• OK, it's on.
  • Please note that many, many Email Addresses used for spam, are not accepted at registration. Select a respectable Free email.
  • Done now. Domine miserere nobis.

Possibility that proccess of thought could be an act of recollecting memory and making sense of it.

Aerl

Active Member
Local time
Tomorrow 12:57 AM
Joined
Apr 12, 2014
Messages
123
---
Location
Fields
This is a speculation.

When ever we think of something, we have already experienced it once in life,
or have memory of someone describing it. It is hard to talk about it on our
current level so I'll give an example of proccess of thought in someone around
the age of 3 years old.

At the age of 3 there is a low amount of memory and only some things appear
to form patterns of happenings or cause behind effect. If a 3 year old saw
some futuristic spacecraft descend from the sky I doubt he would know what
to think. Over the years memories expand and patterns start to emmerge
in more things. Some events are perceived to happen more likely than
others and a set of actions is memorised which are to take place incase
something alien appears.

The amount of memory we have and what we are able to recollect at a given
time seems to correalate to what we think and how we think about it.

example: what is similar between these: fire, shelter, clothing.
There is a memory that all of them provide some protection from cold.

What is happening is we're shuffling through memories in search of 1 function
which is exibited by all of them. Even though I said they provide protection from
cold, it's true that all of them can be a product of Man's action, etc.

In a similar way, when I say that I am thinking about the Sun, I mean that I'm
recollecting everything I can remember that might be connected to the Sun and
I'm scanning if some memories can be merged, connected, to form new ideas,
tracks of thought and possibility of adding more memories.

In simple terms: This idea of possibility proposes that thinking is an act of
bringing up dots which are memories and trying to connect them, in orter to
form patterns. Which are later used to execute a particular course of action.


p.s.
Why I wrote something like this, I want to know what you make of the pattern
that I described. Am I being delusional and seeing things or it actually is there
and what does it mean.
 

John_Mann

Active Member
Local time
Today 10:57 PM
Joined
Feb 23, 2013
Messages
376
---
Location
Brazil
Do you equal thought with stream of self awareness?

I don't think self awareness is equal to memory. They're interdependent but not the same thing. Thinking and feeling are not equal to consciousness.

Neither thinking or feeling are equal to memory.
 

Aerl

Active Member
Local time
Tomorrow 12:57 AM
Joined
Apr 12, 2014
Messages
123
---
Location
Fields
Do you equal thought with stream of self awareness?

I don't think self awareness is equal to memory. They're interdependent but not the same thing. Thinking and feeling are not equal to consciousness.

Neither thinking or feeling are equal to memory.

I can't define consciousness but I think that thinking is one of it's properties, along with feelings.

I agree that neither thinking or feeling is memory alone, what I imply is that
feelings are interconnected memories which activate particular patterns of
responses that could be predefined by genes, my opinion is like that because
we usually feel unconsciously. As for thinking, I proposed a speculation that it
could be the act of connecting memories, not memories themselves. While if we
consider thought as a complete, finished, I'd define it similar to feelings but it
being on a conscious level.

Self awarness is another whole level of consciousness in my book. If I am to
prove my point: you can be enjoying a movie at the moment without self
reflection, but once it ends you become interested what was it that you enjoyed
and why did you enjoy it. This is something I pointed out in BAP's thread

We feel outside world through our senses unconsciously and can respond
without thinking. i.e. reflexes

Than we have awarness of feelings (predefined reflexes to particular
stimulation). Once there is awarness it's possible to store memory consciously
and manipulate it, think.

And only than we have awarness of conscious action, this brings up the idea of
"I" as a Human being which thinks and acts for his own well being.

If we go further on, the "I" shifts from Body to Mind/Brain and afterwards to
Spirit, Soul for some.

I hope that clarifies my position.
 

John_Mann

Active Member
Local time
Today 10:57 PM
Joined
Feb 23, 2013
Messages
376
---
Location
Brazil
I do not understand what you want to say.

