My Youtube: Science of Consciousness
Ahnimus
Posts: 10,560
Apparently Youtube is rife with the debate on free-will and determinism.
I posted a short video explaining some of the science of consciousness. Please don't be rude.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DwM--z0iJuY
I also recommend these videos on the free-will vs determinism debate
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0drT_L4G8w8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F6fdZqzD2Qk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMvvxLwlvYI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pXHwyWp4tz8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fMs0N03UOIQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YBw9gpKWPwc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHAnhDaM5aE
I posted a short video explaining some of the science of consciousness. Please don't be rude.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DwM--z0iJuY
I also recommend these videos on the free-will vs determinism debate
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0drT_L4G8w8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F6fdZqzD2Qk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMvvxLwlvYI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pXHwyWp4tz8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fMs0N03UOIQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YBw9gpKWPwc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHAnhDaM5aE
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
I don't blame you. You may need to crank the sound. I had trouble with the mic recording volume.
I want her, lol.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4cyhztfvgrc
In terms of outside forces affecting us, in order to continue to exist, we must source and obtain energy in the form of food…the oxygen that we breathe…and the sun (and subsequently outwards to infinity) to keep us from freezing, burning up, vaporizing, exploding etc. So in a large part we are very much completely a product of our environment. Without it, we would be no longer be able to exist as we are.
I believe, ultimately, our DNA is what shapes or instructs our biological systems to incorporate and organize the deterministic aspects of our universe to make us who, and what we are. Freewill is essentially our physical randomness interpreting the results. If there were no bible, would we know who or what the conventional Jesus is? Absolutely not. We would however (and still do) look up and wonder at length where the rain, lightning, wind, fire, and thunder comes from dating back ancient times that's for sure. This is ultimately where the foundation for religion comes from. People say God is love....well love is a necessary emotion to procreation. Without it we wouldn't be here. Simple. We wouldn't have the desire to reproduce and raise children to do the same.
We really don't know anything automatically without something prior influencing our senses which to lead us to a conclusion. Information does not get magically implanted in our heads. It's a process of gradual observation, and refinement in a circular manner. To a large part this is an inescapable reality. To think otherwise would imply some form of repeated or continuous unknown divine intervention or mysterious invisible force. It would be like saying God is sending me little mini miracles all the time to make me think, and make me who I am, because I want it to happen. I am really just God's puppet. Faith itself a slow, arduous conditioning of the mind towards a particular state of being.
Something that drives this home for me is how you can see the infancy and folly in mans' struggle with what "god" or "higher unknown power" is. First it was something tangible like idols, statues, and natural elements. Then it progressed to the stars like the stars were gods and then to other people themselves. This is where religion should have stomped on the brakes and said... wait a sec... OK other people can be god now?!?? ok...this is really getting rediculous....
Obviously feeble attempts to put important labels on the unexplainable (at the time). People have worshiped everything imaginable over history. This proves the concept to me.
We are not born thinking about god. Someone tells us about it, sits us in a pew, and plops a book on our laps, and lays a guilt trip on us to obey it. Even then it takes a lot of mental acrobatics based on basic biological emotions (which are already ingrained via genetics from billions of years ago) to finally drive home the notion. The mind continuously rebels against it and fails miserably (sins). It's defintely not natural state of being. It's contrived and learned behavior.
The convention, or ideology of it, is certainly good to maintain a populous and social order, but it is certainly not an essential or a "natural" state of existence.
Our DNA changes over time. A little bit with each generation. It is the lattice that holds us physically in this state, and yes we are a combination of, and end product of, our 5 immediate senses.
I find it very interesting that essentially everything alive on this planet has the equivalency of eyes, a mouth, legs, arms, teeth, a nose, feet, ears, stomach, brain, penis, vagina, etc... I also don't think this is coincidence at all, as the DNA amongst all is so similar right across the board.
