no, matrix is as real as the real world. only the constructs are computer generated as opposed to generated by physical molecules. still every person in the matrix VIEWS the matrix differently due to their perception of the stimuli matrix provides{which is just like the stimuli the real world provides}, their perception of matrix is not the matrix {infact this is easier to ddescribe with the matric}, after all, WHAT is the matrix? is it a cg world? is it just a long bunch of zeros and ones? or is it the electron pulses running through wires or photon pulses running through plastic cables?
ans: it is all of them and none of them. since all of them are an interpretation if the thing which IS the matrix. hehehe, this is much more fun to describe.
Originally posted by leonheartmm
lol, up to your old tricks again 😉 .we see it as different because the FEALING OF SIGHT= PHYSICAL PROCESS OF SIGHT, has certain absurd implications. even if it an unquestionable axiom to you.
take one for example, you see a pyramid. you have a certain mental picture of it. but in all due fairness, that same thing can be interpreted in a million different ways. people could touch it, smell it, tase it etc. a mole wud see it through reflection of sound waves and its mental picture would be inevitably different from yours. yet its the same object. so wouldnt it be a little absurd to make the claim that{even if EVERY1 sees it the same way when looking visually} the object IS the visual sight and nothing else?? i say nuthing else because in REALITY an object can only be one unified things, irresepective of people's interpretations. then why do you beleive the object IS your mental image and not the mental image of a mole????
Neurological process of vision being the same as "What I see" does not mean that any object does or does not exist. It, in fact, says nothing about objects.
What it means is that, there is nothing in our brain watching our processes of sight, although thats how it feels. My point is that there is no difference between the mechanisms of sight and "seeing" something.
Moles, afaik do NOT use echolocation, but in fact use tactile and scent based navigation. Either way, to word this for your echolocating mole: the neurological mechanisms responsible for constructing the mole's internal representation of the world are the exact same thing as what the mole is "experiencing" through its sensory modalities.
^ but again, you are implying that the neurological processes ARE the perception and not anything else ultimately {i.e. the sharing of electrical impulses, the integration of neurons, systems of entropy, matrices of entropy channels etc etc etc} the problem is, if you define them ULTIMATELY as perception, then it is NOT other things and i find that hard to beleive.
Originally posted by leonheartmm
^ but again, you are implying that the neurological processes ARE the perception and not anything else ultimately {i.e. the sharing of electrical impulses, the integration of neurons, systems of entropy, matrices of entropy channels etc etc etc} the problem is, if you define them ULTIMATELY as perception, then it is NOT other things and i find that hard to beleive.
well, as a materialist, you are going to have to show me some really good evidence to show that they are not.
Don't get me wrong, not all neurological processes are responsible for perception. But those involved in the processing of stimuli are inseparable from our perception of that stimuli.
I'm not a dualist, for what I believe are very good reasons. I think this, as with our other conversations on the matter, is as close as we are going to come to consensus. 🙂 word though, always a good talk.
Hey, you are from Pakistan right?
Originally posted by inimalist
well, as a materialist, you are going to have to show me some really good evidence to show that they are not.Don't get me wrong, not all neurological processes are responsible for perception. But those involved in the processing of stimuli are inseparable from our perception of that stimuli.
I'm not a dualist, for what I believe are very good reasons. I think this, as with our other conversations on the matter, is as close as we are going to come to consensus. 🙂 word though, always a good talk.
Hey, you are from Pakistan right?
erm, the thing is, that if you do that, then your saying that the terms "the sharing of electrical impulses, the integration of neurons, systems of entropy, matrices of entropy channels.... " or watever it is defined as are interpretations of the basic CONCIOUSNESS, but CONCIOUSNESS "isnt" an interpretation of the above mentioned terms. i just find that kinda hard to understand. also, i find it hard to understand why the mental processed give rise to SELF awareness{ and qualia as sum percieve it}, i mean, you can say all you want that, that is just the way it is at its basis, but it doesnt seem that way to me, we cud well NOT have this awareness, or conciousness as we feal it and be soulless{forgive the phrase, i cudnt think of a better one to get a point across} robots who ACT physically the same as if we had a conciousness based on predetermined interaction of particles and forces. but WHY shud this physical integration lead to anything MORE than a machine with nothing in the mind to SEE{often described as the homunculus}? the reason i ask is that there is a direct corellation between PERCIEVED conciousness{i.e. philosophical zombies} and the integration of the physical system called the biological body. however, there does seem to be any direct corellation{or mechanical explanation} between the physical neural processes and CONCIOUSNESS.
