I didn’t say it was a skill. By “good at it”, I meant their chemicals are wired in a way that their reactions (their chemical reactions) are quicker than others.
Again still missing the mark because that’s not how it works. There is a cap to the processing speed our brains have and no chemical wiring overcomes that.
It’s not quite as simple as that. There are several stages to reactive behavior.
One is cognition. When the cause is unfamiliar there is the “fight or flight response” (what do I do?)
When the cause is a known source there is an appropriate average response time. (I got this)
When the cause is expected there is an instantaneous response time. (Play me the ball for that 3 pointer)
A Comparative Study on Visual Choice Reaction Time for Different Colors in Females
Abstract
Reaction time is one of the important methods to study a person’s central information processing speed and coordinated peripheral movement response.
Visual choice reaction time is a type of reaction time and is very important for drivers, pilots, security guards, and so forth. Previous studies were mainly on simple reaction time and there are very few studies on visual choice reaction time.
Concept of the reaction time of man appeared in science in the forties of the last century. Hermann von Helmholtz worked on nerve conduction velocity, a component of reaction time. He stimulated first one point of the nerve near to the muscle and then another point far from the muscle.
The difference between the times from the stimulation of nerve to the muscle contraction in those two situations is the nerve conduction velocity. Later experiments were done to study the time taken for a specific response which was called reaction time [6]. Reaction time is very important for our everyday lives and needs intact sensory system, cognitive processing, and motor performance.
Reaction time is a good indicator of sensorimotor coordination and performance of an individual. Reaction time determines the alertness of a person and must be lesser in certain occupations, for example, drivers, military people, pilots, sportsmen, doctors, nursing staff, and security guards where alertness is a must for them [1].
Many factors have been shown to affect reaction time including gender, age, physical fitness, level of fatigue, distraction, alcohol, personality type, limb used for test, biological rhythm, and health and whether the stimulus is auditory or visual [5].
Reaction time is independent of social-cultural influences. Prolonged reaction time denotes decreased performance [7].
There are 3 different types of reaction time experiments, simple, recognition, and reaction time experiments. In simple reaction time experiments, there is only one stimulus and one response. In recognition reaction time experiments, there are some stimuli (the “memory set”) that should be responded to and others (the “distracter set”) that should not be responded to.
In choice reaction time experiments, there are multiple stimuli and multiple responses and subject must give a response that corresponds to the stimulus [8]. It was reported that the time for motor preparation (e.g., tensing muscles) and motor response was the same in all three types of reaction time tests, implying that the differences in reaction time are due to processing time [5, 8].
Are you saying people aren’t different? How do you explain that some people can hit home runs and others strike out?
1 Like
You’re also missing the mark.
Sure processing speed has limits - but neural pathways get rerouted for max efficiency.
So like they say, it gets complicated and you don’t seem to like complicated.
Take it away Write4u,
Out of all the things I said in that post, he responded to my use of “millisecond” and “skill”. He gets more bot-like every day. He has all the “no free will” arguments but none of the experiences of a regular person. He doesn’t talk about work, except how he can’t get it. Only a few family members who don’t seem to have much input. Not even sure if he likes ice cream.
1 Like
Who knows ultimately, but that doesn’t change what the brain is or does or it’s processing speed. Some folks just practice at lot and with the knowledge things get easier. But it doesn’t change that our brains predict reality because we are constructing it based on sense data and to compensate for that lag it does that.
How is any of that relevant? It doesn’t matter if I have the “experiences of a regular person” it has no bearing on my argument. What’s the point in talking about stuff that isn’t relevant to the topic?
Not true. They get rerouted for what is most common, not exactly efficiency. That’s why our brains predict most of reality and why our vision is an average of the last 15 seconds.
And a good thing it is. Physics is supposed to be predictive due to its mathematical regularity.
I wasn’t changing that. I agreed that we are just chemicals and our brains are reality predictors that use sense data. That means it takes time for the sense data to be processed. I don’t think a few milliseconds or 15 seconds is an important factor in that basic understanding.
Well, that’s kind of the discussion. You make some pretty emphatic statements, as if you do know, until someone asks a follow-up, then you get evasive.
It’s not really, but it’s still up to me as both a moderator and a member to understand to whom I am speaking. Your personal background informs your awareness of the world and your opinions. If you are misrepresenting yourself, then I have no way of knowing if what you are saying is truly your opinion or if you are playing games with others on this forum for reasons you are not stating.
Really? And how do you know this?
Not related or the same thing.
It sorta is.
Well you’re not really asking the right questions.
Because that’s just basic neuroscience, they’re routed for what is most often happening. Hence why if you do something over and over it’s easier to do it, but that doesn’t make it efficient.
None of this is really related to the point of life.
All Universal physics are related via mathematics. All of science uses symbolic mathematics to “describe” natural phenomena.
The symbolic mathematical language science uses is standardized and applies universally by all scientists worldwide.
E = Mc^2 is universally understood and applicable to all of science worldwide.
This is true even in countries that use different alphabetical symbols to describe the same thing.
The symbolic alphabetical languages differ, the mathematical values stay the same.
And what is? Please. I really want to know
Well no, we invented math, which describes the universe. It’s still based on our perception.
But again it’s not relevant.
I guess the point in struggling or doing anything? It seems like the people who talk about life being worth living suffer from hindsight bias.
You are missing the point!
We invented the symbols that represent the mathematics. We did not invent mathematics, we are discovering it, still.
Our contribution is in the codification and symbolization of Universal mathematics.
This is what makes it all deterministic and 2 + 2 = 4 everywhere in the universe.
All dynamics in the universe are mathematically based.
Don’t you know? You have no problem telling everyone they are wrong, but you don’t know what the point of what you’re saying is?
No we invented the whole thing. In fact there is still a debate in math about whether we discovered the math of the universe or it’s just us imposing a model on reality.
I know what the point is, I’ve said it before. I’ve also explained the holes in your answers several times but that doesn’t stop you from repeating them.
You say “doing what makes you happy” but that can’t be true because things don’t make us happy, the emotions aren’t in the things so they can’t make us happy.
Making meaning doesn’t work because that’s just living a lie. In nothing has value then pretending it does doesn’t make it happen, and I gave articles showing that. Value is imaginary, it’s not real. So to “make meaning” is to just lie to yourself, except that doesn’t work anymore when you see it for what it is.
So on seeing how empty existence really is what’s the point in living then without engaging in some form of psychosis?
Wrongggggg! All of Physics rests on the mathematical interaction of relational mathematical values, which humans have have codified and symbolized.
The greatest human scientific observational achievement in history.
Do you want to see the “shape” of 4/3?
Take a few minutes to watch this short video by Roger Antonsen. He clearly demonstrates that mathematics is the foundational substrate of all natural interactive dynamics.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZQElzjCsl9o&t=1s
p.s. The single celled brainless and neuronless “slime mold” already uses mathematics in its ability to solve a maze.
Why, please explain your thinking here.
How does tiny processing speeds change anything significant ?
Aren’t you a cutie game player.
We are biological creatures who find ourselves in the middle of a family and then are flung out into the big unforgiving world. Then we live and survive or we don’t. Some lives are better than others, for some life is nothing but suffering, for others it’s mind-fryingly easy - for many it is in-between and we do the best with what we have, and by golly we have a good time, even if that good time includes tears and sorrow.
There is more to people than will ever meet your eye.
There you go again, of course the “things” don’t have emotions. It is cumulative, things interaction together with things going on within yourself, that create the emotions you feel.
That’s a contrived construct you’ll abandon some day.
It gets back to appreciating you simply a mortal biological creature, your body/brain is the result of matter and biology and your material body/brain is what produces your thoughts and emotions.
It’s pretty straightforward and it is where Earth sciences are pointing, this isn’t poetry, it’s what is.
Cognition of the properties of things can make us happy.
This ability for discovery and anticipation is apparent in many evolved species, especially mammals . It’s called empathy when observed in other animals.
If you smiled at this clip, you have just proved this post… 
1 Like
A day ago, you didn’t seem so sure, and this answer today is the usual circular logic. Just 12 hours earlier you said, “I guess the point in struggling or doing anything?” as a question. As the typical high school teacher asks, “are you asking me or telling me?” You bring up me saying “doing what makes you happy”, from weeks ago, ignoring the more recent conversation on “it’s just chemicals”. Your case against “making meaning” and “makes you happy” collapses once you look what “it’s just chemicals” means. You need to bring in new things to argue about, like “hindsight bias” to distract us from this breach of logic.
I’m not agreeing with you about “it’s just chemicals” as a concession that I will at some later point take back. “It” is just chemicals. The chemicals have reactions that rely on the law of physics, and in complex organisms, properties emerge that are greater than the sum of the parts, but without the chemicals those wouldn’t happen.
The properties I’m talking about include “happiness” and “meaning”. We can see that less complex animals have them. They don’t have the complexity of thoughts about the future that we do, and have less sophisticated language about it, so they have not yet written Shakesperean plays to describe these properties, but we can study their social behavior and see that they have feelings and they react to them. All of which can be explained by physics and chemistry.
Then you do this
Psychosis is a break from reality. Since we are just chemicals, then by that definition human beings have been psychotic for millions of years as they tried to work out how they got here and what gods created their environment and what spirits manipulate them. That’s unfair to them because it’s only recently that we’ve discovered the laws and forces that make us what we are. But, your critiques of human beings are valid in many ways, as we see the control that the major religions still have over people’s minds. Not that long ago, we called people “witches” because they believed they deserved to be created equally. So, anyway, the definitions of words change as we learn and grow through history.
More to the point, if there is one here, you decide existence is empty. You don’t care much for the emergent properties because they “aren’t you” or they are “just chemicals”, but that doesn’t mean anything. It’s just reality. You take the “just chemicals” reality and make it mean something, then try to tell me there is no meaning. If I’m living, feeling the feelings that are created by chemistry and that’s what reality is, then how am I disconnected from reality?
1 Like