So yes. Free will is our "spirit" operating with the confines of a deterministic universe.
my .02
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
I can see how I may have overly simplified. I believe "free will" or "personal uniqueness" or "spirit" is basically the physical randomness of our minds interpreting the various stimulus placed on our senses. I believe the terms "free will" or "free spiritedness" or "spirit" can be used interchangeably.
Like a zillion ping pong balls, or atoms, or "data packets" bouncing around inside a cube or sphere so to speak (our minds). The same event will never happen the exact same way twice (different people), however it all takes place within the same "confines" or deterministic framework.
If some mysterious outside force acted upon us to such an extent as to dramatically shape out conscious or subconscious thoughts I imagine would be measurable in some way.
There are of course very subtle subconscious effects the outside universe has upon our psyche like full moons - changes in gravity, barometric pressure, etc...
An interesting thing I found out is women have a thing whereby they can get pregnant a day or two after their period (i.e. another egg is spontaneously released) if they engage in strong sexual stimulation just prior to and while the same phase of moon exists at the time they were born, and happens to coincide with everything. There's a term for it, I can't remember what it was called, but I had this happen to me actually. Many female animal species ovulate according to the moons cycle which is quite interesting.
An argument could be made that full moons lit up the night which lead to a lot creatures not sleeping, getting it on, and shaped life into the pattern of the moon itself.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
We should have a science forum here, eh? If that happened could I call you Bill Nye the Science Guy?
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
Uh, sure, lol.
DNA only determines physical attributes. clones do not think like the donor. cloned animals act differently although having the same DNA as the donor. another example is identical twins. each has his/her own soul or spirit as you call it and therefore thinks and acts independantly of the other.
since when did youtube become an authority on science? have you seen some of the crap on there?
and only to you it seems.
DNA determines which genes get switched on an off, for example if a person has 2, 3 or 4 cones for color defferentiation. However, experience, or learned behavior contributes the rest to a personality.
If you honestly feel that a child has a soul and hence a free-will, then what is the need for punishment and praise? Punishment and praise are means of determining a child's behavior and it works. Every parent does it. If they had a divine free-will inclined to do good, then you wouldn't need punishment.
Finally, if you watched the video, I displayed links to sources of information. With a bit of probing, you will find that what I said was accurate.
This is silly. Childen make mistakes. Punishment and praise are helpful in teaching a child to use his free-will properly. It doesn't mean they don't have it.
To me, Einstein, Hawking, Darrow, Schopenhauer, Adams, Skinner, Voltaire, d'Horbach, Minsky, Freud, Darwin, Gill, Hospers, Russel, Spinoza and a few billion others throughout the history of human species. Those are all the famous ones, but there are plenty of non-famous determinists.
This man presents a good video on the subject of determinism
http://youtube.com/watch?v=fMs0N03UOIQ
If you do a youtube search on determinism you find a lot more.
Also http://www.determinism.com a.k.a Society of Natural Science
Yahoo! Club Determinism - In this group, we share visions of a better world; one built upon a scientifically-based social model. We are interested in advancing the concepts of Naturalism by discussing how they may be applied to promote superior social reform, and thereby reduce suffering. The realization that FW is merely a seductive illusion simultaneously embraces the genuinely promising reality of the determined universe.
Secular Web - An online community of non-believers dedicated to the pursuit of knowledge, understanding and tolerance. Our goal is to defend and promote a non-theistic worldview, which holds that the natural world is all that there is, a closed system in no need of a supernatural explanation and sufficient unto itself.
North Texas Church Of Freethought - The North Texas Church of Freethought was conceived as an alternative to the conventional faith-based religious organizations. We offer the benefits of traditional church membership to those who are uncomfortable with supernatural beliefs.
American Humanist Association - The mission of the American Humanist Association is to be a clear, democratic voice for Humanism in the United States, to increase public awareness and acceptance of Humanism, to establish, protect, and promote the position of Humanists in our society, and to develop and advance Humanist thought and action.
Skeptics Society - Devoted to the Promotion of Science & Critical Thinking and the Investigation of Extraordinary Claims and Revolutionary Ideas.
