Re: Evolutionary question concerning God.
- From: Stanley Friesen <sarima@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 20:35:28 -0700
"someone2" <glenn.spigel2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Stanley Friesen wrote:
Well, actually, there is considerable evidence that there *is* some
electro-physical process binding them together. This mechanism is most
easily observed as "brain waves" in a EEG.
Note, the "symbol binding problem", as it is called, is not yet entirely
resolved. But there is considerable evidence pointing the way to a
solution along the lines I mention above.
I realise that neurons firing is important, but surely that only
explains communication to adjacent neurons.
At the "local" level, sort of. In point of fact most major neurons
actually connect to rather *distant* neurons. Axons from major neurons
typically travel between 3 cm and 1 meter to reach their target neurons.
How are you suggesting that the raw experience of one set of neurons,
linked to the eyes for example is visual, and yet the raw experience of
another set of neurons, linked to the ears for example is auditory?
Because it is. It is wired to be so, partly due to genetics and partly
due to experience.
How can the connections effect how the neurons states are experienced,
is it done by number of connections?
This question makes no sense. The neuron states aren't *experienced*,
they (or rather neuronal activity) *are* experience. They are not
subject, they are process. You cannot seem to step back from your
dualistic concepts enough to understand what we are saying.
Does our conscious experience actually effect the way the organism
behaves, other than in the sense that because it is set up the way it
is (a special structure), consciousness appears and all makes sense,
and experience is differentiated into senses.
This wording still differentiates between "consciousness" and "a subset
of brain activity" in an artificial and meaningless way.
Also sensory experiences existed and were distinct LONG before there was
anything we would normally label consciousness. Lizards experience
vision and hearing in much the same manner as we humans do, but without
any of the "higher" brain functions that combine to produce the state we
call consciousness.
I mean if the structure
still worked the same, but it was a different special structure that
caused consciousness.
Consciousness is simply a way of referring to what certain parts of our
brains *do*. Consciousness is not even a single process or activity in
the brain, it can be decomposed into many semi-independent parts. This
is clearly demonstrated by the many strange syndromes caused by various
sorts of brain damage. It is quite possible to have an inability to
recognize individual people without losing any other aspect of
consciousness. And hemi-neglect is a truly bizarre state of
consciousness that shows how complex our brain processes truly are.
--
The peace of God be with you.
Stanley Friesen
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Evolutionary question concerning God.
- From: someone2
- Re: Evolutionary question concerning God.
- From: Eric Rowley
- Re: Evolutionary question concerning God.
- References:
- Re: Evolutionary question concerning God.
- From: someone2
- Re: Evolutionary question concerning God.
- From: Ross Langerak
- Re: Evolutionary question concerning God.
- From: someone2
- Re: Evolutionary question concerning God.
- From: Ross Langerak
- Re: Evolutionary question concerning God.
- From: someone2
- Re: Evolutionary question concerning God.
- From: Stanley Friesen
- Re: Evolutionary question concerning God.
- From: someone2
- Re: Evolutionary question concerning God.
- From: Stanley Friesen
- Re: Evolutionary question concerning God.
- From: someone2
- Re: Evolutionary question concerning God.
- Prev by Date: Re: OT: Racialist evolutionary psychology
- Next by Date: Re: OT: Racialist evolutionary psychology
- Previous by thread: Re: Evolutionary question concerning God.
- Next by thread: Re: Evolutionary question concerning God.
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading