someting to think about

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

tae1703

Senior Member
15+ Year Member
20+ Year Member
Joined
Jul 16, 2003
Messages
264
Reaction score
0
what is med school anyway? what is school? is school real? maybe its just a state of mind. in that case, what are you? what am i? are we real? are these words real? how do u know u see these words? bc ur eyes told you so? maybe ur eyes arent real either. nothing is real. real is nothing. u r nothing. i am nothing. nothing is nothing. but if nothing is nothing, what is all of this? its nothing, yet i see it, u see it, it makes no sense, its loco. loco? what is loco? loco is nothing, bc nothing is nothing. we dont exist, nothing exists, then what r we doing here. oh wait, but we are not here, we are nowhere. where is nowhere? nowhere is a place that is not a place. have u been nowhere b4? perhaps we are already nowhere. but where is nowhere, no one knows, no one knows anything bc they are nothing, nothing is nothing and nowhere is nowhere. :eek: :scared: :(

Members don't see this ad.
 
"What is real? How do you define real? If you're talking about your senses, what you feel, taste, smell, or see, then all you're talking about are electrical signals interpreted by your brain."
 
Contrary to the widely held belief, human beings are not conscious. We are simply a highly complex and efficient neural network that integrates information from incoming stimuli and past experiences. These experiences are not some metaphysical entity existing somewhere beyond the physical boundaries of the brain. These experiences are simply stored in the synapses of the neurons in your brain. There is no freedom of thought since consciousness does not exist.

Sorry to burst your bubble.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
what are neurons? what are electrical signals? if nothing is nothing then they are nothing
 
Oh course nothing is nothing. By the very definition of "is," nothing = nothing. I don't see what that has to do with neurons.
 
i know im real cause the sex felt good.
 
ForensicPath said:
Contrary to the widely held belief, human beings are not conscious. We are simply a highly complex and efficient neural network that integrates information from incoming stimuli and past experiences. These experiences are not some metaphysical entity existing somewhere beyond the physical boundaries of the brain. These experiences are simply stored in the synapses of the neurons in your brain. There is no freedom of thought since consciousness does not exist.

Sorry to burst your bubble.

Can you prove this?
 
bah. well I do think determinism is generally true, but it doesn't kill free will and so as a consequence does not matter. Compatibilism, as defined by Wikipedia is:

"Compatibilism, also known as "soft determinism" and most famously championed by Hume, is a theory which holds that free will and determinism are compatible. According to Hume, free will should not be understood as an absolute ability to have chosen differently under exactly the same inner and outer circumstances. Rather, it is a hypothetical ability to have chosen differently if one had been differently psychologically disposed by some different beliefs or desires. Alternately, Hume maintains that free acts are not uncaused (or mysteriously self-caused as Kant would have it) but caused in the right way, i.e., by our choices as determined by our beliefs and desires, by our characters. While a decision making process exists in Hume's determinism, this process is governed by the so-called causal chain of events. For example, a person may make the decision to support Wikipedia, but that decision is determined by the conditions that existed prior to the decision being made.

The opposing view, that free will cannot be consistent with determinism, is sometimes called incompatibilism. The pessimistic version, sometimes known as hard determinism, is that neither determinism nor indeterminism permit free will; Hume also considered free will inconsistent with indeterminism. One incompatibilist position holds that "free will" refers to genuine (e.g. absolute, ultimate) alternate possibilities for beliefs, desires or actions, and that such possibilities are absent from the compatibilist definitions. In the absence of such possibilities, the argument that free will confers responsibility is fraudulent.

Some views are less easily categorized. The libertarian position is that our experience of free will implies the universe is not deterministic. Some advocates of this view consider it compatible with determinism in the "physical" universe, but believe "mental" events are different. "

PF Strawson supported the compatibilist argument with his work including "Freedom and Resentment." The epistemology of consciousness isn't going to change even if we are fundamentally functionalist minds. Read "Consciousness Explained" by Dan Dennet to also see what I mean
 
Gbemi24 said:
Can you prove this?

Nothing in philosophy can be proven. Philosophy is not science.

