skip to main |
skip to sidebar
The general idea we have about ourselves is, that we have a mind and a body. They normally work together. It made Descartes (1596 -1650), a French philosopher, wonder.Mind and body were such different things. For instance, a mind is indivisible, hence indestructible, while a body is infinitely divisible.The mind is free. I can think and experience whatever I want, while the body is determined. It is a series of causal processes. I have to eat, if I don't want to starve.The mind is only "unfree" in the sense that it can not stop thinking, which brought Descartes to his famous "cogito, ergo sum". This typical feature of the mind proved our existence.My mind is directly and privately accessible for me. No one can see my thoughts, but my body is public. Everyone can see me.Thence Descartes had to conclude that the mind had to be something completely different from the body. You even can think of the mind without that body.So he stated that there are two kinds of substances in the world, a mental and a physical. The essence of the mental is "thinking" or consciousness, while the essence of the physical was extension.According to Descartes, the mental and the physical are entirely different realms. One is a realm of things that obey physical laws and occupy space. Another is a realm of ideas, sensations, and feelings that don’t even exist in space. The philosopher Gilbert Ryle (1900 - 1976) referred to this Cartesian Dualism and view of the mind as "the ghost in the machine" and this is exactly the situation.Our physical body is subjected to the laws of nature, while the mind, being not physical, is not. This observation leads to the most important objection to dualism.Descartes himself was well aware of the objection, which was: How can a non-physical substance influence a physical substance. There is not a single law of nature that answers that question.He literally has tried to find the answer by dissecting real human brains. He discovered that in the brain everything comes in pairs, a left and right hemisphere and so on, but at the base of the cortex he found one single little part: the pineal gland.There it was where mind and body touched each other. However, this was a weak answer, because the question was not WHERE mind and body were in a causal relation, but HOW the causal process could take place.This causality on which the laws of physics are based leads to another problem with dualism. This physical causality means that the body is determined. Every process is predictable.But the mind is free. We have a free will. But when everything in the physical world is determined what difference makes a so called free will then?I have direct access to my mind, but when you think of it….it is the only mind I can go to. Are there also other minds in the world? How can I be sure about that?But not only other minds are a problem. If I am locked in my own experiences, my own mind, how can I ever really know anything of the external world? In that way we end up with Skepticism.And when I stop thinking, do I stop to exist then too? When I am unconscious or asleep, what is my condition then?And then there is the "I" in the "I think, therefore I exist". Where did Descartes find that "I"? What is it? Where does it come from.There have been written complete libraries about all these questions for Dualism and dualism had no answer. How to proof that the mental and the physical are two separate realms, which really exist and where the laws of physics only apply to one of these realms?In other words, there is hardly any scientist nowadays who believes that the mind is some kind of exclusive substance next to physical substance.The Discussion[13:25] herman Bergson: Thank you :-)[13:25] herman Bergson: The floor is yours ^_^[13:26] Ciska Riverstone: but there is no explanation what it is then[13:26] Mick Nerido: Descartes thought the soul resided in the pineal gland...[13:26] Ciska Riverstone: is there?[13:26] Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): i think they are finding so many connections in the mental ability to control parts of the body[13:26] Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): using for people who have lost limbs etc[13:27] herman Bergson: explanation for what Ciska?