After finishing all these reviews, YouTube did me the favor of suggesting a lecture by Professor Mark Solms. Solms’ first talk was like a revelation with all the bells and whistles, then two days of binging on his many talks, that amazingly don’t get repetitive, always covering some new ground, and still no red flags. In fact, the good doctor is probably one of the most solid individuals I’ve listened to.
1 Like
After finishing all these reviews, YouTube did me the favor of suggesting a lecture by Professor Mark Solms. Solms’ first talk was like a revelation with all the bells and whistles, then two days of binging on his many talks, that amazingly don’t get repetitive, always covering some new ground, and still no red flags. In fact, the good doctor is probably one of the most solid individuals I’ve listened to.
It was like arriving at an oasis after a treacherous withering desert ordeal and being handed a pitcher of cool clean water along with a platter of food. Pure relief. Finally, someone that made sense and though he doesn’t actually discuss evolution much, it’s obvious that he has a bottom up Evolutionary understanding of consciousness - as opposed to Hoffman’s fascination with Hollywood/Madison Avenue’s top down perspective on our human consciousness.
The bottomline? Relax, we don’t need any metaphysical life-rafts. Fundamentally, our mind and consciousness is the inside reflection of our body/brain interacting with its dynamic environment. It’s simple, if mind-b&*#ing, yet explainable and understandable. The “Hard Problem” turns out to be our Ego vs. God issues and is a direct hangover from our collective Abrahamic world view, but I’ll save that for my last chapter.
6) Dr. Mark Solms deftly demystifies Chalmers’ “ Hard Problem ” of Consciousness
(6.01) Dr. Mark Solms demystifies Chalmers’ “Hard Problem” of Consciousness.
(6.02) The Other Side of Mark Solms PhD, doctor, professor, farmer, vintner, humanitarian.
(6.03) Students’ Resource: A representative cross-section of Dr. Mark Solms’ scientific publications.
Okay now show me where are there are any BANNED words?
“blowing” ? ? ? Seriously?
What fickled guidelines are being applied and who are they applied to?
If there’s no list of banned words, then why have I had three innocuous posts barred for supposedly banned words that don’t exist? Then to really underscore the capriciousness I get to post the same dang quotes over here, that it’s steadfastly refusing to allow me to post where I want it to appear.
This is not fun anymore.
What is going on in the back of the house that causes it to interfere with posts that have nothing wrong with them?
Some one is in charge of back end and should have some answers.
You have a knack for finding bugs. I put that whole post in the test box and and it said no matches found.
I will change my one entry though, because a truck for fighting fires is a match. I got the warning just now, and it told me the specific words.
They find me.
Thanks for doing some fishing for me.
I don’t know how you find them or they find you, but one of us will let the webmaster know. Not sure what he can do about it, given that it happens to one person, but we’ll see.
1 Like
Fair enough.
thank you
Mark Solms is great on describing the hierarchy of agitational control: brainstem → midbrain → cerebrum (higher consciousness) of course with connectome data-enrichment at each stage (atheists who aren’t at Mark Solms’ level miss some explanations and the Muslims on YouTube pretend they prevail because they complete their unknowingness with very strong biases). His descriptions are useful also in the future Brodmannian truly personhooded AI, but this will require new programs, more activation function types and controllers, and also new hardware. Mark Solms isn’t God. Neuropsychoanalysis doesn’t work well with everyone. Mark Solms is a tool for your knowledge. You must collect enough information from many professors and shape your own views.
Well he’s got that right Mark Solms is no God, but he is a heck of an accomplished guy. He’s working on part of the story and he has added some wonderful chapters to our understanding.
signed,
Earth-centrist 
@omniaxiomaticity is bent on prioritizing the minimization of others while simultaneously employing multisyllabic diction that is often questionably grammatical. They point out the limitations of philosophers, atheists, and scientist and offer very little illumination of further insight.
What limitations to philosophers, atheists, and scientists and theologists?
Go figure.
What a shame so few are interested in actual discussion.
1 Like
@omniaxiomaticity is not specific, usually saying so-and-so can’t address topic X and that’s about it.
Philosophy is like being in a room without light, and look for a black cat.
Metaphysics is like being in a room without light, and look for a black cat that is not there.
Religion is like being in a room without light, and look for a black cat that is not there, and say we found it.
Science is like being in a room without light, and search for a black cat using a flashlight.
2 Likes