Anyone here watching the PBS series The Brain? If you watch it and really take it in, I defy you to come away from it thinking we have any control over our thoughts, decisions or even perceptions. Tonight’s episode, “What Is Reality,” is especially telling. It explains how the brain constructs multi-sensory reality, enabling us to understand–or more likely, misunderstand, the world around us.
Lois
It must not be in the local listings where I live.
But I can’t help asking, who is this “we” you’re talking about, and what do you mean by “control”? It sounds to me as if you still unthinkingly believe in mind/brain duality. Quite without meaning to, you imagine that “you” are a tiny homunculus buried in there who “perceives” the outside world and then makes decisions about it. We seem almost hard-wired to believe that, and it’s hard not to think that way. The “self” is an illusion, although an incredibly useful one.
It must not be in the local listings where I live. But I can't help asking, who is this "we" you're talking about, and what do you mean by "control"? It sounds to me as if you still unthinkingly believe in mind/brain duality. Quite without meaning to, you imagine that "you" are a tiny homunculus buried in there who "perceives" the outside world and then makes decisions about it. We seem almost hard-wired to believe that, and it's hard not to think that way. The "self" is an illusion, although an incredibly useful one.I agree that the self is an illusion and that we don't make independent decisions. I'm a hard determinist. I don't see how you got anythinng different out of what I wrote. The series on the Brain underscores my position. Some of the episodes from the series are available here. I'm not sure how well the website works. In any case, keep trying to see if the series is available on your PBS station. It may be available on Netflix. I'm in Southern California and we get the series on Sunday evenings on KOCE. There is also a book based on the series. http://video.pbs.org/program/brain-david-eagleman/
Another great barrier to broken…but how?
The illusion is strong.
They’ll figure it out completely one day. But then what? :lol:
http://video.pbs.org/program/brain-david-eagleman/Looks like that's a limited time offer. First episode will only be available four more days, and so far it's taken for eeva to get started, actually still waiting It's also available on iTunes for three bucks a pop. https://itunes.apple.com/us/tv-season/the-brain-with-david-eagleman/id1039443555?mt=4&ign;-mpt=uo=4
It must not be in the local listings where I live. But I can't help asking, who is this "we" you're talking about, and what do you mean by "control"? It sounds to me as if you still unthinkingly believe in mind/brain duality. Quite without meaning to, you imagine that "you" are a tiny homunculus buried in there who "perceives" the outside world and then makes decisions about it. We seem almost hard-wired to believe that, and it's hard not to think that way. The "self" is an illusion, although an incredibly useful one.I agree that the self is an illusion and that we don't make independent decisions. I'm a hard determinist. I don't see how you got anythinng different out of what I wrote. The series on the Brain underscores my position. Some of the episodes from the series are available here. I'm not sure how well the website works. In any case, keep trying to see if the series is available on your PBS station. It may be available on Netflix. I'm in Southern California and we get the series on Sunday evenings on KOCE. There is also a book based on the series. http://video.pbs.org/program/brain-david-eagleman/ Link works fine for me..earlier (in another thread) I posted an episode by Eagleman, but this is the entire series....excellent, thank you. I wonder what he thinks of the *mirror neural network*, an apparent mirror function of the brain which seems to fit so many mental scenarios, especially in the areas of *cognition* and *empathy* or *being of like mind*.
It must not be in the local listings where I live. But I can't help asking, who is this "we" you're talking about, and what do you mean by "control"? It sounds to me as if you still unthinkingly believe in mind/brain duality. Quite without meaning to, you imagine that "you" are a tiny homunculus buried in there who "perceives" the outside world and then makes decisions about it. We seem almost hard-wired to believe that, and it's hard not to think that way. The "self" is an illusion, although an incredibly useful one.I agree that the self is an illusion and that we don't make independent decisions. I'm a hard determinist. I don't see how you got anythinng different out of what I wrote. The series on the Brain underscores my position. Some of the episodes from the series are available here. I'm not sure how well the website works. In any case, keep trying to see if the series is available on your PBS station. It may be available on Netflix. I'm in Southern California and we get the series on Sunday evenings on KOCE. There is also a book based on the series. http://video.pbs.org/program/brain-david-eagleman/ Link works fine for me..earlier (in another thread) I posted an episode by Eagleman, but this is the entire series....excellent, thank you. I wonder what he thinks of the *mirror neural network*, an apparent mirror function of the brain which seems to fit so many mental scenarios, especially in the areas of *cognition* and *empathy* or *being of like mind*. The book may answer your question. I don't have the book but assume he goes into more detail there than he can on the TV series. Lois
But I can't help asking, who is this "we" you're talking about, and what do you mean by "control"? It sounds to me as if you still unthinkingly believe in mind/brain duality. Quite without meaning to, you imagine that "you" are a tiny homunculus buried in there who "perceives" the outside world and then makes decisions about it. We seem almost hard-wired to believe that, and it's hard not to think that way. The "self" is an illusion, although an incredibly useful one.I agree that the self is an illusion and that we don't make independent decisions. I'm a hard determinist. I don't see how you got anythinng different out of what I wrote. The series on the Brain underscores my position. You do realise you did not answer Advocatus' questions, don't you? You say 'we are not in control' and then you say 'we' is an illusion. That makes your proposition empty. And then you do not even tell what you mean with 'control'. I fully agree with Advocatus: you are a dualist. When you are not a dualist it makes no sense to say that we are not in control, simply because there is no 'we' that could have control, or could be controlled by the brain. Your thinking about free will, determinism and the mind-body problem is only skin deep.
