humour, Alan ,sorry , that's no insult , just a fact deduced from your silly behaviour : check out the works of non-materialist scientists on the subject : I spend so much time and energy trying to explain simple things to you ,and what do i get in return ? : just silly remarks from you .Thanks a lot for nothing :http://opensciences.org/about/manifesto-for-a-post-materialist-science"Imagination is more important than knowledge " Einstein .Imagination that has been behind many scientific discoveries ,if not behind all of them, behind works of art , literature...
So are you admitting that nonmaterialist science doesn't actually predict anything?
+ This is yet another materialistic tragic -hilarious so-called theory of consciousness by neuroscientist Michael S.A.Graziano : You might like it lol :http://aeon.co/magazine/philosophy/how-consciousness-works/
I said : the physical brain is just a medium through which consciousness expresses itself , both ways : the brain as a transceiver = transmitter-receiver = transmits information from the external environment through the senses to the mind or consciousness , and receives the corresponding feedback from the mind or consciousness : that's the only logical or rational explanation of the mind-brain relationship .The physical brain is just the vehicle through which the consciousness driver ,so to speak, expresses itself by driving its vehicle : the brain : both the vehicle and the driver are inseparable though : they can't function without each other , although the driver remains intact despite the damaged vehicle : the driver just can't express itself through the damaged vehicle ,simply because it gets disconnected from it : in the case of brain damage thus ,brain diseases , malfunction ....the brain vehicle behaves accordingly ,so, the driver is prevented from driving its brain vehicle : that's no ghost in the machine , since the brain and body are no machines , but living organisms that have to be driven by consciousness or the mind ....The activity of the neuronal correlates of consciousness is just the physical "translation " of that of the 'corresponding " consciousness : just the image of the process , not the cause of the process ......
As lunatic Dennett said , and rightly so : " There is no such thing as philosophy -free science ..." : science has thus been based on the 19th century outdated , false and superseded materialistic philosophy .There is even what can be called the philosophy of physics also (see Einstein on the subject in relation to his great debate with Bohr ...) .
You could invent any number of scenarios about how a physical manifestation is just a “correlation” and not the thing itself. Since there are no examples of disembodied consciousness just floating around by itself, Ockham’s razor would suggest that you are needlessly complicating things by saying X isn’t really X. It’s really Y, even though it always takes the form of X, and never appears just as Y.
author=dlorde link=topic=52526.msg445303#msg445303 date=1416959001]Quote from: DonQuichotte on 25/11/2014 17:14:11+ This is yet another materialistic tragic -hilarious so-called theory of consciousness by neuroscientist Michael S.A.Graziano : You might like it lol :http://aeon.co/magazine/philosophy/how-consciousness-works/Thanks for that - I hadn't seen that article, and yes, I do like it. It's pretty much the way I currently view the generation and role of consciousness and the sense of self [8D]
Good to see your posts aren't always a complete waste of time []
Quote from: cheryl j on 26/11/2014 02:28:48You could invent any number of scenarios about how a physical manifestation is just a “correlation” and not the thing itself. Since there are no examples of disembodied consciousness just floating around by itself, Ockham’s razor would suggest that you are needlessly complicating things by saying X isn’t really X. It’s really Y, even though it always takes the form of X, and never appears just as Y. It can't appear as Y and can't be falsified because, by definition, it's 'immaterial'. Not only does it introduce the interaction problem, but it requires an entire immaterial universe (or 'realm' as the mystics like to call it). It's special pleading of the most egregious kind, and Ockham would be spinning in his grave.Given that damage to the brain can change, disrupt, or destroy all the known attributes of consciousness, including personality, character, emotion, attention, recognition, understanding, sense of self, focus, and awareness, there is no substantive function for this supposed 'immaterial consciousness' to fulfil - he's inventing an entire immaterial realm to support some sort of simple, undifferentiated, undetectable 'elan vital' that has no discernable function. It's absurd and irrational (and I suspect he realises that).
Quote from: DonQuichotte on 25/11/2014 20:50:06I said : the physical brain is just a medium through which consciousness expresses itself , both ways : the brain as a transceiver = transmitter-receiver = transmits information from the external environment through the senses to the mind or consciousness , and receives the corresponding feedback from the mind or consciousness : that's the only logical or rational explanation of the mind-brain relationship .The physical brain is just the vehicle through which the consciousness driver ,so to speak, expresses itself by driving its vehicle : the brain : both the vehicle and the driver are inseparable though : they can't function without each other , although the driver remains intact despite the damaged vehicle : the driver just can't express itself through the damaged vehicle ,simply because it gets disconnected from it : in the case of brain damage thus ,brain diseases , malfunction ....the brain vehicle behaves accordingly ,so, the driver is prevented from driving its brain vehicle : that's no ghost in the machine , since the brain and body are no machines , but living organisms that have to be driven by consciousness or the mind ....The activity of the neuronal correlates of consciousness is just the physical "translation " of that of the 'corresponding " consciousness : just the image of the process , not the cause of the process ......That’s groovy, Don. But sort of meaningless, when you think about it. Not only is it untestable, but you can apply it to anything and everything with the same meaningless result. It’s like saying that water isn’t really H2O molecules, water just “uses” the molecules to “express” its watery-ness. And infectious diseases are not caused by bacteria and viruses, but are actually caused by demons that always possess certain species of bacteria and viruses. The mircoorganisms are just the "medium", not the cause. And wind is not air molecules moving from an area of high pressure to low pressure (do not confuse the image with the process!) That is just the “vehicle” through which the wind spirit acts. Occasionally, wind gets “stuck” and cannot “flow properly” and that is what causes it to seem “not so windy outside.” You could invent any number of scenarios about how a physical manifestation is just a “correlation” and not the thing itself. Since there are no examples of disembodied consciousness just floating around by itself, Ockham’s razor would suggest that you are needlessly complicating things by saying X isn’t really X. It’s really Y, even though it always takes the form of X, and never appears just as Y.