IMO thinking and memory can be achieved without self awareness. IBM Watson is a good example of that. He can perform what we call thinking and regarding memory every ordinary computer have it (better than humans).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DywO4zksfXw
 

Aerl

Active Member
Local time
Tomorrow 12:57 AM
Joined
Apr 12, 2014
Messages
123
---
Location
Fields
I do not understand what you want to say.

IMO thinking and memory can be achieved without self awareness. IBM Watson is a good example of that. He can perform what we call thinking and regarding memory every ordinary computer have it (better than humans).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DywO4zksfXw

That I agree with what you said and elaborated on how it doesn't contradict my speculation.

Yes, and yes, also another yes. To all 3 points. I can elaborate on what I think is
happening and how my proposed speculation fits into all that.
 

John_Mann

Active Member
Local time
Today 10:57 PM
Joined
Feb 23, 2013
Messages
376
---
Location
Brazil
I think there's a hierarchy among these 3 phenomena.

Memory (short an long term) < thinking < consciousness

We already know how to replicate memory and thinking in non biological substrates.

Consciousness is very hard to even define, but I tend to agree with the consciousness being an heuristic algorithm of pattern recognition.
 

Cherry Cola

Banned
Local time
Today 10:57 PM
Joined
Mar 17, 2013
Messages
3,899
---
Location
stockholm
I think there is a possiblity that there are too many hastily formulated theories of mind about. All of them being concerned with semantic trivialities.. consciousness is this or these words! As if it mattered.
 

Grayman

Soul Shade
Local time
Today 2:57 PM
Joined
Jan 8, 2013
Messages
4,418
---
Location
You basement
Aerl;432068The amount of memory we have and what we are able to recollect at a given time seems to correalate to what we think and how we think about it. example: what is similar between these: fire said:
In simple terms: This idea of possibility proposes that thinking is an act of
bringing up dots which are memories and trying to connect them, in orter to
form patterns. Which are later used to execute a particular course of action.[/B]

p.s.
Why I wrote something like this, I want to know what you make of the pattern
that I described. Am I being delusional and seeing things or it actually is there
and what does it mean.

Emotions are seperate and physically exist seperate in the mind. Many are built at birth before memory. Fear for example exists when you see danger. Memory can provide the feeling as a result of reliving the memory. Memory can also convince you that your current situation is dangerous when it relates to that memory. The feelings are a function of thier own but memory can execute those functions.

It is argued that emotions allow memories to be stored and that emotions shape the memories when stored. To me it seems when i recall the memory I recreate the emotions based on my current memory and decide how I might of felt. Sometimes I just recall how I felt.
 

John_Mann

Active Member
Local time
Today 10:57 PM
Joined
Feb 23, 2013
Messages
376
---
Location
Brazil
I think there is a possiblity that there are too many hastily formulated theories of mind about. All of them being concerned with semantic trivialities.. consciousness is this or these words! As if it mattered.

I think consciousness is the only thing that matters. Lately I think it doesn't exist at all, it's just a kind of illusion. It's just a kind of reflection of others processes like memory and thinking.

What you think about the consciousness CC?
 

Grayman

Soul Shade
Local time
Today 2:57 PM
Joined
Jan 8, 2013
Messages
4,418
---
Location
You basement
I think consciousness is the only thing that matters. Lately I think it doesn't exist at all, it's just a kind of illusion. It's just a kind of reflection of others processes like memory and thinking.

What you think about the consciousness CC?

He just said it doesn't matter.
 

John_Mann

Active Member
Local time
Today 10:57 PM
Joined
Feb 23, 2013
Messages
376
---
Location
Brazil
He said it doesn't matter in a semantic approach.
 

Grayman

Soul Shade
Local time
Today 2:57 PM
Joined
Jan 8, 2013
Messages
4,418
---
Location
You basement
Memory is knowledge thought requires knowledge of the psst or even the present. I am not sure what greater understanding you are trying to gain from this.
 

