(May 17, 2014 at 4:46 pm)Godslayer Wrote: "That'd be nice" = A rule?

Oh do lighten up.

Quote:And you're right, it's has no scientific backing and therefore is pseudoscience. Philosophical positions still need evidence to some degree to be taken seriously. You're obviously wrong about the mind gap, the brain is the physical medium for the mind. The mind is an emergent property of the brain. One Neuron on it's own does nothing, but gather enough neurons together and you've got a network of neurons making chemical reactions and forming a mind. That's why we can look at the neurons of other animals and see they have the same activity, just less of it.

How does that occur? Magic? Is there an underlying principle that determines such an outcome for neurons? Does it have to be a certain biochemical organization or can silicon chips facilitate the same function? Does a specific structural organization of matter necessitate the presence of mind? Or is it the nature of the electrical impulses that count? Can some type of radio transmitter do the trick for neurons separated across miles of space? What is it about their nature that allows them to transcend their otherwise apparently inanimate quality--objects, rather than subjects--individual physical states and processes, which then give rise to the Ego, to intelligence, to intention? We are Unintended Intenders, which is unlike anything else we find in nature, hence we feel distinct, and yet this very nature is in us, is us.

(May 17, 2014 at 3:26 pm)rasetsu Wrote: To my view, panspychism is just a short cut to solve the physicalist paradox. To a physicalist, that which contains thoughts is matter. Yet matter only contains more matter. How can it contain thoughts? Panpsychism takes the shortcut of postulating that all matter can contain thought. It's solving the physicalist paradox by simply asserting that "stuff" has the right properties, therefore there is no paradox. In that, it's not that different from substance dualism, which, also asserts that there's a substance which "just does have the right properties," and that thing is the soul or spirit. The substance dualist solves the problem by attributing thought to a substance separate from matter; panpsychism solves the problem by attributing thought as a basic property of matter. But do either of these approaches actually solve the problem, or do they just postpone the inevitable mechanistic account of how either soul-stuff or matter itself gives rise to the property of thought that we see?

If by 'solve' you mean 'make shit up to explain away an actual problem', then sure.

But it was a clear summary description, so thanks for that.

(May 17, 2014 at 7:00 pm)Chas Wrote: If by 'solve' you mean 'make shit up to explain away an actual problem', then sure.

But it was a clear summary description, so thanks for that.

Hey, made up shit is the shit that scientists test.

(May 17, 2014 at 6:46 pm)Pickup_shonuff Wrote: How does that occur? Magic?

Why is a chemical reaction, magic? I'd suggest study into this area. There have been huge advancements in our understanding of Neurology.

(May 17, 2014 at 6:46 pm)Pickup_shonuff Wrote: Is there an underlying principle that determines such an outcome for neurons?

No, it's just brain chemistry. If it was determinable then we wouldn't have things like downs syndrome for example.

(May 17, 2014 at 6:46 pm)Pickup_shonuff Wrote: Does it have to be a certain biochemical organization or can silicon chips facilitate the same function?

Well the brain of any animal has to form properly so biochemical processes can function correctly. I hope I'm not misunderstanding you. But, we yes, we could hypothetically replicate a brain or make a sentient robot with enough chips, it's not inconceivable at least. We are also making huge strides in the field of robotics, they get better every year. It's strange that our brain could be upgraded by software, but it's the future. We're slowly going towards a world of trans-humanism where we upgrade ourselves, it happens now. If we could make the brain more optimal, then we are probably going to go that direction.

(May 17, 2014 at 6:46 pm)Pickup_shonuff Wrote: Does a specific structural organization of matter necessitate the presence of mind?

This is where panpsychism is sort of brought in isn't it? You might say that it doesn't have to be organized to be a mind or that everything is organized like a mind? (I disagree on both). But, this is kind of why I brought up particles with you. If the cosmos is surrounded by minds then is every particle alive? or how about one neuron? is it really alive if it can't sustain itself without other neurons? I'd say no.

(May 17, 2014 at 6:46 pm)Pickup_shonuff Wrote: Or is it the nature of the electrical impulses that count?

Well, it's more complex than just electrical impulses. But, yes, as of now our understanding is that the more going on in your brain, the more complex the mind, which is why retarded people have less neuron activity. I love how aliens are depicted in movies with the big heads for big brains.

(May 17, 2014 at 6:46 pm)Pickup_shonuff Wrote: Can some type of radio transmitter do the trick for neurons separated across miles of space?

Interesting. But probably not. What does this have to do with panpsychism though?

(May 17, 2014 at 6:46 pm)Pickup_shonuff Wrote: What is it about their nature that allows them to transcend their otherwise apparently inanimate quality--objects, rather than subjects--individual physical states and processes, which then give rise to the Ego, to intelligence, to intention?