I agree that the self is an illusion and that we don't make independent decisions. I'm a hard determinist. I don't see how you got anythinng different out of what I wrote.Again with the "we"! "WE don't make independent decisions." Who is this WE you're talking about? Imagine your brain is like a company or an organization made up of many different hierarchal levels. Your "self" (your WE) is like a CEO who has no clue what's going on; he spends most of the day in his office playing golf on his carpet. But at each level of the hierarchy... upper management, middle management, foremen on the factory floor, shipping and receiving, security, the mailroom, even the custodians... hundreds of decisions are being made very day. Usually through rules of thumb that get passed down, along the lines of "we've always done it like this." Every time a decision is made, a memo has to be sent to the next higher level in the hierarchy. A few of the most important decisions get sent all the way up to the CEO, just so he'll know what's going on in case the board of directors ever asks. To the outside world, the CEO (the Self, the WE) appears to be in charge, but in reality he's an illusion, he's just another part of the process. So in your brain. The Self is a convenient fiction, just another link in the chain, BUT it doesn't change the fact that some organic process within your brain IS making decisions. That's why I'm not what you'd call a "hard determinist"; I don't get caught up in the arguments over Free Will, but I still feel like there's a little room in the machine for a tiny bit of it. :)
Another great barrier to broken....but how? The illusion is strong. They'll figure it out completely one day. But then what? :lol:The illusion of the sun revolving around the earth was strong, too, but humans got over it. LOis
I agree that the self is an illusion and that we don't make independent decisions. I'm a hard determinist. I don't see how you got anythinng different out of what I wrote.Again with the "we"! "WE don't make independent decisions." Who is this WE you're talking about? Imagine your brain is like a company or an organization made up of many different hierarchal levels. Your "self" (your WE) is like a CEO who has no clue what's going on; he spends most of the day in his office playing golf on his carpet. But at each level of the hierarchy... upper management, middle management, foremen on the factory floor, shipping and receiving, security, the mailroom, even the custodians... hundreds of decisions are being made very day. Usually through rules of thumb that get passed down, along the lines of "we've always done it like this." Every time a decision is made, a memo has to be sent to the next higher level in the hierarchy. A few of the most important decisions get sent all the way up to the CEO, just so he'll know what's going on in case the board of directors ever asks. To the outside world, the CEO (the Self, the WE) appears to be in charge, but in reality he's an illusion, he's just another part of the process. So in your brain. The Self is a convenient fiction, just another link in the chain, BUT it doesn't change the fact that some organic process within your brain IS making decisions. That's why I'm not what you'd call a "hard determinist"; I don't get caught up in the arguments over Free Will, but I still feel like there's a little room in the machine for a tiny bit of it. :) Where would this "free will" come from? Wouldn't it also be a product of brain activity? "Free will" sounds like something that is independent of our brain's function. As if a computer could "decide" to step outside ts program and do things it was never programmed for. Lois
The illusion of the sun revolving around the earth was strong, too, but humans got over it. LOisI don't know Lois...I can't see an application of this knowledge in our behaviors becoming a reality.
Many theorists would insist that they have explicitly rejected such an obviously bad idea. But [...] the persuasive imagery of the Cartesian Theater keeps coming back to haunt us—laypeople and scientists alike—even after its ghostly dualism has been denounced and exorcized. — Daniel Dennett, Consciousness ExplainedWhen science finally discovers the process of Cartesian Theater it won't change the fact that it exists. Lois it's pointless to have these discussions with some of these folks. The very things we are trying to explain to them are the same things that prevent them from understanding it.
Where would this "free will" come from? Wouldn't it also be a product of brain activity?Yes. Or better, not quite. The suggestion that the brain produces something (free will, thoughts, mind) can be interpreted wrongly. Take the following 'bonmot' of Karl Vogt]:
The brain produces thoughts like the kidneys secrete urine.There are several things wrong with this statement, but the most important here is: urine exists as an independent substance. Thoughts don't exist independently: they are processes in the brain. If you understand it like this, then you can say: yes, free will is a product of the brain. It is an aspect of the working brain, where a lot of conditions apply: that processes are the material basis of thoughts, wishes, beliefs, observations, plans, etc.
"Free will" sounds like something that is independent of our brain's function.It sounds like that, yes. But it isn't. It is the same as saying we have no free will. This also sounds like something independent of the brain, that is then forced by the brain. Both come forth from the illusion that 'we' exist as separate entities, as homunculi, so clearly explained by Advocatus. If 'free will' means something, then it is the fact that humans can act according their own wishes and beliefs. This is a sensible meaning, that fits with the fact that we are determined.
