Re: type writers and tooth aches II



Curt Welch wrote:
[...]

> Yes, the reason so many people believe there is
> a gap is because they were taught to believe it
> by the language. But the reason we have the
> language, is because there is a real "sense of
> gap" as you call it. It's because we can not
> hear/see/smell/taste our brain functioning.
> That means the brain is not able to detect a
> direct correlations between the external sensory
> signals, and the internal sensory signals.
> Temporal correlation between signals is how the
> brain creates associations. If there is no
> correlation, there is no association. So we are
> left with the sense that the external sensory
> signals (which do all nicely correlate with one
> another) group into one domain, and the internal
> sensory signals which do not correlate (our
> mental thoughts) get lumped into a separate domain.
> This makes it "feel" to us, that it must be two
> separate domains. That's why everyone continues
> to think there is a gap.


This is I believe the child belief that the blue
color and the sky is "out there" whereas the pain
is "in here". Now we know *everything* is "in here".



[...]


> What we really need is some type of high tech brain
> scanner that allowed you to sit in front of a computer
> and monitor the activity of any neuron in your own
> brain in real time. And inversely, to click on the
> screen and force neurons to fire. Anyone spending a
> day playing with a machine like this I'm sure would
> be left with no doubt that their thoughts were nothing
> more than the activity of the neurons in their head.


But you would still be left with the same problem.
Why does this activity give the sensation of blue
and that activity the sensation of red.

Why is this neural activity painful and this other
neural activity pleasurable.

That neural activity will correlate with subjective
experiences is not the question. The question is why
can't we deduce a subjective experience from what
we can imagine as regards neural activity?

[...]


> There are two sensory domains. Our thoughts are real
> and we can sense them. I know this. Radical
> behaviorists like Skinner knew it and addressed it in
> his work.


> What's dangerous is the fact that the mental language
> we created is not grounded to objective verifiable data.
> Subjective data by it's nature is currently unverifiable.


The "subjective nature" of subjective data is unverifieable.
That we have "private behaviors" can be deduced from a
program that can also have "private behaviors". What we
can't deduce is the "subjective experience" of those
"private behaviors".



> What happens is that lies can be defined into the system,
> with no way to remove them. One such "lie" is the idea
> that thoughts are not physical. Most religious beliefs
> creep into our belief system the same way.


Another "lie" is the idea that the world "out there" is as
we see it. The world "out there" is limited by our sensory
input and how it is processed.


> But, if we had this magic real-time full brain activity
> scanner, then all mental activity would become objective.


Not really. Our subjective experience would still remain.
All we would have is the neural activity associated with it.


[...]

> The reason for the gap is the fact that the brain doesn't
> sense any correlation in the data between the two sensory
> domains.


The reason for the gap is the fact everything we know is
subjective in nature and the objective is contained within
this subjective experience as being "out there" and thus
assumed to be different. Our brain (mind) is part of the
world "out there". The other reason for the gap is confusing
our "model of the world out there" extracted from our
sensory input and processing limitations is all there is.
Qualia flags that there is more to it.


[...]



> The paradox only happens if there is no causal connection
> between the sensory signals. If you built a robot which
> had blinking lights to show all his brain activity so that
> he could see with his own eyes that every thought he had
> was correlated to a blinking light, the robot would never
> have formed the "paradox" that humans formed.


I don't think seeing the neurons associated with my feeling
pain "lighting up" would give me any understanding at all
as regards the subjective feeling of pain or how it works.

Knowing the actual connections might explain why we react
to pain the way we do but again what connections or activity
would "explain" subjective feelings is a moot point.

[...]


> But, there are NO objects for normal humans that form a
> cross-sensory correlation between one of the "physical"
> senses, and our internal thoughts. But, these objects
> do exist. They are called neurons. It just took man
> a few hundred thousand years to identify them. Normal
> people however have never gotten to see their own
> neurons in action at the same time they "feel" their
> own thoughts. So they don't get to experience the
> connection for themselves. We only get to read about
> the connection in science books.


But you can imagine "seeing your neurons in action" and
yet that still does not explain your conscious experience
of seeing your neurons in action while you have that
conscious experience. A conscious experience is not a
deduction from any given or possible physical description
or observation I know of.

John

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Off-Topic -- Gender Discrimination
    ... Granted, that's an overall median, but there it ... There *is* a gap. ... The dispute is over the reason for the gap. ... Women choosing lower paying jobs, women choosing to take time off to raise small children, women being less aggressive about pursuing/demanding higher wages, and yeah, good old evilmen wringing their hands and cackling with glee as they cheat poor helpless little women out of their rightful pay? ...
    (rec.games.frp.dnd)
  • Re: Golden Tickets Announced
    ... the whole GAP vs. TPR thing, ... but I can say that no one at TPR even mentions it anymore. ... I'm not entirely sure that GAPer's know the real reason that they were ... being of the sort that hate Robb, ...
    (rec.roller-coaster)
  • Re: Off-Topic -- Gender Discrimination
    ... Granted, that's an overall median, but there it ... There is no evidence the gap is "based on" gender. ... Which are simple to test for, and where "experience" as a reason ... all he does is assert. ...
    (rec.games.frp.dnd)
  • Re: RCX400 review ?
    ... There might be a reason, probably thermal, for the gap. ... The Mighty Light of ten thousand suns ... The tube is not completely closed. ...
    (sci.astro.amateur)