The neurons nature is to form in the womb and function as well as possible in life, maybe that's boring but there it is. Other animals have neuron activity, just not enough for certain personality traits, but definitely enough for things like love and compassion. I think the brain is such a beautiful organ, we still have lots of work to do in mapping the brain so I'm excited to learn more moving forward.

(May 17, 2014 at 6:46 pm)Pickup_shonuff Wrote: We are Unintended Intenders, which is unlike anything else we find in nature, hence we feel distinct, and yet this very nature is in us, is us.

I wouldn't say we're an unintended being. Our parents had sex and likely make us with intention. But I still don't see how being biological creatures with biochemical brains necessitates the cosmos being full of minds. Honestly it sounds like you're making connections where there is no connection, thinking the universe is full of minds when minds are products of brains. And in the vastness of space, there are hardly any brains.

(May 18, 2014 at 11:28 am)Godslayer Wrote:

(May 17, 2014 at 6:46 pm)Pickup_shonuff Wrote: How does that occur? Magic?

Why is a chemical reaction, magic? I'd suggest study into this area. There have been huge advancements in our understanding of Neurology.

(May 17, 2014 at 6:46 pm)Pickup_shonuff Wrote: Is there an underlying principle that determines such an outcome for neurons?

No, it's just brain chemistry. If it was determinable then we wouldn't have things like downs syndrome for example.

(May 17, 2014 at 6:46 pm)Pickup_shonuff Wrote: Does it have to be a certain biochemical organization or can silicon chips facilitate the same function?

Well the brain of any animal has to form properly so biochemical processes can function correctly. I hope I'm not misunderstanding you. But, we yes, we could hypothetically replicate a brain or make a sentient robot with enough chips, it's not inconceivable at least. We are also making huge strides in the field of robotics, they get better every year. It's strange that our brain could be upgraded by software, but it's the future. We're slowly going towards a world of trans-humanism where we upgrade ourselves, it happens now. If we could make the brain more optimal, then we are probably going to go that direction.

(May 17, 2014 at 6:46 pm)Pickup_shonuff Wrote: Does a specific structural organization of matter necessitate the presence of mind?

This is where panpsychism is sort of brought in isn't it? You might say that it doesn't have to be organized to be a mind or that everything is organized like a mind? (I disagree on both). But, this is kind of why I brought up particles with you. If the cosmos is surrounded by minds then is every particle alive? or how about one neuron? is it really alive if it can't sustain itself without other neurons? I'd say no.

(May 17, 2014 at 6:46 pm)Pickup_shonuff Wrote: Or is it the nature of the electrical impulses that count?

Well, it's more complex than just electrical impulses. But, yes, as of now our understanding is that the more going on in your brain, the more complex the mind, which is why retarded people have less neuron activity. I love how aliens are depicted in movies with the big heads for big brains.

(May 17, 2014 at 6:46 pm)Pickup_shonuff Wrote: Can some type of radio transmitter do the trick for neurons separated across miles of space?

Interesting. But probably not. What does this have to do with panpsychism though?

(May 17, 2014 at 6:46 pm)Pickup_shonuff Wrote: What is it about their nature that allows them to transcend their otherwise apparently inanimate quality--objects, rather than subjects--individual physical states and processes, which then give rise to the Ego, to intelligence, to intention?

The neurons nature is to form in the womb and function as well as possible in life, maybe that's boring but there it is. Other animals have neuron activity, just not enough for certain personality traits, but definitely enough for things like love and compassion. I think the brain is such a beautiful organ, we still have lots of work to do in mapping the brain so I'm excited to learn more moving forward.

(May 17, 2014 at 6:46 pm)Pickup_shonuff Wrote: We are Unintended Intenders, which is unlike anything else we find in nature, hence we feel distinct, and yet this very nature is in us, is us.

I wouldn't say we're an unintended being. Our parents had sex and likely make us with intention. But I still don't see how being biological creatures with biochemical brains necessitates the cosmos being full of minds. Honestly it sounds like you're making connections where there is no connection, thinking the universe is full of minds when minds are products of brains. And in the vastness of space, there are hardly any brains.

I appreciate all those answers. It's not that I'm trying to make connections; I don't prescribe to panpsychism myself. What I do find, however, is that panpsychists do ask vital and interesting questions about the nature of matter and how mind might arise from it or be realized through it. Most of the material I've read on the mind has been at least 20 years old so I definitely need to look into more up-to-date research on the topic. How exactly chemical reactions, forged in stars and which at bottom consist of the same "stuff" found everywhere else in the Universe, give rise to consciousness, is a confounding mystery to me. It makes for some interesting speculation and that is important I think when we're still on the outer edges of understanding.