[13:27] Doodus Moose: indeed, MIT has controllers where people can move things by thinking[13:27] Ciska Riverstone: for what we called mind up to now[13:27] Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): yes[13:27] herman Bergson: oh yes..there is...:-)[13:27] Bejiita Imako: yes[13:27] herman Bergson: but we havent yet come to that...[13:27] Bejiita Imako: have seen such things[13:28] herman Bergson: it is the whole reason of this project :-)[13:28] Bejiita Imako: kind of interesting[13:28] Ciska Riverstone: so at the moment you want us to accept that there is something else you are going to explain later on - right?[13:28] herman Bergson: No Mick...the soul was not in the pineal gland according to Descartes[13:29] herman Bergson: of course Ciska..[13:29] Ciska Riverstone: ok[13:29] Ciska Riverstone: I'll wait for the alternative then ;)[13:29] herman Bergson smiles[13:29] Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): ♥ LOL ♥[13:30] herman Bergson: I don't give all my treasures away that easily Ciska...[13:30] Bejiita Imako: ㋡[13:30] Ciska Riverstone: well you want me to give something up[13:30] Ciska Riverstone: so i have to get something for it[13:30] Ciska Riverstone: thats economics ;))[13:30] herman Bergson: But ..main point today is...substance duality[13:30] Ciska Riverstone: (teasing of course)[13:30] Mick Nerido: The world is so filled with opposites light and dark, male and female, mind and body that leads to dualism[13:31] Doodus Moose: the nature of light itself, lends to dualism[13:31] herman Bergson: The idea that the mind is another kind of substance than molecules[13:31] Mick Nerido: Yes Doodus[13:31] Ciska Riverstone: i think its just a matter of language... buddhism for example speaks of bodymind[13:31] herman Bergson: waves and particles..isnt it Doodus[13:32] Doodus Moose: correct[13:32] Bejiita Imako: yea[13:32] Bejiita Imako: s[13:32] herman Bergson: but that is just a technical issue, I would say[13:33] Doodus Moose: again, how would Descartes describe the situation where a person could move a mouse cursor with some equipment attached to his head?[13:33] herman Bergson: you cant compare that to the mind - body relation, I would say[13:33] Mick Nerido: Matter may not be what it seem with so much unknown in the universe ie. dark matter and dark energy[13:33] Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): ♥ LOL ♥[13:33] Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): he would faint[13:33] herman Bergson: Yes Gemma![13:34] herman Bergson: Well...the question ..."What is matter" is a complete different story Mick...[13:34] herman Bergson: It has no effect on our problem today, I think[13:35] Ciska Riverstone: mh... if we consist of matter and matter is in our brain... and our mind is our brain[13:35] Ciska Riverstone: matter matters.[13:35] Ciska Riverstone whispers: no?[13:35] Bejiita Imako: hehe[13:35] herman Bergson: yes Ciska...[13:36] Bejiita Imako: well matter study is a fav hobby for me[13:36] Bejiita Imako: ㋡[13:36] herman Bergson: we have to assume that what we call the mind is just a feature of the brain..[13:36] Bejiita Imako: and antimatter for that part as well[13:36] Flo (flora.jewell) is now known as Flora Jewell.[13:37] Mick Nerido: And quantum physics is an issue also[13:37] Ciska Riverstone: yes Mick think so too[13:37] herman Bergson: well..only to some extend Mick...[13:37] Mick Nerido: Just plating devils advocate[13:37] herman Bergson: it doesn't change the fact that the mind is a feature of the brain[13:37] Ciska Riverstone: no not at all[13:37] Ciska Riverstone: it asks how[13:38] herman Bergson: it may be involved in the discussion about free will[13:38] Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): complex[13:38] herman Bergson: We will get to that certainly[13:38] Ciska Riverstone: very, Gemma[13:38] herman Bergson: Yes Gemma....[13:39] herman Bergson: I sometimes don't know where to begin....[13:39] Ciska Riverstone: can imagine that[13:39] Bejiita Imako: mm[13:39] herman Bergson: .