Aerl

Active Member
Local time
Tomorrow 12:57 AM
Joined
Apr 12, 2014
Messages
123
---
Location
Fields
Memory is knowledge thought requires knowledge of the psst or even the present. I am not sure what greater understanding you are trying to gain from this.

Why, how and exactly What, turns the engine on...
 

Cherry Cola

Banned
Local time
Today 10:57 PM
Joined
Mar 17, 2013
Messages
3,899
---
Location
stockholm
I think consciousness is the only thing that matters. Lately I think it doesn't exist at all, it's just a kind of illusion. It's just a kind of reflection of others processes like memory and thinking.

What you think about the consciousness CC?

I elaborated on it here:

http://intpforum.com/showthread.php?t=19534

My position is basically that it is too hard a question to tackle directly. I try to clarify what is consciousness and what is not rather than try to define what consciousness is exactly. The latter is a hopeless endeavor so far as I can see, before we start trying to define consciousness we need to debunk all the myths surrounding it.
 

Aerl

Active Member
Local time
Tomorrow 12:57 AM
Joined
Apr 12, 2014
Messages
123
---
Location
Fields
I elaborated on it here:

http://intpforum.com/showthread.php?t=19534

My position is basically that it is too hard a question to tackle directly. I try to clarify what is consciousness and what is not rather than try to define what consciousness is exactly. The latter is a hopeless endeavor so far as I can see, before we start trying to define consciousness we need to debunk all the myths surrounding it.

That is a view point I share with you. While unable to define consciousness,
I try to recognize what it does and I speculate about thought proccess for
example, feelings, emotions, memorie storage, etc.

I'll have to check that thread carefuly, later.
 

Cherry Cola

Banned
Local time
Today 10:57 PM
Joined
Mar 17, 2013
Messages
3,899
---
Location
stockholm
There are a million stances on the nature of consciousness which differ in semantic trivialities only. Each one criticizing the others for their failure to give a complete picture of the way consciousness works. The problem is that each and every one of them tries to "solve" the problem of consciousness rather than approximate what consciousness is. Hence the polarity between the different views. Consciousness is mental, consciousness is physical, but what is mental anyway and what is physical and how do the two differ?

I put myself in the panpsychism camp because they seem less concerned with polarizing and pretending to understand consciousness by labeling it than do other camps.

Now your thread isn't concerned with measly polarizing but I think it's still going to be fruitless trying to make sense of thought by memory alone. Memory is a part of thought and it's not fully understood either. The connections you make in the OP (what is similar between these: fire, shelter, clothing.
There is a memory that all of them provide some protection from cold
) require that memory works by storing information in a pattern that allows for recall by analogy among other things.
The OP shifts focus unto memory, the intricacies of its functioning demanding to be uncovered.

Douglas Hofstader (once a teacher of David Chalmers) elaborates on this here, he presents a pretty vivid example of how memory works by analogy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n8m7lFQ3njk#t=1184

The whole video is pretty good but I think he gets the concept across there starting from 19:40 too like 26:00 or something.

The OP shifts focus unto memory, the intricacies of its functioning demanding to be uncovered.
 

Variform

Banned
Local time
Today 10:57 PM
Joined
Mar 11, 2014
Messages
809
---
I don't know how much memory a three year old has.

What is the basis for this?

example: what is similar between these: fire, shelter, clothing.
There is a memory that all of them provide some protection from cold.

Untrue. Fire is an element and shelter and clothing are things you can be in. You can be in a shelter, a bomb shelter or a shelter from the elements, like fire. Clothes are things also around you, around your body. I see no difference between the fact clothes are close to your skin and walls of a shelter. Clothes are a shelter too, just mobile ones.

However, when I do an IQ test, I would pick what you said. :kodama1:
In simple terms: This idea of possibility proposes that thinking is an act of
bringing up dots which are memories and trying to connect them, in orter to
form patterns. Which are later used to execute a particular course of action.


p.s.
Why I wrote something like this, I want to know what you make of the pattern
that I described. Am I being delusional and seeing things or it actually is there
and what does it mean.