Freethought Radio - What is Freethought? This is a term used to encompass several ways of thinking or living that are, in essence, non-religious. Freethinkers would include Atheists, Agnostics, Skeptics, Rationalists, and Humanists of several varieties. Many in the Freethought community are committed to human rights and an ethical / moral life-stance that is secular --- not relying on religious dogmas or deities. And many are committed to a viewpoint of scientific naturalism and free inquiry into supernatural claims.
The Brights - A bright is a person who has a naturalistic worldview. A bright's worldview is free of supernatural and mystical elements. The ethics and actions of a bright are based on a naturalistic worldview.
Human Nature Daily Review - Independent column by Dr. Ian Pitchford
Center For Naturalism - CenterForNaturalism.Org is intended as a resource for those interested in naturalism and its personal and social implications. It seeks to encourage the non-dogmatic, non-confrontational dissemination of naturalistic philosophy as an alternative to theism, spiritualism, and other varieties of dualism. You'll find articles on naturalism and its applications, brief descriptions of some of its main aspects, and links to journals, magazines, newspapers, organizations, and personal web sites which relate either directly or indirectly to naturalism.
OneWithEverything.Org - The Secular Journey, living a life of discovery.
Ahem, anyway, so no, it's not just me.
"Everything happens through immutable laws, ...everything is necessary... There are, some persons say, some events which are necessary and others which are not. It would be very comic that one part of the world was arranged, and the other were not; that one part of what happens had to happen and that another part of what happens did not have to happen. If one looks closely at it, one sees that the doctrine contrary to that of destiny is absurd; but there are many people destined to reason badly; others not to reason at all others to persecute those who reason." - Voltaire
So, you are determining their use of free-will which is a contradiction to it being free, in order for it to be free nothing can touch it.
Let's take social liberty as an example. You are free to go to the store if you want, the state will not stop you, that is freedom. Now let's say you go to the store and the state slaps you in jail for 2 or 3 days and says "You are still free, we are justing teaching you to use your freedom properly." you wouldn't accept that, because it's not actually free. That's a distortion of the term free.
You are suggesting that free-will is touchable that it can be molded and shaped through child-rearing, then I ask how it is not simply another determinant which is determined by your child-rearing?
Its called education. Free will is not removed when a child is praised or chastised for certain behaviors. They may make decisions based on what they have been taught, but the point is they still make decisions, and are fully capable of making them in contradiction to how they were raised. Our decisions and choices are not without influence. i've never suggested that. But my decisions and choices are still that. Mine. i make them. They are of my own cognition. There are good choices and bad choices along with a lot of gray area. i guide my children. i don't program them.
Ok, but you are referring to choice, or rational deliberation. A system by which your brain processes information and produces a result, a behavior, statement, action or so on. This is the dilemma. That's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about what determines what a person 'wills'. The concept of free-will suggests that our will just appears out of nowhere, and by some manner it has already an opinion or determination. I don't see how that is possible. Secondly it would have to be constant, if I had this free-will and you had free-will then our free-wills could not be different. If your free-will said "I like apples" and mine said "I like oranges" then what is causing this difference in disposition? Even if such a thing simply snapped into existence with no explanation, it would not be within my control to will a different will. So then it is hardly my free-will that I like oranges, but rather some quantum indeterminacy or divine spirit that determined that I like oranges. Now if free-will is a thing that everyone has and there is no difference in free-will from one person to the next, for example it doesn't say "I like apples" or oranges, then I fail to see what purpose it actually serves.
Consider this math. You have two equations both incorporating the same variable.
15 + Free-will + 9 = A
10 + Free-will + 2 = B
We can say that A is 24 + Free-will and B is 12 + Free-will, but we still havent defined free-will, we can say, free-will is 3, then we add 3 to each equation, but the variance in the two outcomes is virutally identical it's just offset by 3, it doesn't actually change the difference between the two numbers, just the value of the number and it increases the value of each number identically, so there is virtually no difference in putting it in the equation. I hope you can see how this mathematical anology applies to decision making. If I am faced with a situation, for example, I am hungry, but I have a history of reinforcement to not steal, and another person is hungry but doesn't share the same history as I, then we put free-will in the equation, what does that really accomplish? If free-will is free and not determined then it's the same for both me and the other person and changes absolutely nothing in the ultimate outcome, because it's the differences that clearly matter.
so we agree; DNA only determines physical attributes as i said.
the need for punishment and praise is to direct the child as to what is acceptable ie: right and wrong. IT IS BECAUSE the child has free will that we must direct the child and teach right and wrong. otherwise the child will only act out of free will and not learn that free will also comes with responsability; and ramifications for their actions.