Your "mind" is really just the very complex and highly efficient interaction of neurons. How these neurons interact is determined by two things: genetics and experience. Therefore, no two people are alike (even if they are 100% genetically identical) and will respond to their environment as laid out by the plan in their neural network. Each experience you have imparts some physical change onto your neurons that remains in what we call memories. These then interact with present stimuli as they are presented to your brain neurons through your senses.

Quick thought experiment:
Steal a baby from the nursery in a hospital just seconds after it is born. Put it in a room and do not allow it to receive any external stimuli from the environment. Nourish it and allow it to grow and develop, but do not allow it to receive any information from any of the senses. After 20 years, let the person out (remember, you nourished it and it is a physically healthy 20 year old human). Will this person be conscious? My bet is that the person will not be conscious and I would even go as far as to say that he will not even have knowledge of himself. In other words he would be a blank slate waiting for "consciousness" to develop from the neuronal changes caused by neurons.

Consciousness is an "illusion" created through evolution that allows the information from the environment to be condensed into a more manageable and storable form. Much like an mp3 condenses the information in a song into a storable and readable format for a computer.

Free will is an illusion. Sorry religions, it is true.
 
Free will doesn't have to exist. It feels like we have free will right? So, even if we are being completely controlled it doesn't matter. We can't tell if we have free will or not.
 
tae1703 said:
what is med school anyway? what is school? is school real? maybe its just a state of mind. in that case, what are you? what am i? are we real? are these words real? how do u know u see these words? bc ur eyes told you so? maybe ur eyes arent real either. nothing is real. real is nothing. u r nothing. i am nothing. nothing is nothing. but if nothing is nothing, what is all of this? its nothing, yet i see it, u see it, it makes no sense, its loco. loco? what is loco? loco is nothing, bc nothing is nothing. we dont exist, nothing exists, then what r we doing here. oh wait, but we are not here, we are nowhere. where is nowhere? nowhere is a place that is not a place. have u been nowhere b4? perhaps we are already nowhere. but where is nowhere, no one knows, no one knows anything bc they are nothing, nothing is nothing and nowhere is nowhere. :eek: :scared: :(



That Oregon weed I sent you is good ****, huh?
 
tae1703 said:
what is med school anyway? what is school? is school real? maybe its just a state of mind. in that case, what are you? what am i? are we real? are these words real? how do u know u see these words? bc ur eyes told you so? maybe ur eyes arent real either. nothing is real. real is nothing. u r nothing. i am nothing. nothing is nothing. but if nothing is nothing, what is all of this? its nothing, yet i see it, u see it, it makes no sense, its loco. loco? what is loco? loco is nothing, bc nothing is nothing. we dont exist, nothing exists, then what r we doing here. oh wait, but we are not here, we are nowhere. where is nowhere? nowhere is a place that is not a place. have u been nowhere b4? perhaps we are already nowhere. but where is nowhere, no one knows, no one knows anything bc they are nothing, nothing is nothing and nowhere is nowhere. :eek: :scared: :(


Hmmm... maybe that second tab of acid was overkill? Word to the wise, reality questioning not withstanding, you cannot fly. :laugh:
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Nanon said:
Hmmm... maybe that second tab of acid was overkill? Word to the wise, reality questioning not withstanding, you cannot fly. :laugh:

I'M A GOLDEN GOD!!
 
ForensicPath said:
Nothing in philosophy can be proven. Philosophy is not science.

Your "mind" is really just the very complex and highly efficient interaction of neurons. How these neurons interact is determined by two things: genetics and experience. Therefore, no two people are alike (even if they are 100% genetically identical) and will respond to their environment as laid out by the plan in their neural network. Each experience you have imparts some physical change onto your neurons that remains in what we call memories. These then interact with present stimuli as they are presented to your brain neurons through your senses.

Quick thought experiment:
Steal a baby from the nursery in a hospital just seconds after it is born. Put it in a room and do not allow it to receive any external stimuli from the environment. Nourish it and allow it to grow and develop, but do not allow it to receive any information from any of the senses. After 20 years, let the person out (remember, you nourished it and it is a physically healthy 20 year old human). Will this person be conscious? My bet is that the person will not be conscious and I would even go as far as to say that he will not even have knowledge of himself. In other words he would be a blank slate waiting for "consciousness" to develop from the neuronal changes caused by neurons.