I don't know enough about memory to say much. I think memories are not stored in the brain. The act of recollection may fire up neurons and that will show on a scanner.

But listen, re-readyour bold text and rephrase. What you are saying now is simpley this:

- The act of thinking brings up memories.
- Thinking connects the memories (or tries to).
- ...to form patterns.
- ...to be the basis of action.

I think we all pretty much can agree we already known this for 2000 years.
 

Variform

Banned
Local time
Today 10:57 PM
Joined
Mar 11, 2014
Messages
809
---
I can't define consciousness but I think that thinking is one of it's properties, along with feelings.

I agree that neither thinking or feeling is memory alone, what I imply is that
feelings are interconnected memories which activate particular patterns of
responses that could be predefined by genes, my opinion is like that because
we usually feel unconsciously. As for thinking, I proposed a speculation that it
could be the act of connecting memories, not memories themselves. While if we
consider thought as a complete, finished, I'd define it similar to feelings but it
being on a conscious level.


So you seem to want to reduce feelings to genetic responses through memory.

In which case we are pre-programmed bio-robots with built-in feelings, that get triggered by memories.


Self awarness is another whole level of consciousness in my book. If I am to
prove my point: you can be enjoying a movie at the moment without self
reflection, but once it ends you become interested what was it that you enjoyed and why did you enjoy it. This is something I pointed out in BAP's thread

When you watch a film, your attention is on the film, but that is part of your consciousness. I think by default you are aware you are watching the film, because the information is always being processed in your brain and subconscious.

I think you mean another type of self-awareness. What you mean is being aware of your attention. That means as you watch the film, you constantly reflect on what it is you are doing and what you are experiencing.


We feel outside world through our senses unconsciously and can respond
without thinking. i.e. reflexes


Autonomous responses to stimuli from the external world that I think are based in the oldest parts of the brain.

Than we have awarness of feelings (predefined reflexes to particular
stimulation). Once there is awarness it's possible to store memory consciously and manipulate it, think.

I have trouble agreeing to this. I do not think that feelings are built-in autonomous responses because that would suggest that we store an infinite amount of permutations genetically to deal with infinite numbers of possible experiences, as no situation is ever just the same. Besides that, people can experience feelings differently in the same situation.

I would suggest that our self-awareness directs the memory storage although the process of it is below the threshold of conscious processing.

And only than we have awarness of conscious action, this brings up the idea of "I" as a Human being which thinks and acts for his own well being.

If we go further on, the "I" shifts from Body to Mind/Brain and afterwards to
Spirit, Soul for some.

I hope that clarifies my position.

Not sure really.
 

Variform

Banned
Local time
Today 10:57 PM
Joined
Mar 11, 2014
Messages
809
---
Why, how and exactly What, turns the engine on...

Yes the old question formulated by Alan Watts: 'Are you doing it or is it doing you?'

One does not beat their own heart. Or activate the immune system, or breath. These are all autonomous responses.

You are an observer of these responses and can affect them. You can hold your breath, but you are going against the flow. Your body will not be a willing participant for long.

Consciousness turns the engine on and has a great stake in keeping it on. If it wants to act in the world it must keep the body going and so it will protect and maintain the body, its vehicle that carries it around. I think that my consciousness in a non-local non-temporal phenomenon independent of my body but acting in conjunction with this biological organism in order to maintain a presence in this bandwidth realm we call the universe.

I also believe there is only one consciousness and that it is mine. And yet all may claim so and they would be right too.

I think of consciousness in this way, that when you imagine a rubber sheet, stretched out into infinity, that this represents reality and that when you poke a finger underneath it, you will cause a protrusion from this sheet.

And that is who you are. A protrusion from consciousness that now sticks above the field of reality and therefore can discern reality. When you die, the rubber sheet snaps back and you lose oversight.