DNA determines physical attributes, yes. So for example if a person is schizophrenic, has temporal lobe epilepsy, chronic depression, colour blindness, etc... many physical things affect cognition, it is reasonable to suggest that 'normal' congition depends on or is determined by a 'normal' physiology.
So, you are suggesting that free-will is bad, that free-will drives people to sin unless taught otherwise. I don't agree with that and I don't see evidence for that, I also don't see evidence that humans are innately sinful. So far what you've given is anecdotal evidence for free-will, evidence that is just as easily attributed to a deterministic will. In-fact if you give me an example behavior, action or thought that you would consider to be a product of free-will, I can give a comprehensive deterministic explanation for it.
For example love...
The pheramones emitted by person A is detected by the Vomeronasal organ in person B, the VNO performs a DNA comparison and 'rates' the difference in nervous systems, this result is passed onto a biochemical system that incorporates other details such as visual attractiveness and personality mapping, this biochemical system then produces a 'cocktail' or mixture of several peptides (biological chemicals) Norepinephrine, Testosterone, Vesopressing, etc.. that stimulates various receptors in the brain and body producing the ontologically subjective sensation of love. This is a deterministic explanation, the alternative (of free-will) would simply suggest "I love so and so of my own free-will" and no further explanation can be given or else the free-will is slave to it's explanation.
i never said anything about sin. i also never said the child would do wrong either.
as for love; you cannot explain why in a room of say 20 women; i may only be attracted to one. nor can you explain how someone can be attracted to someone over the internet.
Actually I can. But if you really wanted to understand this stuff you'd read up on it yourself, and I don't mean the bible. I've repeatedly posted the science of love on this board, and had you ever read it, with some inductive reasoning you could answer those questions yourself. That would of course mean disregarding the concept of free-will for the sake of assuming there is something more to be understood.
How can you watch a video of a puppy being murdered and feel sad? The same way you can feel love over the internet.
Oh man....if I had a nickel for every youtube link I clicked on....
I am probably the farthest thing from an authority on this subject. I do not wish to change or impress my beliefs on others, I can only relay various thoughts ideas, concepts, and observations. My learning and understanding is very much an ongoing work in progress.
To be honest I rarely talk about this kind of thing, as rocking someones foundation on this personal level brings me very little satisfaction.
I am most happy and content when others around me are as well.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
These are the comments I received to my vids
nervousneuron (10 hours ago)
Awesome! The bit on NCC was interesting. I love the quote at the end.
Science of Consciousness
rvwissen (4 hours ago)
Libet's research is very interesting, but it doesn't really convince me though. Determinism doesn't make much sense to me. This is really a nice video, the volume should be a little harder maybe, 4/5 stars.
Re: Determinism and Free-will
http://youtube.com/watch?v=L-rXCxFj134
AndrewJCar (11 hours ago)
I couldn't agree more. All your points are well thought out and I agree. Punishment is a way to form behavior. Especially liked the part about pedophiles. It should not be equated with child molestation unless they act on these uncontrollable feelings. The large majority keeps it to themselves, I'm sure. They cannot help their thoughts about children just like homosexuals cannot help their thoughts about the same sex and straights cannot help their thoughts about the opposite sex.
It seems to me that even one who disagrees with me did not take the video as an attack, apart from the quote at the end all I did was cite scientific experiments. I would say that the offensiveness of the video is inversely related to how the video challenged your beliefs, based on your interpretation of it.