Consciousness is an "illusion" created through evolution that allows the information from the environment to be condensed into a more manageable and storable form. Much like an mp3 condenses the information in a song into a storable and readable format for a computer.

Free will is an illusion. Sorry religions, it is true.
actually, philosophy is the only way things can be proven. Science is a posteriori, and epistomologically speaking, can't be proven because one can question the reality of our observation and experience.

Socrates is a man.
All men are mortal.
Socrates is mortal.

Being illusory doesn't mean that something isn't real. The illusion is very real even if its content has no basis in reality. Consciousness is real...I have thoughts whatever mechanism is controlling them...the physically-regulated firing of neurons or "will". Cogito ergo sum.
 
Dammit, don't use Descartes's ****ty proof of God. :)
 
ForensicPath said:
Nothing in philosophy can be proven. Philosophy is not science.

Your "mind" is really just the very complex and highly efficient interaction of neurons. How these neurons interact is determined by two things: genetics and experience. Therefore, no two people are alike (even if they are 100% genetically identical) and will respond to their environment as laid out by the plan in their neural network. Each experience you have imparts some physical change onto your neurons that remains in what we call memories. These then interact with present stimuli as they are presented to your brain neurons through your senses.

Quick thought experiment:
Steal a baby from the nursery in a hospital just seconds after it is born. Put it in a room and do not allow it to receive any external stimuli from the environment. Nourish it and allow it to grow and develop, but do not allow it to receive any information from any of the senses. After 20 years, let the person out (remember, you nourished it and it is a physically healthy 20 year old human). Will this person be conscious? My bet is that the person will not be conscious and I would even go as far as to say that he will not even have knowledge of himself. In other words he would be a blank slate waiting for "consciousness" to develop from the neuronal changes caused by neurons.

Consciousness is an "illusion" created through evolution that allows the information from the environment to be condensed into a more manageable and storable form. Much like an mp3 condenses the information in a song into a storable and readable format for a computer.

Free will is an illusion. Sorry religions, it is true.



I used to think this too, but I dont anymore. It took just one trip to understand that there is something inside me that is not made of matter.. if you know what i mean..
 
Side note: There was an experiment where they would completely remove all external stimuli (sound, touch, smell, sight...all of them) as much as possible. The subjects in these experiments began hallucinating severely after a while. Weird ehh?
 
I never said I was a golden god ;)
 
indo said:
Side note: There was an experiment where they would completely remove all external stimuli (sound, touch, smell, sight...all of them) as much as possible. The subjects in these experiments began hallucinating severely after a while. Weird ehh?

Indo... wasn't that was a movie? "Altered States," I believe. (Awesome movie from the 70's, by the way, and perfect with a little mj and a beer). And, of course, a brilliant "Simpsons" episode.

Who knows. Maybe these were all based on real experiments of the effects of isolation tanks, but for the most part, most people report that it's just deeply relaxing.
 
Science cannot prove anything. Science can only gives SUPPORTS. Nothing can ever be proved.
 
Nanon said:
Indo... wasn't that was a movie? "Altered States," I believe. (Awesome movie from the 70's, by the way, and perfect with a little mj and a beer). And, of course, a brilliant "Simpsons" episode.

Who knows. Maybe these were all based on real experiments of the effects of isolation tanks, but for the most part, most people report that it's just deeply relaxing.

There are several movies about these experiments. One is called "Mind Benders".

Here....read this:

http://articles.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_g2699/is_0003/ai_2699000310

Sensory deprivation experiments of the 1950s have shown that human beings need environmental stimulation to function normally. In a classic early experiment, college students lay on a cot in a small, empty cubicle nearly 24 hours a day, leaving only to eat and use the bathroom. They wore translucent goggles that let in light but prevented them from seeing any shapes or patterns, and they were fitted with cotton gloves and cardboard cuffs to restrict the sense of touch. The continuous hum of an air conditioner and U-shaped pillows placed around their heads blocked out auditory stimulation.

Initially, the subjects slept, but eventually they became bored, restless, and moody. They became disoriented and had difficulty concentrating, and their performance on problem-solving tests progressively deteriorated the longer they were isolated in the cubicle. Some experienced auditory or visual hallucinations. Although they were paid a generous sum for each day they participated in the experiment, most subjects refused to continue past the second or third day. After they left the isolation chamber, the perceptions of many were temporarily distorted, and their brain-wave patterns, which had slowed down during the experiment, took several hours to return to normal. The intensity of the discomfort these volunteers experienced helps explain why solitary confinement is often regarded as the most severe form of punishment in prisons.