To be able to interact, we must create many protrusions so that we can observe one another. Yet under the sheet it is all consciousness and we are all connected below that surface.

It is for this reason sometimes we can have memories of events that never occurred to us experience past lives or recognize places we have never been in.

Our memories are stored in that consciousness and do not evaporate when our protrusion levels back to the flat surface.

Our body and brain are merely very smartly evolved inter-mediums so we can be in contact with basically, ourselves, to experience life in as diverse ways as we can. That doesn't mean our bodies should be neglected but maintain it well and it will last long enough to gain experience.

The reason consciousness 'protrudes' is to be self-aware. And self-awareness can only, ONLY be achieved by the self splitting into more than ONE form. So you and I are one, but we inhabit different bodies, experience different lives and so when I look upon you I see myself yet in another form. If there was only me, I would not know me, I would be god instilled in an eternal dream.

The fact is, to be self-aware, consciousness needs to undergo the formality of occurring.

This is why our nature is dual. Duality is the reduced fraction of multipality. If that is not a word, it is now.

You see, next to one, is two, two defines one in two ones. Think it over.

After two come many. 7 billion many. And perhaps many other conscious species in the universe. They are protrusions too, them aliens, you know, just use different evolutionary biological based forms.

If consciousness is basically a form of energy that can act to protrude itself into existence by pushing up from this 'rubber sheet', the only logical reason to do so is that it is not satisfied with just contemplating all possible infinite omnisciently recognized possibilities. It wants to be and the only way to so so is basically, to create reality as a platform on which to act out all these infinite possibilities.

That is what we are, as humans. To live and have experiences in unique ways. Life on Earth is a playpen for consciousness, so that it undergoes the formality of occurring.

That is why we are all unique. Evolution is an amazing system that allows for near infinite variety just on this single world. Imagine billions of Earths, all with different creatures, adding and giving form to consciousness. Experiencing reality in their unique ways.

It makes no sense not to be unique, for that would mean one typical protrusion would suffice. The very fact humans are diverse, that genetics are a system of diversity proves to me that consciousness want to experience everything possible into infinity, otherwise evolution would lead to a single species so well designed that no harm can come to, ultimately well adapted it and then it would sit around looking at its own body. But what a meager existence. :ahh:

I often think how sad it is when a person dies. All their hopes and dreams, experiences, feelings, everything that one is, is cut off, the memories fade into the consciousness underneath reality but as a matter of fact, a whole universe seizes to be. Because their perspective on everything IS the universe.

It disallows consciousness to look upon itself in one less way. This is a shame.

So, I am saying is, I am doing myself, as consciousness, to be a protrusion into reality out of which I can discern myself, be self-aware and see myself in many different shapes around me, who watch back at me with the same curiosity and wonder.


Who am I but you and the sun
A sad reflection of everyone
Was it me who let you walk away
Were you the one or is it we're the same
-- Mountain - For Yasgur's Farm

We are the same, you and I, and we are the sun, we are the universe, a canvas for experience. The very fact we are, to me, proves the reason for why we are here. If we would not be here there would be no need for us. And yet, here we are, so there must be a wish being fulfilled.

And we know what that wish is. We can recognize its pattern, see? In religion e.g. All people seek answers to these existential questions.

Well, here you have it. And it is a personal perspective, but that is self-proving, because I am a single protrusion out of reality and as such, my views differ from yours. And they can exist simultaneously, which is one of the great unanswered and as far as I know, unrecognized philosophical questions. There is roomfor difference because the rubber sheet stretches infinitely to compensate. But to me it makes sense and I feel I have answered satisfactory these existential questions.

For you and other it is a matter of choice to accept it or reject it and both choices are fine and mean little to me. We must all find our own answers for why we exist, to come to terms with these pesky questions like 'what is consciousness and memory and life and the whole caboodle.

