Kuhn and geniuses getting lost within their own mindscape

Humanism
121

Don’t be scrambling my words. I’m very consistent.

Appreciating the Physical Reality ~ Human Mindscape divide

Your repeated rephrasing isn’t playing fair and only indicate you haven’t actually thought about it too much.
That you can’t recognize, or is it acknowledge, the limits of your thoughts, your mind, your intellectual self is surprising.

Don’t be waving the meta-physical charge at me.

Folds within folds of cumulative harmonious complexity flowing down the cascade of time is more a description than an appeal to meta-physics.
Better appreciating our Evolutionary origins and developmental history, and the fact that evolution piggy back everything on top of what came before is no meta-physics.

Please, offer up a quote of mine that contains an appeal to the meta-physical?

Emotionally, viscerally connecting to the historic chain of generations via being party to the birth of a beautiful child, that may get close to poetry, but meta-physics it is not, spiritual, potentially religious, sure, why not, but meta-physical no. Unless you don’t quite believe we were created by Earth and time and a lot of lucky breaks.

Seems to me you’re closer to doing that. Jezz read the words you quote then the doctors quote

Well, getting to know it’s thumb, among other little surprises, listening to beautiful music and feeling the waves of love embracing mother, or feeling a terrified mother that’s being battered. All that and more!

Is a label indicating human ignorance on a top, not that nothing exists there.

Right back at you.

Want to start at the beginning, okay,

We didn’t pop into existence, we are evolved biological sensing organs. Our bodies intercommunication systems are only understood in rough outline. My expectation is that medical science will continue to be astounded at unexpected discoveries, while you imply we got it all figured out.
Who’s doing the meta-physics here?

122

Undoubtedly, as has everyone else that obsesses over the mind-game.

Descartes had an excuse, he lived in 1600’s was a fervent believer in God and certainty and perfect.

I’ve had enough of listening to what others have to say about him and have started listening to his “Discourse on Method and the Meditations” - only about a quarter way through it but have ordered a printed copy, trapped by yet another project.

As for the read, so long as I keep it in his time frame, it seems splendid
and putting aside his idealistic pomposity, his obsession with perfection and certainty, and that absolute acceptance of God as the ultimate explanation to everything, I was surprised by how relatable he seems to me, I think I could liked knowing the author of that book a lot more than many of the lecturers I’ve heard. Him and Hermann Hesse for dinner, that would have been a fun time.

But, against the backdrop of what we know today, other than its historic value, and as a good personal (self-improvement) lesson plan for how to objectively learn by experiencing, rather than reading and trusting all you read - it doesn’t offer much to understanding our human consciousness.

First impressions.

123

I don’t think that his “brain in a vat” was an attempt to prove the existence of a god. Darwin also believed in a first cause Agency. Does that falsify Evolution?

[quote=“citizenschallengev4, post:122, topic:9697”]
But, against the backdrop of what we know today, other than its historic value, and as a good personal (self-improvement) lesson plan for how to objectively learn by experiencing, rather than reading and trusting all you read [/quote]

That is a contradictory statement . We can only subjectively learn from personal experience.
Reading the “proven” and “falsified” science is the way to learn objective fact.

[quote]it doesn’t offer much to understanding our human consciousness [/quote] Are you suggesting that ignorance brings insight into “human consciousness”?
image

Sorry CC , but IMO, this thread is no longer productive.

124

Yeah but he mentions God repeatedly in the first chapters.

[quote=“write4u, post:123, topic:9697”]

[quote=“citizenschallengev4, post:122, topic:9697”]
But, against the backdrop of what we know today, other than its historic value, and as a good personal (self-improvement) lesson plan for how to objectively learn by experiencing, rather than reading and trusting all you read [/quote]

write4u: That is a contradictory statement . We can only subjectively learn from personal experience.
Reading the “proven” and “falsified” science is the way to learn objective fact.
[/quote]

No you misunderstand, what I meant was it seems that Descartes recorded his own lesson plan for finding his truth. Might have been a better way to say it.

As for learning, sure personal experience is most important, but book learning sure does help supplement and improve what we get out of our physical experiences.

Does that make sense?

Where does that come from?

You act as though I reject the various scientific facts you share - which most certainly is not true.
It’s your interpretations I find cause to question.

