[split] PORN

[TruthWorthy]

They way your neurological self (NS) contructs itself, no matter how different, makes you, you.
Baring trauma to the brain I would maintain "you" will remain "you" until natural decay of brain functions makes you into somebody else.

Now you're talking about the internal physical structures, psychology is still in its infancy. It was only a century ago that it became separated from philosophy. During Freud's time, all you needed to become a psychoanalyst was a degree in physiology. Of course there's more now, and illnesses of experience and conditions never imagined are being identified while psychology continues to develop. More over, you might find interesting that this locationism (localised and specific areas of the brain performing different functions) has largely been over thrown by a more monogamous description of plasticity, proposed by Edward Taub whom also had a massive hampering by the lay community which seen him charged with 119 counts of misconduct (incorrectly btw) from his experients. Following the trial 117 counts were thrown out and the bigger names resided with him. Shows how the reluctance for change is so damaging on a large scale.

[Purple Rabbit]

Part of the self is the body outside the brain that with its feedback to the brain, its sensory organs, its hormone producing glands, its nervous system, its proprioperceptive awareness is just part of you. IOW, a brain transplant would not lead to the same you. It is our inability to trace our thoughts to bodily functions at molecular levels that suggests a divide between conscious thinking and bodily functions. That divide is illusional as shown by work of Antonio Damasio among others.

[TruthWorthy]

there is some argument either way - somatic vs. psyche, methinks its rubbish, gotta think with something, aint somethin you sit on neither

[Dotard]

I disagree. Sensory organs can be electronic, hormones can be artificially produced, nervous system replaced by wiring, proprioceptive awareness is just another sensor to install.

Just read an article about artificial limbs. Made wired in to nerve endings where the wearer just 'thinks' to move it and it does. Read it here:

I believe this work shows that 'divide' you speak of. If it can be done with an arm, why not a complete torso?

[Purple Rabbit]

I disagree. Sensory organs can be electronic, hormones can be artificially produced, nervous system replaced by wiring, proprioceptive awareness is just another sensor to install.

Just read an article about artificial limbs. Made wired in to nerve endings where the wearer just 'thinks' to move it and it does. Read it here:

I believe this work shows that 'divide' you speak of. If it can be done with an arm, why not a complete torso?

Don't know with what you're exactly disagreeing but I didn't say you cannot replace the feedback from the body with electronic stubs. Only that what constitutes 'you' isn't located in the brain alone.

And of course your article does not show that the feedback from the artificial limb constitutes the same neural map if any that the original limb would do. Part of the neural basis for emotions lies outside the brain. Proprioperception is the awareness of your limbs, i.e. the feedback of your limbs to the brain by neural maps, not the ability to control your limbs.

[Dotard]

Don't know with what you're exactly disagreeing but I didn't say you cannot replace the feedback from the body with electronic stubs. Only that what constitutes 'you' isn't located in the brain alone.

That is what I am disagreeing with. And this:

Part of the neural basis for emotions lies outside the brain.

Proprioperception would be achieved with internal sensors. Another piece of hardware to install.

And of course these arms in their infancy cannot do what a real arm can do, yet.

You would have to provide me with more evidence of any emotion being generated outside the brain. Anything your body does is in reaction to the emotion.

[Purple Rabbit]

Don't know with what you're exactly disagreeing but I didn't say you cannot replace the feedback from the body with electronic stubs. Only that what constitutes 'you' isn't located in the brain alone.

So to be clear about it, you disagree with: that what constitutes 'you' isn't located in the brain alone.

Since 'you' includes the whole nervous system, how can it be otherwise? Can I chop of the brain stem too? Where exactly is you located in your nervous system?

That is what I am disagreeing with. And this:

Part of the neural basis for emotions lies outside the brain.

Proprioperception would be achieved with internal sensors. Another piece of hardware to install.

And of course these arms in their infancy cannot do what a real arm can do, yet.

I agree the response of the robot arm to commands from the brain (downward stimulation) is not relevant for the argument being made. But as long as a robot arm cannot give back nervous stimuli (upward stimulation) that accurately replace the feedback of the original arm, the awareness of the limb would be different and therefore you would be different.

You would have to provide me with more evidence of any emotion being generated outside the brain. Anything your body does is in reaction to the emotion.

Well, I think you're making the claim that a brain without body contains all of the 'self', so actually I think the burden of proof lies with you. But I will nevertheless meet you halfway with positive evidence for the so called Somatic Marker Hypothesis formulated by Damasio. A somatic marker is a representation in the brain of the state of bodily functions outside the brain. These markers areas have been positively identified in the ventromedial prefrontal cortex. They act as a kind of aggregated snapshot of the state of the body. IOW if there is some sort impairment or dysfunction in the body this will be reflected in the somatic markers. If the blood sugar level falls below a level of comfort for instance this will be represented in the somatic markers. These are the basis for emotions of physiological origin. Damasio's hypothesis says that these somatic markers influence decision-making in the brain. Bechara, Damasio et al showed in this paper that damage of the ventromedial prefrontal cortex influences conscious decision making. Thus showing that the somatic markers contribute to traits of the self.

[fr0d0]

Interesting stuff Rabbit. I don't think that shows that personality exists outside of the brain tho'. It seems to suggest sensory feedback. Is hormonal information communicated from the body that would influence the gender of a personality do you think?

[Purple Rabbit]

Interesting stuff Rabbit. I don't think that shows that personality exists outside of the brain tho'. It seems to suggest sensory feedback.

It is feedback from the body to the brain as I've stated before. And that feedback is part of what constitutes the self. The body interferes with decision-making these results indicate. You can brush it aside with a "I don't think" but then the burden of proof would be on you to show how these results can be refuted.

Is hormonal information communicated from the body that would influence the gender of a personality do you think?

Are you referring to the perceived gender of the individual or to the physiological gender of the body?

[fr0d0]

I don't think decision making impacts on personality tho' does it??

I'm talking about perceived gender. I'm trying to understand the relation to transgenderism.