[13:39] Bejiita Imako: aaa puh new keyboard works again[13:39] herman Bergson: there are so many issues , all related to each other[13:39] Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): yes[13:39] Bejiita Imako: hit num lock on my new mini keyboard, no wonder it started behaving strang[13:39] herman Bergson: But I'll do my best ^_^[13:40] Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): :_)[13:40] Ciska Riverstone: complex as the linkings in the brain ;)[13:40] Ciska Riverstone: and we appreciate that ![13:40] herman Bergson: Well..yet this is an important issue..dualism...[13:40] herman Bergson: it means...if we reject it as an explanation of the mind...[13:41] herman Bergson: then there is not such a thing as a material body and an immaterial mind[13:41] Jerome Ronzales: is it right to say that Dualism is a Absolutism?[13:41] herman Bergson: it also means...and that was what Descartes hoped to save...there is no immaterial soul[13:42] herman Bergson: no Jerome..makes little sense..I am sorry[13:42] Mick Nerido: And yet there is an immaterial quality to the mind[13:42] Jerome Ronzales: ok[13:43] herman Bergson: I will disagree with you Mick.. :-)[13:43] herman Bergson: that sounds like property dualism[13:43] herman Bergson: that means...[13:43] herman Bergson: ok...no mind substance...[13:43] herman Bergson: but the mind is a property ,,a special property of the brain[13:44] Ciska Riverstone: Mick - maybe we see it like that cause we see that matter reacts to the same things in the same way wether decisions seem not to[13:44] herman Bergson: it is not the brain itself..but a special "mind" property[13:44] :: Beertje :: (beertje.beaumont): can you locate the mind property?[13:45] herman Bergson: Well Beertje...that has taken a while...[13:45] herman Bergson: the egyptians didn't give a dime for the brain...[13:45] herman Bergson: their Pharaos were burried without a brain[13:45] Mick Nerido: We can see the brain at work with brain scans[13:45] herman Bergson: The Greek thought it was located in the chest or abdomen..:-)[13:46] Ciska Riverstone: yes but we still do not know why it fires which neuron - as far as i know mick[13:46] herman Bergson: In the Middle Ages they began to believe that the mind was in the head[13:47] herman Bergson: No. I wouldn't say so Ciska...[13:47] herman Bergson: We really know where what functions are located where in the brain[13:48] herman Bergson: Look at the charts on the wall for instance[13:48] herman Bergson: That doesn't mean we understand the brain as such...:-)[13:49] herman Bergson: But we have soem insight[13:49] Doodus Moose: we might all use the same parts to walk, but what is "programmed" in the reasoning section is somewhat individual[13:49] Mick Nerido: There is global theory and another that says specific areas do specific functions[13:49] Ciska Riverstone: i meant the individual thing - yes doodus[13:51] herman Bergson: OK...let's conclude that we are not inclined to accept substance dualism as an option to explain the mind[13:51] herman Bergson: at least...that is MY point of view[13:51] Doodus Moose: :-)[13:51] Bejiita Imako: ㋡[13:51] Bejiita Imako: oki[13:51] Bejiita Imako: oki[13:51] herman Bergson: Deal Bejiita ^_^[13:52] Bejiita Imako: hehe[13:52] Mick Nerido: Ok, but was Spinosa's mind better than Descartes? ")[13:52] Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): ♥ LOL ♥[13:52] Bejiita Imako: its for sure an interesting topic[13:52] Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): different maybe[13:52] Ciska Riverstone: definitivly gemma[13:52] herman Bergson: better means that you have criteria to test the difference[13:53] herman Bergson: wehat are they Mick?[13:54] Mick Nerido: They both lived in Holland, most of their lives also...funny[13:54] herman Bergson smiles[13:55] herman Bergson: Both didnt wear wooden shoes or loved tulips :-)[13:55] Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): WaaaHaHAhahAHA! AhhhhHAhahhAHhahHAH! haha![13:55] Bejiita Imako: hahahahahahahahaha[13:55] Bilthor Esharham: hahahahahaaaa[13:55] herman Bergson: so I guess they were equal partners in this matter[13:55] Bilthor Esharham: *** HOHOHO THAT IS A GOOD ONE !!! ***[13:55] Mick Nerido: They found a friendly intellectual community I would guess[13:56] herman Bergson: Oh yes..[13:56] Bejiita Imako: ah[13:56] herman Bergson: But the fact that the one had another idea than the other doesnt make him bette or worse..