Interesting, well perhaps you simply need to get back to first base and ponder it a bit more:

Appreciating the Human Mindscape ~ Physical Reality divide.
Accepting Earth as the ultimate touchstone with reality.
The fact of this world existing is proof that our Evolution unfolded down one particular path.
Theory of Consciousness, requires appreciating humans as evolved biological sensing creatures.

“I Am, therefore I Think” is a better reflection of the reality of our human condition.

Where’s the meta-physics?

125

[quote=“citizenschallengev4, post:124, topic:9697”]
As for learning, sure personal experience is most important, but book learning sure does help supplement and improve what we get out of our physical experiences.
Does that make sense?
[/quote] Not to me. Why go to school to learn to read, write, and do arithmetic, if personal experience is all that is needed to know what the world offers?

Today the world is at our fingertips because of the internet, but consider the state of knowledge of microtubules before the invention of electron microscopy?

Personal experience of this:
image image ?

You do come up with some very strange declarations… :thinking:

126

But write I wrote:

Lordie and I was thinking you were saying personal experience is all that matters. That’s not what I say, but we gotta cross-check what we read about with what we experience.

I’ve learned a lot more about people from watching them, then I ever have listening to them. Why, because I think how they behave is more genuine than what they say or write.

It’s another one of those shades of gray, rather than black and white. After all, take the Royal Society, Nullius in verba’ most say it means ‘take nobody’s word for it’.

I think both of us would disagree with that, while at the same time appreciating that while we should trust - we need to verify best we can. Critical thinking skills and healthy skepticism are needed, and often best we can do is verifications coming down to commonalities, consilience and consistency. Doing the best we can with what we have.

Does it make sense in light of other things we already understand.

Indeed it is, and without it I’d be lost in the wilderness, with it I can connect to a world of information, claims, cross claims, valuable evidence and utter nonsense. Just as grand, I can write down my ideas with the potential of sharing with people around the world. It is amazing, although I’m only familiar with a sliver of it.

:v:t2:

Not sure what that is about.
As for microtubules, their particular state of knowledge was achieved long before the electron microscope came along.
What they do, and how they do it, will remain long after the last electron microscope has disintegrated back into dust.
Or were you talking about state of human knowledge regarding microtubules?

127

Yes you said that.

Lordie and I was thinking you were saying personal experience is all that matters. That’s not what I say, but we gotta cross-check what we read about with what we experience.

No you said that… See my correction of your quote that you attributed to me; “As for learning, sure personal experience is most important”. :rofl:

I do agree that “knowledge” helps in better understanding ourselves, others, and the world in general.

128

That’s not fair to take it out of context.
Yes, personal experience is most important, you should know you gotta get out into the world and experience things to get to know life and yourself. The Book learning adds immensely to our depth and breath, but the human is still a physical being experiencing life through its body.

It’s like you see all these oppositions,
and I see a big dance, both mind and body are needed to be a complete human.
Theory and education coupled with hands-on experience.

How would book learning, to the exclusion of engaging in physical experiences, profit someone?

129

CC, the cup of my life’s personal experiences runneth over and now that I’m retired, I am probing the mysteries of the universe and consciousness. My only advanced education was 2 Associate degrees in Architectural and Mechanical drafting and Accounting. The rest of my acquired knowledge is from personal research on the internet.

I am physically doing well and have no regrets other than starting so late in deeper research of the Universe, the Earth, and the nature of life and consciousness.

Just ordered a 40x - 5000x microscope w/camera to personally visit the micro world. I hope to publish some of my research here on CFI.

130

So we don’t disagree that both experience and education are required for creating a vibrant fulfilling life experience.

131

Actually, in general we disagree on very little. We just have different specific areas of interest and a good thing it is. Life would be very boring if we just kept repeating each other… :no_mouth:

1 Like
132

Tru dat.
Consider me the Goldmund to your Narcissus

:raising_hand_man:t2:

When Narcissus persuades the young student that he is not meant for a life of self-denial, Goldmund sets off …

Actually, it was a young lady who did the “persuading” Narcissus merely anticipated, accepted, and blessed young Goldmund’s awaking, then bestowed some timely advice as the young man departured with eyes and dreams all a gaga.

133

image
image418×630 84.8 KB

LOL, talking about Narcissus.