😄 yes i am a pakistani. infact i practically live next to the red mosque 😄 .
Originally posted by leonheartmm
erm, the thing is, that if you do that, then your saying that the terms "the sharing of electrical impulses, the integration of neurons, systems of entropy, matrices of entropy channels.... " or watever it is defined as are interpretations of the basic CONCIOUSNESS, but CONCIOUSNESS "isnt" an interpretation of the above mentioned terms. i just find that kinda hard to understand. also, i find it hard to understand why the mental processed give rise to SELF awareness{ and qualia as sum percieve it}, i mean, you can say all you want that, that is just the way it is at its basis, but it doesnt seem that way to me, we cud well NOT have this awareness, or conciousness as we feal it and be soulless{forgive the phrase, i cudnt think of a better one to get a point across} robots who ACT physically the same as if we had a conciousness based on predetermined interaction of particles and forces. but WHY shud this physical integration lead to anything MORE than a machine with nothing in the mind to SEE{often described as the homunculus}? the reason i ask is that there is a direct corellation between PERCIEVED conciousness{i.e. philosophical zombies} and the integration of the physical system called the biological body. however, there does seem to be any direct corellation{or mechanical explanation} between the physical neural processes and CONCIOUSNESS.
fair enough man, I just come at it a little differently. I don't even think consciousness exists really, I think it is a word or a concept that has been accepted for so long that we just assume it is true without any real proof.
Originally posted by leonheartmm
😄 yes i am a pakistani. infact i practically live next to the red mosque 😄 .
wow... that must have been terrifying...
check your PMs
^ well yea, the ground shaking every 5 seconds, broken windows, and the mother ****ing , corrupt police and ranger people even shot a tear gas cannister into my house and i nearly suffocated while trying to save my cat, n i dunno, it was wierd kinda tear gas, really made my skin burn{hehe, still got the empty cannister}
i do think the conciousness exists, after all, your there listening to what im saying arent you. its kinda self apparent, but only to the individual.
Originally posted by leonheartmm
^ well yea, the ground shaking every 5 seconds, broken windows, and the mother ****ing , corrupt police and ranger people even shot a tear gas cannister into my house and i nearly suffocated while trying to save my cat, n i dunno, it was wierd kinda tear gas, really made my skin burn{hehe, still got the empty cannister}
Thats messed up.
before all the stuff went down, what was it like living near the mosque? I've heard the sisters there were somewhat ultraconservative...
Originally posted by leonheartmm
i do think the conciousness exists, after all, your there listening to what im saying arent you. its kinda self apparent, but only to the individual.
I don't know...
It could be your visual system compiling information with your language system and then processing the necessary motor and memory information to create a reply based on the goals interpreted through the processing of the content of the input stimuli. lol
There are certainly things that we are "aware" of, and we can "think" about things, but to me those things aren't "consciousness", they are specific mechanisms which are based on physical and demonstrable neurological processes. To say that we "possess" a "consciousness" of some type just needlessly complicates everything in my understanding.
well yea, they were. but then this is pakistan, half the people are like that here, infact my sisters are kinda like that too. but ofcourse our dear world media has to villify that more than it really was and magnify it to make it seem like they were evil or sumthing. truth is most girls there are from protective families but are good people in themselves, there were only a few were nuts {kidnapped masseuses and hookers and stuff and threatened em to leave town n stuff} , sum of the men were nuts too, but u know what,{and initially i was VERY against the whole idea}, after seeing what our ****in american asskisser president did to those chidren, along with the military and police and rangers, if i had to choose, id choose those extremists side in a second, atleast they wont kill 1800 innocent children{girls and boys} in week or so and then bury them in the same ground and load them up in trucks and dump em in garbage or wrap em in plastic and float em down sum sewage drains so many, that they end up cloggin the drain/stream. {yup, just stuff i can see}
ofcourse, its a usual thing here these days, with the power struggle and all, tre terrorist using the military to bomb the hell ouit of poor workers in wana and the north and killing thousands of women and children just to make every1 beleive that they are doing a LOT in the war against terror or to try and say that infact this country is full of terrorists and the perosn is required along with ameerican support to deal with it... ok im going on for too long
as for the conciousness thing, you are again describing a philosophical zombie, all those things may be true, but what im saying is that even if it isnt FREE will, you still have AWARENESS, you are still SELF aware, you FEAL, you EXIST. thats enough for me. as i said, it is only apparent to the individual. it may be very hard or impossible to prove to OTHERS that you have a conciousness and it might seem like other people are also just complex robots which SEEMS to have a conciousness, but still you can not say the same about yourself. after all, YOU exist and this existance can not be justified if we look at simple cause and affects of molecular and elecron movement in your brain. this AWARENESS exists, in every individual and is proven fact TO the individual if no1 else. so i dont think you can make a normal scientific evidence based argument to disprove it.