[13:57] herman Bergson: scientifically you could ask the question....who was closer to how things really are[13:57] herman Bergson: but in those days they only had their own brain....[13:57] herman Bergson: their imagination..[13:58] Mick Nerido: Good point herman[13:58] Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): ♥ Thank Youuuuuuuuuu!! ♥[13:58] Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): herman[13:58] herman Bergson: like even the Greeks like Democritus, when I am not mistaken, imagened that the world was a collection of atoms[13:58] Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): i should make it thursday[13:58] herman Bergson: Or Leibniz thought it were monads[13:59] herman Bergson: Glad you were back again Gemma..missed you[13:59] Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): ♥ Thank Youuuuuuuuuu!! ♥[13:59] Bejiita Imako: ㋡[13:59] Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): ♥ LOL ♥[13:59] Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): had a good time away tho[13:59] Bejiita Imako: hehehe[13:59] herman Bergson: Sure :-)[13:59] Ciska Riverstone: :) great gemma[13:59] Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): saw lots of birds[14:00] Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): 22 species of warbler[14:00] Doodus Moose: :-0[14:00] Bejiita Imako: aa ok[14:00] Bejiita Imako: nice[14:00] Mick Nerido: Where?[14:01] herman Bergson: Well..I gues it is time to dismiss class then...[14:01] Bejiita Imako: ah[14:01] herman Bergson: Now that Gemma is gone ^_^[14:01] Bejiita Imako: again very interesting[14:01] Bejiita Imako: gave me some more to think about ㋡[14:01] Ciska Riverstone: very interesting - thank you herman[14:01] herman Bergson: thank you Bejiita[14:01] Doodus Moose: Thanks, Professor :-)[14:01] Mick Nerido: Bye, thanks[14:01] Ciska Riverstone: bye Mick[14:01] Bejiita Imako: tine to head on I guess[14:02] Bejiita Imako: cu soon again[14:02] :: Beertje :: (beertje.beaumont): thank you Herman..it was very interesting again[14:02] Ciska Riverstone: bye all[14:02] Bejiita Imako: hugs[14:02] Bejiita Imako: ㋡[14:02] Ciska Riverstone: bye Bejiita[14:02] Doodus Moose: ....surrounded by .......particles......[14:02] Bilthor Esharham: Very interesting...very thanks professor......)))[14:02] Jerome Ronzales: bye´[14:02] herman Bergson: Tahnk you Bilthor[14:02] herman Bergson: Thank[14:03] Jerome Ronzales: bye professor[14:03] Jerome Ronzales: bye all~[14:03] Bilthor Esharham: bye bye....Auf Wiedersehen[14:03] herman Bergson: Bye Jerome[14:03] Jerome Ronzales: cya next time~
Do you realize, that a philosophical debate has reached the pages of the newspapers presently? If I hadn't started my project "The Mystery of the Brain", I might have read some articles with only general interest and overlooked the deeper ramifications.But now I do not consume the information as just interesting information anymore. I am witnessing an ongoing debate, which is only becoming more and more intense.For instance March 7. Do you remember me mentioning http://www.cephoscorp.com/ and that scary video, where was stated,that 'blood pumping' was the proof of being a liar?A similar company in the US is No Lie MRI, the competitor of Cephos. This company also claims that the fMRI scanner is a highly reliable lie-detector.The article in my newspaper begins thus: " Who wants to conceal the truth in a brainscan, can achieve this easily. American and Dutch researchers demonstrate this in an article in the magazine 'Neuroimage' of this month".The text to the pictures is: "(…) Researchers have proven that the brainscanner does not score better than the questionable polygraph."As a philosopher I read a lot more in this article than only the simple observation that the brainscanner is as reliable as a polygraph, which means… of no use.To give such eye-catching space to this subject in the newspaper shows us, what you by now should know, that THE BRAIN has become a social issue, subject of many debates. Debates about evidence in court, about the value of religion in politics, even the existence of god.Again today there was a letter of a reader on the forum page of my newspaper about the role of God in politics and about claims people have, while referring to God as their inspiration.That is the other