And that is the self-sulfilling prophecy of my TOE, that we are all doing that in our own way, which was exactly the purpose of these protrusions of consciousness.

And this is why I believe the human mind is a fractal. Because I can zoom in and out of any person and recognize this patterns of diversity and uniqueness.

In a way all we do reflects the notion of undergoing the formality of occurring, to satisfy consciousness' need to look at itself in different ways.

Political ideology e.g., like religion, is a binder of individuals under a common denominator, meaning we collect ourselves as social groups as a deeply subconscious way of looking at each other in relation to other groups. We self-organize as a species, if you like, to observe and act out in reality. We focus on the differences, yet we forget we are all the same consciousness.

If we are all the same, then why kill each other over these surface differences? It makes no sense, for the purpose was to be different.

We gather in cities, even if our social group finds, between individuals, different visions of reality. So in a city you have many different people with different views, yet still we gather there, rather than wander around. We say that we are social animals, but even though this is a evolutionary and biological argument, the deeper causes of genetics and biology were to provide infinite variety, so this very deep drive within us can be considered a genetic materialistic drive that came out of the intent of consciousness top provide this structured framework for the purpose of undergoing the formality of occurring.

SO you can take any group of people and see the patterns that come out of discerning reality as a whole. This pattern recognition is wider than any mankind-based paradigm or axiom. It is bigger than reality, because consciousness is bigger than reality. Reality is a function of consciousness and we see that in a few religions around the world. And yet, we see it in animism too, where everything is alive, basically its saying that all is consciousness, even stone.

Here too, Alan Watts was ahead of me:

"All I am saying is that minerals are a rudimentary form of consciousness, whereas the other people are saying that consciousness is a complicated form of minerals."
-- Alan Watts, Myth of Myself / The Tao of Philosophy

So with my view here I try to unify reality itself into a coherent explanation of why we are here, who we are, what we are, as per the question posed by Aearl.

What turns the engine on? I turn it on. But you as well, by simply being in the world.

And so, this view I have gives purpose to existence. At least, to mine.

This is why I struggle with suicide, not feeling too good about myself and life. On one hand I am merely a protrusion, like billions in so that I am BOTH unique NOR special. It is not either...or. It is both...and.

And on the other hand, my unique perspectives if not only this particular one I just wrote about, are worthy to exist and experience this wondrous phenomal opportunity we call life.

Consciousness set reality in motion, in which there developed a cosmos, which followed many stages of complexification, to arrive at a planet in some spiral nebula, in one arm of that, in some solar system, where evolutionary processes began, that lead to a naked ape species that developed consciousness, as if it thus was born into the universe from underneath, as a figure of speech, to go through a developmental progress of millennia, to come to fruition when my mom and dad had sex and gave birth to me. I am the very fulfillment of the dream of consciousness to undergo the formality of occurring, and who am I then, to kill myself because the very experience of myself, on Earth, is painful hurtful to me? And yet, I am that what made me, through this elaborate structuringof reality, the universe and all that is the whole platform dedicated as a stage for me to dwell on.

To off myself is insignificant and perhaps my experience of it is what needed to undergo the occurrence, yet I cannot be certain of it. Or it may be a disaster, when I am cut off too soon, because I may still add to my unifying theory and progress mankind someway.

So basically, and it proves the pattern again, hence the fractal mind, whatever I do or choose, will be what is supposed to happen. I am a self-aware self-fulfilling prophecy.

I can find this pattern in any system or model, in any thought, trivial or wise. I stumbled over something and I think it is beautiful. But the world as such it is, makes my life not all that better.
 

Cherry Cola

Banned
Local time
Today 10:57 PM
Joined
Mar 17, 2013
Messages
3,899
---
Location
stockholm
A three year old doesn't have that many memories. A new born has less, still they both have some kind of innate mental algorithm allowing them to turn their experiences into memories by classifying and storing them. Hence, people are born equipped with some basic mental constructs already in place, else there would be nothing by which to classify the initial experiences.
 