I only speak for myslef. I'm not implying anything other than my own personal perspective on how I feel about this topic with regards to others. I have persuaded more than a few religious types in the past, and ultimately did not like how I made them feel about themselves afterwards. I can be very persuasive in person. It's definitely an interesting topic. Absolutely.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
I agree, I was just stating that the video was an attempt at rocking foundations but citing science as per the relevancy of consciousness. If the science had of been pro-free-will, then I would have cited it as well, and instead I'd be a dualist.
I definitely appreciate your contributions. I am very open to this entire area of thought, and I believe you have made some very acute observations on the subject.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
Let's say, for one minute, biochemistry, genetics and molecular biology aren't old studies and all there is to understand in the human body hasn't been understood yet. Now, keeping this in mind let's say that on the biochemistry of love we don't have all the info yet to map out a correct or "true" explanation of what happens when we fall in love. So, still in total imagination, we have only a partial view of what is happening in the human body and try to fill in the blanks by expressing theories and predictions though further studies must be made.
Now, considering all this, how is your explanation more valid than the free will one? Both don't account for a whole and correct explanation. You, as a "nerdcore" might feel better expressing your feelings under obscure acronyms, but my little sister feels better expressing hers with poetic words. You both are wrong in your explanations but who cares?
That's using free-will as a fill-in-the-blank placeholder. We don't know, so let's say it's free-will, oh the pancreas stopped producing islets, well I guess diabetes isn't free-will then. Point is this concept of free-will exists only as long as we don't have explanations. But some people will reject explanations anyway. For example a guy at work said the virginia tech gunman may have had a brain tumor, he says "Don't look for excuses, he fucking did it". Don't try to figure it out, just be ignorant and call it free-will because it's self-satisfying. I'm not saying all dualists feel that way entirely, but never-the-less belief in free-will is entirely a matter of faith and to me that's not something to set policy on.
On the point that we should never use free-will or god as a unique explanation, I agree. We should, and actually do, look for other explanations. Such as scientific ones. It's just that with our, current, limited understanding of the biochemical reactions in the human body and the correlations with genetics, I think it's arrogant and wrong to state that "love in nothing more than a biochemical reaction". You don't know, I don't either, so your explanation is no more valid than mine. Now we'll both be looking for an explanation as we aren't satisfied with the ones we have, but for now neither one of us can claim "I know the truth!".
I won't speak about free will because obviously we disagree, but it's all the same. If you don't have empiric or mathematical proof of what you claim, you're as wrong as I am. Whatever unconvienent truth you wish so much to believe in.
I don't really want to believe in it. I don't believe in it for me. Unless of course I get a brain tumor and kill a bunch of people. Then I'll want it for me while I'm rotting in jail. It's more or less that it's the moral thing to do. As far as I know the guy was a good guy, I've no reason to doubt that, and this invader in his brain caused different behavior. It's not unreasonable. But I also think the brain is very plastic and how one person thinks is not at all how another person thinks. It's the same basic idea, but some are more finely tuned for emotion or logic, and some aren't equipped with either.
"That guy is a fucking moron." "What a tool" "n00b" "idiot".. All these statements imply that an idiot would not be an idiot if he simply chose to not be an idiot. Why would anyone want to be an idiot in the first place? As if he has the free-will to know the answers to the universe. He can't rub his stomach and pat his head at the same time. You know? This is where I look at it and think, the guy is an idiot and that's not his fault. Nobody decides they want to be mentally retarded. They didn't say "Hey mom can you smoke some more crack so I can be totally retarded?"
Some things I don't have an explanation for. Is causality infinite or is their a causal loop, is there some incomprehensible thing that exists without cause. I simply don't make a presuppositions about that. Everything I do has cause and effect, everything I do has effect, why wouldn't it have cause?
I made a youtube video about it, tried to get all of it in there in the 10 minute time frame, but went over by 40 seconds and didn't want to cut it anymore, so I split it in two segments. It's only 10:40 roughly. I'd prefer you watch it because text is two-dimensional.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dC-amGODYSA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AoPoZEuA3IA