I thought that HESSE was the title of the book and Narcissus and Goldmund the authors… :rofl:

Is that an example of an Abrahamic mindset?

134

image
image1488×1068 264 KB

Looks like a college student put together that cover page.
Still, you know what they say, don’t judge a book by its cover.

Also, if you’re reading it for the first time, keep in mind that Hesse belongs to the old world Victorian era, and was trying to sell books, and had a romantic heart, with long nights and no radio, or boob tube, or 'puters, or night life - but a lot of lamp oil.
Meaning a very different tempo from today’s rush, rush, rush.

Still the undercurrent is fun to ponder, at least for a spirited soul, who doesn’t want to become a brick in the wall.

135

Might be relevant

In that it says we need to study how we interact, not just a single brain, as if we can map it out

136

Talking it out, wonderful, but that requires listeners.

Then each needs to dosido, that’s where things can get tricky.
When to shut up and start listening and thinking.

Good faith, an essential ingredient. That’s something that’s been wonderful about working with a pretty full spectrum of people over the years. When everyone is focused on some goals, talk is easy and all sorts of new insights can be stumbled into.

1 Like
137

I might as well park this here, it’s another variation on my theme. Although I’ve started attending the local college philosophy club and am getting ready to spring this on them.
I’ve got the four essay and list as a sort of back bone.

This would be my intro pitch. First draft.

Introducing A New Philosophical Perspective,

along with inviting critique.

Founded on a life time of curiosity and learning about my body, myself along with Earth and the universe, through the findings that scientists have been sharing over the past decades and centuries. I call it,

Earth Centrism

Because Earth is our ultimate fundamental touchstone with reality and ourselves.

We appreciate that changes during Earth’s unimaginably long history are imprinted within our body and being.

We appreciation the profound divide between physical reality - and the thoughts that unfold within our minds, (or more descriptively, our human mindscape).

For us, the “Hard Problem of Consciousness” seems contrived since we appreciate that fundamentally awareness and life’s “consciousness spectrum” started over a billion years ago with the invention and prospering of the unbelievably organized complexity of Eukaryote cells. Then in due time colonies, then increasingly complex creatures, with their increasing awareness that eventually evolved into introspection and language and our human adventure.

We humans are most realistically understood as evolved biological sensing creatures. Our consciousness (mind) is basically the inside reflection of our brain/body dealing with our body and our changing circumstances.

“I Am, Therefore I Think”

Here’s a remaining dangling thought I’d like to include, but not sure how to weave it in:
The fact of this world existing is proof that our Evolution unfolded down one particular path, no matter what people think.

1 Like
138

I agree insofar humans are concerned. Of course all we need do to look around us and see the infinite variety of paths other organisms have followed.

Interesting tidbit:

Octopuses may be so terrifyingly smart because they share humans’ genes for intelligence

By Donavyn Coffey
published July 01, 2022

image
image1200×675 113 KB

Octopuses are brainy creatures with sophisticated smarts, and now scientists have uncovered a clue that may partly explain the cephalopods’ remarkable intelligence: Its genes have a genetic quirk that is also seen in humans, a new study finds.

The clues that scientists uncovered are called “jumping genes,” or transposons, and they make up [45% of the human genome](The evolutionary history of human DNA transposons: Evidence for intense activity in the primate lineage - PMC. Jumping genes are short sequences of DNA with the ability to copy and paste or cut and paste themselves to another location in the genome, and they’ve been linked to the evolution of genomes in multiple species. Genetic sequencing recently revealed that two species of octopus — Octopus vulgaris and Octopus bimaculoides — also have genomes that are filled with transposons, according to a study published May 18 in the journal BMC Biology.

1 Like
139

Fascinating article.

… These findings not only connect jumping genes to octopus’ intelligence, they also suggest that LINE transposons do more than just jump around. Rather, they have some role in cognitive processing, the authors suggested in a statement. Because jumping genes are shared by humans and octopuses, they may be good candidates for future research on intelligence and how it develops and varies between individuals within a species, according to the study.

However, since octopuses are quite distant from humans on the tree of life, it’s possible that active LINE transposons in the two groups are an example of convergent evolution. This means their contribution to intelligence evolved separately in the two lineages, rather than originating in a shared ancestor, the scientists reported.

Originally published on Live Science.