Grayman

Soul Shade
Local time
Today 2:57 PM
Joined
Jan 8, 2013
Messages
4,418
---
Location
You basement
I have trouble agreeing to this. I do not think that feelings are built-in autonomous responses because that would suggest that we store an infinite amount of permutations genetically to deal with infinite numbers of possible experiences, as no situation is ever just the same. Besides that, people can experience feelings differently in the same situation.

Feelings are like the periodic table. We often see the molecules created from the atoms but there are only a limited number of atoms.

These atom(feelings) are triggered by basic human interactions with what was, is or is to come. Fear is a reaction to the possibilty of something you care about being lost or destroyed. Your memories can cause fear to occur on different levels depending on what and how much you care about the things you are thinking about. Memories give us possiblities to fear. I remember it hurts to touch something hot so I fear it when it seems as if I may be forced to touch it. The molecule(feeliing) comes into play when you see a person. Your memories of this person make you see many possiblities and what is possible now about this person. You may feal a recipe of feelings, Fear, Anger, Hopelessness, and a sense of Loss. The person describes these feelings as hate. This recipe has different feelings and in different levels so hate feels differently for each person.

Memories indirectly affect our emotions by affecting thought of possibilites and perceptions.
 

Grayman

Soul Shade
Local time
Today 2:57 PM
Joined
Jan 8, 2013
Messages
4,418
---
Location
You basement
@OP

Clearing up some thoughts. Some if this are from things i read in AI development articals but who knows how valid this all is.


Memory is not separate from comparison and connection finding types of thought processes. I mean this physically in the brain. Memory as a storage of chunks of data does not exist. It is not like a hard drive. Memory is built into the connections of the synapsis. The brain does not need to search for connections because when a single piece of memory is triggered all the surrounding neurons fire their connections. These connections are made at different areas of the brain. Different functional parts fo the brain cause you to view this data in many ways at once. Sensual, emotional, linear, spacial, possible....

Concentrating on certain thoughts that resulted in the first memory can fire more connections and further results.

Emotions are wired differently into the brain. They are wired as a reactive force to the data results. I personally curious where personal values are stored. Perhaps they are memory. I know that our personal values and like and dislikes are triggers for emotions.
 

John_Mann

Active Member
Local time
Today 10:57 PM
Joined
Feb 23, 2013
Messages
376
---
Location
Brazil
Do you think consciousness is conditioned to cause and effect? Or is independent?
 

Cherry Cola

Banned
Local time
Today 10:57 PM
Joined
Mar 17, 2013
Messages
3,899
---
Location
stockholm
Do you think consciousness is conditioned to cause and effect? Or is independent?

Defining consciousness requires solving the issue of cause and effect. Namely that everything can be understood through cause and effect despite the fact that the two are not really separate as neither can be without the other and which is which depends entirely on perspective.
 

Grayman

Soul Shade
Local time
Today 2:57 PM
Joined
Jan 8, 2013
Messages
4,418
---
Location
You basement
Defining consciousness requires solving the issue of cause and effect. Namely that everything can be understood through cause and effect despite the fact that the two are not really separate as neither can be without the other and which is which depends entirely on perspective.

Have you always been alive? What makes up you has always been in the cause and effect so you must be outside of it. Consciousness itself must be mortal.
 

John_Mann

Active Member
Local time
Today 10:57 PM
Joined
Feb 23, 2013
Messages
376
---
Location
Brazil
Ray Kurzweil pointed that you can't never replicate your exact moment of consciousness, every moment is unique, literally is a stream of consciousness.

It makes me think if consciousness is related to the very space-time fabric, because our crazy movement through space-time.

You can't never enter the same river twice...

Can something immaterial be mortal?
 