Quote from: dlorde on 26/11/2014 09:03:52Given that damage to the brain can change, disrupt, or destroy all the known attributes of consciousness, including personality, character, emotion, attention, recognition, understanding, sense of self, focus, and awareness, there is no substantive function for this supposed 'immaterial consciousness' to fulfil...So, you reduce the very existence of the non-physical nature of consciousness to just that old and refuted elan vital ? Odd, despite all the indirect overwhelming empirical evidence proving consciousness to be a non-physical and non-local process ?.
Given that damage to the brain can change, disrupt, or destroy all the known attributes of consciousness, including personality, character, emotion, attention, recognition, understanding, sense of self, focus, and awareness, there is no substantive function for this supposed 'immaterial consciousness' to fulfil...
author=dlorde link=topic=52526.msg445346#msg445346 date=1417037049]Quote from: DonQuichotte on 26/11/2014 18:57:53Quote from: dlorde on 26/11/2014 09:03:52Given that damage to the brain can change, disrupt, or destroy all the known attributes of consciousness, including personality, character, emotion, attention, recognition, understanding, sense of self, focus, and awareness, there is no substantive function for this supposed 'immaterial consciousness' to fulfil...So, you reduce the very existence of the non-physical nature of consciousness to just that old and refuted elan vital ? Odd, despite all the indirect overwhelming empirical evidence proving consciousness to be a non-physical and non-local process ?.Well, no; I see no evidence whatsoever for non-physical consciousness. I was exploring the implications of such a hypothesis.
By all means enlighten me - how does your non-physical consciousness hypothesis account for the observations I outlined above? (I asked you this previously, but you declined to respond).
... damage to the brain can change, disrupt, or destroy all the known attributes of consciousness, including personality, character, emotion, attention, recognition, understanding, sense of self, focus, and awareness...how does your non-physical consciousness hypothesis account for the observations I outlined above?
I have already responded to that , dlorde :
In short : consciousness gets disconnected from its damaged neuronal correlates and hence does not get through , i guess...
Once more - how does your non-material consciousness hypothesis account for brain damage causing changes to personality, character, emotion, attention, recognition, understanding, sense of self, focus, and awareness, unless those features are actually all functions of the brain? What is left for this proposed non-material consciousness to do?
... Gotta go ...
(Occam's razor can be twisted in any irrational way to make it fit into whatever we a -priori believe in .........Correlation and causality have been hotly debated and still , but nevertheless correlation does not necessarily imply causation : there is a very thin line between the 2 , but that does not mean they are synonymous of each other , even though the correlation concept can be sometimes misused and extended beyond its limits , the same goes for causality ...... ......there is plenty of evidence or an overwhelming body of empirical evidence proving . indirectly that is , consciousness to be non-physical and non-local : that fact can be inferred from the related experiment........In short : consciousness gets disconnected from its damaged neuronal correlates and hence does not get through , i guess,since consciousness has to work through the brain .
author=dlorde link=topic=52526.msg445354#msg445354 date=1417041962]Quote from: dlorde... damage to the brain can change, disrupt, or destroy all the known attributes of consciousness, including personality, character, emotion, attention, recognition, understanding, sense of self, focus, and awareness...how does your non-physical consciousness hypothesis account for the observations I outlined above?Quote from: DonQuichotte on 26/11/2014 21:43:52I have already responded to that , dlorde :Link to the post please.
QuoteIn short : consciousness gets disconnected from its damaged neuronal correlates and hence does not get through , i guess...Odd that after pasting reams of non-materialist rants, you so often run out of time when asked specific questions. Once more - how does your non-material consciousness hypothesis account for brain damage causing changes to personality, character, emotion, attention, recognition, understanding, sense of self, focus, and awareness, unless those features are actually all functions of the brain? What is left for this proposed non-material consciousness to do?
Quote from: DonQuichotte on 26/11/2014 21:43:52 ... Gotta go ...That's now over a year Don's been saying "gotta go" ...https://www.google.com/search?q="Gotta+go"++DonQuichotte+site:www.thenakedscientists.comYet he's still here , repeating himself ad nauseam.