Minds and Events

[DLJ]

No matter; never mind... True.

Never mind; no matter... False.

[Arkilogue]

So basically: I think, therefore I think I think is about as robust as it can get...

I personally think I'm a brain in a vat. Doesn't mean I really really am. What if I'm a virtual brain in a virtual vat in a virtual sim............. floating on a big turtle somewhere?   Cool!

note to self: don't forget the milk...

"I think therefor I....ah crap, I forgot."


Feeling around the original saying objectively, there must at least be; a thinker (I), a query of self existence (think), and there must be some kind of reflective membrane (therefor) to bounce the query/confirmation back to source (I am).

[chimp3]

"Thus we would need to conclude a rock has a mind or is part of a mind to the same extent that my brain is a mind or is part of a mind."
 

So , you wish to argue that your mind and a rock are on equal par ?

[purplepurpose]

All this philosophy idealy should encourage us to surrender our lifes to serving the God and dont be egoitic lustful animals, to please the God. Because hell...

I think in a broad sense its a harmless belief.

But jihadis who kill apostates and rape and murder infidels, now thats fucked up faith.

[Jesster]

All this philosophy idealy should encourage us to surrender our lifes to serving the God and dont be egoitic lustful animals, to please the God. Because hell...

I think in a broad sense its a harmless belief.

But jihadis who kill apostates and rape and murder infidels, now thats fucked up faith.

Jihadis are definitely the greater evil, so I won't assert a comparison here.

I wouldn't call belief in a god entirely harmless though. Sure, it may not do too much to the casual believer. The casual believer does vote to make lives like mine more miserable though. If they didn't believe in that god, a good number of them would not vote as they do.

[fdesilva]

Simultaneous events give rise to feelings?  What does that even mean?  I think you're developing a word salad.  Feelings are caused by physical and mental events.  In space, physical things can cause reactions in other physical things.  Therefore it's possible that feelings are caused by other physical things, and therefore mental events may be physical events.

In regards to the above question, please consider the following

Passage of time
       Time passes from one instant to the next. This allows for a well defined past, current and future      instant of time
 
Perception
 
Consider the experience of watching an apple. If we close our eyes the apple cannot be perceived. From this observation we can conclude that the light from the apple stimulates the eyes which in turn stimulate the brain which results in an apple appearing in the mind. From this experience we get the following axioms.

Axiom A
 
Stimulating events in the eyes give rise to Perception located within the brain at the current instant.
 
Axiom B
 
Perception consists of 2 components.
 1. The observed or the object of perception (U) that is the apple.
 2. The perceiver or the thing looking at the apple. (I)
 
Events of perception
 
Consider the distribution of events in the brain pertaining to perception. U the apple or the first component at any given instant will correspond to a set of simultaneous events in the brain
 
I the second component by the act of perception will connect this set of simultaneous brain events.
 
2 Special Relativity physics and simultaneous events
 
Special Relativity groups all events into 2 distinct groups.
 1. Time-like separated events
 2. Space-like separated events.
 
Time like separated events.
 
These are events that are separated in space and time such that there is sufficient time for a beam of light from one event to have reached the second event.
 
Space-like separated events.
 
These are events that are separated in space and time such that light from any one event can never reach any of the other events. Thus simultaneous events are space-like separated. That is even 2 event occurring 0.0001 mm from each other in the same instant will be space-like separated.
 
 

 
3 Pivotal Argument
 
P1. Thus the events of U at a given instant is space-like separated.
P2. Perception connects these events.
P3. Special relativity states that nothing physical (material) can connect space-like separated events.
C1. Therefore perception as it connects space-like separated events of U, cannot be physical. That is it is non physical or dualistic.
 
 

[LadyForCamus]

"Thus we would need to conclude a rock has a mind or is part of a mind to the same extent that my brain is a mind or is part of a mind."
 

So , you wish to argue that your mind and a rock are on equal par ?

No argument from me on that point.

[Angrboda]

Time like separated events.
 
These are events that are separated in space and time such that there is sufficient time for a beam of light from one event to have reached the second event.
 
Space-like separated events.
 
These are events that are separated in space and time such that light from any one event can never reach any of the other events. Thus simultaneous events are space-like separated. That is even 2 event occurring 0.0001 mm from each other in the same instant will be space-like separated.

Can never reach any of the other events?  You have a funny definition of what it means to be spatially separated.  Relativity redefines simultaneity effectively eliminating the traditional concept.  Thus, simultaneous events are not space-like separated, they are defined by relative motion.

 
3 Pivotal Argument
 
P1. Thus the events of U at a given instant is space-like separated.
P2. Perception connects these events.

Perception doesn't literally connect these events, it builds a representation of space in which two events are occurring.  As this representation isn't bound by the laws of space-time, it can be manipulated in real time to be whatever is required to represent multiple perceptions.

P3. Special relativity states that nothing physical (material) can connect space-like separated events.
C1. Therefore perception as it connects space-like separated events of U, cannot be physical. That is it is non physical or dualistic.

As noted, perception is a representation of the percipii, not the actual space-like separated events, therefore it is not bound by the laws of relativity.  The pivotal argument fails.  Moreover, the eye and the brains processing of U occur with a high degree of parallelism, which can create the appearance of simultaneity by generating near simultaneous results which are then incorporated into one representation of U.

[downbeatplumb]

All this philosophy idealy should encourage us to surrender our lifes to serving the God and dont be egoitic lustful animals, to please the God. Because hell...

I think in a broad sense its a harmless belief.

But jihadis who kill apostates and rape and murder infidels, now thats fucked up faith.

Belief in god hampers the search for knowledge. If the answer is god can do anything by magic then looking for how stuff really happened is pointless.

[Angrboda]

All this philosophy idealy should encourage us to surrender our lifes to serving the God and dont be egoitic lustful animals, to please the God. Because hell...

I think in a broad sense its a harmless belief.

But jihadis who kill apostates and rape and murder infidels, now thats fucked up faith.

Belief in god hampers the search for knowledge. If the answer is god can do anything by magic then looking for how stuff really happened is pointless.

While in theory this is true, I don't think that in actual practice it has that much of a stifling effect.

It takes all kinds to make a world. Not everybody is on a search for knowledge. Some just want to live their lives.