Aerl

Active Member
Local time
Tomorrow 12:57 AM
Joined
Apr 12, 2014
Messages
123
---
Location
Fields
Now your thread isn't concerned with measly polarizing but I think it's still going to be fruitless trying to make sense of thought by memory alone. Memory is a part of thought and it's not fully understood either. The connections you make in the OP (what is similar between these: fire, shelter, clothing.
There is a memory that all of them provide some protection from cold
) require that memory works by storing information in a pattern that allows for recall by analogy among other things.
The OP shifts focus unto memory, the intricacies of its functioning demanding to be uncovered.
I have come to realize that, not a well thought out course of action. As for
memory and "the intricacies of its functioning demanding to be uncovered".

I believe its impossible to work with something that goes in circles and into
infinity without braking the whole thing down into bits and analising them
separately from one another, later to understand how they all fit into the whole
picture or form 1 cycle. i.e. thinking in a magical way: thinking about thinking
only spawns more thinking about thinking what in turn ..... (if we can't define
accurately)".

Untrue. Fire is an element and shelter and clothing are things you can be in. You can be in a shelter, a bomb shelter or a shelter from the elements, like fire. Clothes are things also around you, around your body. I see no difference between the fact clothes are close to your skin and walls of a shelter. Clothes are a shelter too, just mobile ones.

However, when I do an IQ test, I would pick what you said.
That's the problem we could address once we can settle on that I'm not
delusional. That base pattern that I proposed also implies that memory is past
thought. And that thought goes in loops... but in some cases there actually
appears to be a limit to how many times it can make a circle. If I wanted I could
define fire, clothes, shelter in countless many ways and they would share a
limitless number of possible similarities..... but I don't when I'm faced with a
simple problem.
(actually I do, I don't know how to think about something sometimes,
I'm bad at IQ tests or any other tests that measure like that, last time someone
did a psychological analysis, was kinda intrigues of the way I wasthink, I do not
know if I am insane or more sane than anyone else or what does sanity even
mean, each time I try to define it, it escapes me)
- The act of thinking brings up memories.
- Thinking connects the memories (or tries to).
- ...to form patterns.
- ...to be the basis of action.

I think we all pretty much can agree we already known this for 2000 years.
Why I wrote something like this, I want to know what you make of the pattern
that I described. Am I being delusional and seeing things or it actually is there
and what does it mean.
Glad I'm not delusional.

@OP
Clearing up some thoughts. Some if this are from things i read in AI development articals but who knows how valid this all is.

Memory is not separate from comparison and connection finding types of thought processes. I mean this physically in the brain. Memory as a storage of chunks of data does not exist. It is not like a hard drive. Memory is built into the connections of the synapsis. The brain does not need to search for connections because when a single piece of memory is triggered all the surrounding neurons fire their connections. These connections are made at different areas of the brain. Different functional parts fo the brain cause you to view this data in many ways at once. Sensual, emotional, linear, spacial, possible....

Concentrating on certain thoughts that resulted in the first memory can fire more connections and further results.

Emotions are wired differently into the brain. They are wired as a reactive force to the data results. I personally curious where personal values are stored. Perhaps they are memory. I know that our personal values and like and dislikes are triggers for emotions.
I don't like it when I'm forced to discuss something real when I'm concerned
with imaginary as imaginary is always shifting definition.

i.e.
a. what is cold, cold is blue color, cold is winter, cold is a relative temperate to
origin point of temperate in a termometer, cold is a word.

b. which part of the algorithm evaluates the information, or how does it express
the result... It's all "1s" and "0s", obviosly they are the ones doing everything.
(There is only one thing in the whole
existence that I approve to be constant , it's "change", not as a word but as an idea. I'm actually considering a language that defines everything as "change" but with a "change" added to it each time a new form of "change" appears,
etc.)
p.s.
I was having a mental breakdown before reading everything and still am. I'm
not sure when I will be able to write something with more sanity than now.

@CC , that's a lot of reading, now I need to read all the links posted there
besides OPs 1st and than re-read everything to make sense of everything.
Untill I do, I will probably avoid posting anything regarding the matter.
 
Top Bottom