The deterioration in both physical and psychological functioning that occurs with sensory deprivation has been linked to the need of human beings for an optimal level of arousal. Too much or too little arousal can produce stress and impair a person's mental and physical abilities. Thus, appropriate degrees of sensory deprivation may actually have a therapeutic effect when arousal levels are too high. A form of sensory deprivation known as REST (restricted environmental stimulation), which consists of floating for several hours in a dark, soundproof tank of water heated to body temperature, has been used to treat drug and smoking addictions, lower back pain, and other conditions associated with excessive stress.
Further Reading
For Your Information
Lilly, John Cunningham. The Deep Self: Profound Relaxation and the Tank Isolation Technique. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1977.
Solomon, Philip. Sensory Deprivation: A Symposium Held at Harvard Medical School. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1961.
 
If you truly believe that you are nothing but your genes and senses, then you still are going to have quite a few tough questions to answer. What gives any value to human life? Why do actions matter on this earth if ultimately they are meaningless? Why does it matter whether the human race stays or becomes extinct? Is there any reason to apply morality to your actions? Should you turn to a life of hedonism because a pleasure-filled life feels best (if this one life is all we have)? How can you hold anyone accountable for their actions if their genes determine them?

Science is absolutely limited, as much as we rejoice in its advances. I do not believe that we can reduce humanity to neuronal discharges.
 
Pleasure and pain man, pleasure and pain :)
 
Asclepius said:
actually, philosophy is the only way things can be proven. Science is a posteriori, and epistomologically speaking, can't be proven because one can question the reality of our observation and experience.

Socrates is a man.
All men are mortal.
Socrates is mortal.

Being illusory doesn't mean that something isn't real. The illusion is very real even if its content has no basis in reality. Consciousness is real...I have thoughts whatever mechanism is controlling them...the physically-regulated firing of neurons or "will". Cogito ergo sum.

I'm drunk, but let me try to respond anyway.

Of course the illusion of consciousness is real. It wouldn't be a very effective survival device if it weren't. Mother natures is that "evil deceiver" that Descartes was talking about, only she doesn't really intend to deceive. Consciousness is the biggest deception of all time. You have thoughts, but unfortunately, you are not controlling them. Even if a thought seems random, it is not. You can always trace it back to some external stimuli. Some stimulus (smell, sight, etc..) triggered a thought, which was closely connected to another thought, and so on... Creativity and random thinking is generated by external stimuli and pre-existing memories in the form of the physical neuronal synapses. Your so-called "free-will" is the greatest achievement thus far in evolutionary history. Nature has created brains (through evolution) that have fooled humans into thinking they have control of their own bodies. This so-called control allows humans to condense and efficiently integrate many stimuli from their external environment.

It is true that you can question the reality of our observation, but to do so would just be fruity. I understand what you are saying about the reality of our experience (Nagel- "We will never know what it is like to be a bat"), but that doesn't change the fact that we can still "measure" and create relationships. These relationships tend to be universal no matter who or what experiences them in how many different ways.

P.S. The fact that the possibility for different types of experiences exists for the same event kind of proves my point. I forgot what I else I was going to say because I am hella drunk. Argue more because I am sure what I said didn't make sense.
 
ForensicPath said:
Nature has created brains (through evolution) that have fooled humans into thinking they have control of their own bodies. This so-called control allows humans to condense and efficiently integrate many stimuli from their external environment.

Are you an agent? Are we in the matrix?

.. but seriously, determinism is a question that's been around for ages. We still don't know "jack" about consiousness. We know there are neurons and spikes, but we have no idea about the brain as a whole. where do thoughts exist?...

An interesting study (I forgot from where) suggested that we act BEFORE we think. This basically means most of what we do is instinctive, but our brain/conscious is tricked into thinking it initiated the action.
 