When science finally discovers the process of Cartesian Theater it won't change the fact that it exists.What would be gained by that? The Cartesian Theater is an idea, nothing more. What did you find out more than e.g. the discovery what the neural correspondent of seeing red is? Or do you think neurologists will discover the homunculus in the brain?
The very things we are trying to explain to them are the same things that prevent them from understanding it.I think for you, VYAZMA, understanding means agreeing with you. Show me where I did not understand you.
The Self is a convenient fiction, just another link in the chain, BUT it doesn't change the fact that some organic process within your brain IS making decisions. That's why I'm not what you'd call a "hard determinist"; I don't get caught up in the arguments over Free Will, but I still feel like there's a little room in the machine for a tiny bit of it. :)I would not call that 'room'. I would say that the machinery of the brain must have certain functions implemented that it is able to act freely: i.e. can act according its own wishes and beliefs.
The Self is a convenient fiction, just another link in the chain, BUT it doesn't change the fact that some organic process within your brain IS making decisions. That's why I'm not what you'd call a "hard determinist"; I don't get caught up in the arguments over Free Will, but I still feel like there's a little room in the machine for a tiny bit of it. :)I would not call that 'room'. I would say that the machinery of the brain must have certain functions implemented that it is able to act freely: i.e. can act according its own wishes and beliefs. And IMO, that decision making is always in the *direction of greatest satisfaction* There may lots of choices available, but each individual will choose and act according to their individual circumstances and desires. *CFW*?
And IMO, that decision making is always in the *direction of greatest satisfaction* There may lots of choices available, but each individual will choose and act according to their individual circumstances and desires. *CFW*?Peacegirl? :ahhh:
Where would this "free will" come from? Wouldn't it also be a product of brain activity?Yes, of course it would. Just as the "we" you keep referring to is also a product of the organic processes of the brain. You keep saying that "we" don't make decisions. If we don't, then who does? The organic processes of the brain clearly make creative decisions all the time. The fact that I can sit here, listen to your arguments, compose a creative counter-argument of my own, then decide whether or not I should bother to post it or not, means that a whole series of complex decisions are being made. It doesn't matter at what level these decisions are being made, the important thing is that they are being made. That's still "Me" making those decisions. The Self may be an illusion, but it is an extremely useful illusion or our brains would never have bothered to evolve it.
The Self is a convenient fiction, just another link in the chain, BUT it doesn't change the fact that some organic process within your brain IS making decisions. That's why I'm not what you'd call a "hard determinist"; I don't get caught up in the arguments over Free Will, but I still feel like there's a little room in the machine for a tiny bit of it. :)I would not call that 'room'. I would say that the machinery of the brain must have certain functions implemented that it is able to act freely: i.e. can act according its own wishes and beliefs.And I would completely agree. I wish that I had originally phrased it that way.
I agree that the self is an illusion and that we don't make independent decisions. I'm a hard determinist. I don't see how you got anythinng different out of what I wrote.Again with the "we"! "WE don't make independent decisions." Who is this WE you're talking about? All humans. You are free to disagree, but that's how I see it. I don't presume to speak FOR all humans, I am expressing an opinion about how I understand the the human brain to be working, based on scientific research. Many scientists and philosoohers have come to the same conclusion--that our thoughts and decisions are determined by factors beyond our control. Imagine your brain is like a company or an organization made up of many different hierarchal levels. Your "self" (your WE) is like a CEO who has no clue what's going on; he spends most of the day in his office playing golf on his carpet. But at each level of the hierarchy... upper management, middle management, foremen on the factory floor, shipping and receiving, security, the mailroom, even the custodians... hundreds of decisions are being made very day. Usually through rules of thumb that get passed down, along the lines of "we've always done it like this." Every time a decision is made, a memo has to be sent to the next higher level in the hierarchy. A few of the most important decisions get sent all the way up to the CEO, just so he'll know what's going on in case the board of directors ever asks. To the outside world, the CEO (the Self, the WE) appears to be in charge, but in reality he's an illusion, he's just another part of the process. So in your brain. The Self is a convenient fiction, just another link in the chain, BUT it doesn't change the fact that some organic process within your brain IS making decisions. That's why I'm not what you'd call a "hard determinist"; I don't get caught up in the arguments over Free Will, but I still feel like there's a little room in the machine for a tiny bit of it. :) Ok, that's your position. I can only ask where you think free will comes from, how it works and whether there is any scientific evidence that it exists and can overcome deterministic factors we are unconscious of.
The Self is a convenient fiction, just another link in the chain, BUT it doesn't change the fact that some organic process within your brain IS making decisions. That's why I'm not what you'd call a "hard determinist"; I don't get caught up in the arguments over Free Will, but I still feel like there's a little room in the machine for a tiny bit of it. :)I would not call that 'room'. I would say that the machinery of the brain must have certain functions implemented that it is able to act freely: i.e. can act according its own wishes and beliefs.And I would completely agree. I wish that I had originally phrased it that way. Where would those wishes and beliefs come from? Are you saying the human brain can "decide" to act outside its determining factors? How would it do that? Where does that independence of thought reside? Can there be independent thoughts that are not determined by precedent? Can you show any evidence of this phenomenon? Lois