Originally posted by leonheartmmI've been thinking about this. And I'm wondering how you define consciousness. Personally, I find it hard to think about it as anything other than the result of neurological systems when if you cut the corpus collosum you have opposing hemispheres.
so i dont think you can make a normal scientific evidence based argument to disprove it.
its odd though, that even after cutting away the corpus collosum, with each hemisphere having its own phenomenology and perception, you still end up with distinctly ONE personality in the being and not two{seeing as even twins with identical brain structures initially grow op to be different}. but thats besides the point.
by conciousness, i simply mean self awarenes i.e. awareness of stimuli around you, and awareness of the fact that you as an entity are yourself aware{ofcourse you cud also think of it as an infinite regress where you are aware of your initial awareness, and also aware of the awareness of your own awareness, and aware of the awareness, of the awareness of your own existance............................ and it goes on} . basically, its the fealing of EXISTING, or what people generally attribute to the soul. ofcourse you may EXPLAIN human behaviour through cause and affect relationships of their physical components but you probably will not be able to deny your own existance{the FEALING of a homunculus. which in a way, proves the homuculus because machines do not feal and homunculus is exactly that, the ability to FEAL and further, be aware of one's ability to feal so that in that awareness, it has a defined reality}, hence it being self apparent, but only to the individual.
unfortunately, every time i try to explain it, multiple semantic and coneptual difficulties hamper me{not that im claiming to have a clear conception of the whole thing myself}. its like saying, "PROVE THAT EXISTANCE EXISTS", even though existance is apparent to us, it becomes practically impossible to PROVE existance from inside the confines of "existance" .
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
So, we're in the Matrix?😕
🎅
Originally posted by leonheartmm
[i think what shaky MEANT TO SAY, was that if what you saw was reality than the only way acid would be able to work is by changing that actual REALITY. {which is absurd, seeing as to the stuff u can see when doing acid}. so really, there must be some PERCEPTION/TRANSLATION from reality which is NOT in itself reality, which the acid can manipule without manipulating reality.this is support for that fact that your INTERPRETATION of reality is not REALITY in itself.
not with that specific term, no. but i am familiar with the experiments done on basic cognitive functions on people with hemisphere deconnection, and even though at the basic cognitive level, the two brains can be seen as different with no way of communicating between themselves, it is still absurd to think that two different hemisphere, which specialise in different things, have different phenomenology and have no internal way of communicating between each other can give rise to stable SINGLE unified personalities which dont even feal the cognitive differences until put under special conditions. also, how can you describe the coordination of memory, language, general thinking, problem solbving at a higher level and beleifs etc, which admittedly all represent ONE person? infact i think if we take the hypothesis of the twin brains at face value, then the person wudnt be able to survive and it wud become very much like two twins in a robot each having overlapping control of it. the thing would fall down in a second. also, hemisphere deconnection in severe cases of eppilepsy etc continued BECAUSE it was seen that patients are pretty much ok even after it, the ethical impliocation of creating TWO people in one body, if that were the case, wud be terrible.
also, i think, this is still one place where very little research is based{obviously becaue most neurologists would like to bruch off the question as being one of philosophy and not hard sciene} on how a single personality can remain with the currently understood mechanics of neurology and basic physics in such an absurd situation. but i see it as a very big reason to think that thing lik the holographic model/soul etc are still sumwhat better explanations for a conciousness/personality than the currently taken physical model, as it can not{in my oppinion} account for the mentioned phenomenon.