G_Eagle said:
If you truly believe that you are nothing but your genes and senses, then you still are going to have quite a few tough questions to answer. What gives any value to human life? Why do actions matter on this earth if ultimately they are meaningless? Why does it matter whether the human race stays or becomes extinct? Is there any reason to apply morality to your actions? Should you turn to a life of hedonism because a pleasure-filled life feels best (if this one life is all we have)? How can you hold anyone accountable for their actions if their genes determine them?

Science is absolutely limited, as much as we rejoice in its advances. I do not believe that we can reduce humanity to neuronal discharges.

I am going to respond to things based on my experiences. Part of my experiences include being raised in an environment that is Judeo-christian. Thats how morality plays into it. You would not turn to a hedonistic lifestyle because in essence, you have been "trained" not to. I don't understand why the human race can't come to grips with the possibility that life may have no meaning. Why does life need a meaning? If you found out tomorrow that life had no meaning, would you just kill yourself? I wouldn't. Maybe we are just here because of some random and lucky chemical reactions "got it right." Maybe there is a god that just kind of spun things into motion, but never really gave life a meaning at all. "What gives value to human life?" How about nothing. Why is human life any more valuable than my dog's life or the life of the sparrow chirping in the tree outside. Just because our brain evolved into a more efficient machine than that of another animal, that doesn't make our life any more valuable. Life is basically meaningless in the "metaphysical" sense, but that doesn't mean that it is meaningless in the evolutionary sense.
 
there's noting to think about. :D
 
kels said:
An interesting study (I forgot from where) suggested that we act BEFORE we think. This basically means most of what we do is instinctive, but our brain/conscious is tricked into thinking it initiated the action.

yes (my message is too short, i need 10 characters)
 
If life doesn't have to have meaning, then we shouldn't get upset when people do things that violate the morals that our society accepts. They are just performing what their instincts tell them. There is no reason for altruism (unless it is to seek pleasure from it). There is no reason to sacrifice your life for another. There is no reason to live for anyone but yourself.
 
ForensicPath said:
Contrary to the widely held belief, human beings are not conscious. We are simply a highly complex and efficient neural network that integrates information from incoming stimuli and past experiences. These experiences are not some metaphysical entity existing somewhere beyond the physical boundaries of the brain. These experiences are simply stored in the synapses of the neurons in your brain. There is no freedom of thought since consciousness does not exist.

Sorry to burst your bubble.

What a sad way to go through life... :( Would you like me to be your friend?
 
Sean2tall said:
"What is real? How do you define real? If you're talking about your senses, what you feel, taste, smell, or see, then all you're talking about are electrical signals interpreted by your brain."

Arguing is futile because none of us is right, so I won't bother. Instead, here are some quotes from a certain awesome movie I'd like to share.

"What is real? How do you define real? If real is what you can feel, smell, taste and see, then 'real' is simply electrical signals interpreted by your brain."

"Have you ever had a dream...that you were so sure was real? What if you were unable to wake from that dream? How would you know the difference between the dream world and the real world?"

and see my sig
 
G_Eagle said:
If life doesn't have to have meaning, then we shouldn't get upset when people do things that violate the morals that our society accepts. They are just performing what their instincts tell them. There is no reason for altruism (unless it is to seek pleasure from it). There is no reason to sacrifice your life for another. There is no reason to live for anyone but yourself.

Why can't we accept that? Why does life need meaning? Why can't we just live?

Altruism is not unique to only humans. There are many "lower" species that exhibit altruism. It offers some evolutionary advantage to those that are willing to perform altruistic activities.

Yes, crimes and the like do bring certain problems into the equation, so to speak. I will contend that, as you pointed out, that crime really can't exist in the way we think of it because free will doesn't exist. However, evolution (both biological and social) has made it more advantageous not to commit crimes. The human is a social animal that relies on societies in order to survive. Evolution has given us a tool that allows us to weed out those that attempt to disrupt that important social structure.

"There is no reason to live for anyone but yourself."
The human is an inherently selfish species. I guarantee you every single act you or others perform can be traced back to selfishness.


Spitting Camel said:
What a sad way to go through life... Would you like me to be your friend?

Sorry, but I find that highly patronizing. Why is that a sad way to go through life? I am having a good time and I will continue to have a good time and be a decent person while I'm at it. Are you saying that all atheists and agnostics have a pitiful existence because we don't believe in or care if there is a higher good or meaning to life? If so, then I pity you.
 
Top