side of the public debate that has come up now in the media about the homo sapiens and his brain. And when reading your newspaper, realize that you are witnessing the debate between materialism and all other concepts of reality, religious, esoteric or transcendental.So, from now on I ask you to read your newspaper and magazines also with philosophical glasses. Focus on articles, which deal with brain and brain related issues. Focus on articles, which discuss the reality of religion and god. And if you run into such articles, tell us about it or send it to me one way or the other. I can handle French, German, English and Spanish.But there is more. One of the major discussions within a materialist context is, that every process in nature is determined by causality.Thence, if mental states are in fact physical states of the physical brain, they have to be causal. This means that we have to conclude, that every mental state / brain state is caused by a prior state. In other word we have to deal with determinism here.Sure, causality is an unquestionable feature of our physical world, but then there is the interview with the Dutch Quantumphysicist Dick Bouwmeester in my newspaper of March 12.From a materialist point of view quantum mechanics offer a puzzling situation regarding matter, for it is an establish physical fact that on the smallest atomic level matter doesn't behave causally at all, but random.This confronts us with an intriguing question: on the macro-level we see causality, but on the micro-level we see randomness. This leads to the question: where is the point of transition from quantum randomness to strong causality and how does that work?This question shows nicely how little we actually know about the physical world, about matter, although we yet know at least much, that we can formulate such a question.Finally something else from my newspaper, which is closely related with our attempts to unravel the mystery of the brain: Symbiogenesis.In 1924 the Russian botanist Boris Mikhaylovich Kozo-Polyanski had published a book, in which he contended that all kinds of parts of the living cell are actually bacteria, but fully integrated in the cell as part of it.Simply stated: it began with a symbioses between cell and bacteria and it ends up in a complete absorption of the bacteria in the cell, thus creating a completely new kind of cell.The quintessence of this idea of symbiogenesis is, that this theory emphasizes cooperation while the classical interpretation of evolution emphasizes competition as the main force behind evolution.Thence contrary to the theory of gradual evolution, Kozo-Polyanski asserts that the creation of a compound organism out of the merging of two or more separate organisms, has to be regarded as a leap instead of a gradual evolution.Then there was an interview in my newspaper with Antonio Damasio, one of the leading neurobiologists today, about his new book "Self comes to Mind"He says: "Smart people say that the mind emerges from the brain, that the mind IS the brain, but that is not a satisfactory answer. How becomes brain mind?"Then I beginning to wonder about a symbiogenetic leap. Was that what has happened in our evolution when the Self emerged in our mind? As you see, even reading the newspaper is participating in the philosophical debate of today about the mystery of brain.Perfect article on the rediscovery of symbiogenesis you find here: http://harvardpress.typepad.com/hup_publicity/2010/07/rediscovering-symbiogenesis.htmlAnd last but not least: keep us informed about what YOU read in your newspaper and magazines about this philosophical debate…..The Discussion[13:25] herman Bergson: Thank you...[13:25] herman Bergson: If you have a question or remark..the floor is yours ^_^[13:25] :: Beertje :: (beertje.beaumont): i just read the article you have on the board..it seems easy to fool the scan[13:26] Bejiita Imako: ok[13:26] herman Bergson: Yes seems so indeed....[13:26] Bejiita Imako: hmm doubtful about that method[13:26] BALDUR Joubert: first:quantum theory.. the fact that we cant exéplain and understand the changes.. so we say random but it doen't mean it IS RANDOM[13:26] BALDUR Joubert: JUST A WORD FOR WHAT WE SEE AS SUCH[13:26] herman Bergson: nice move Baldur....:-)[13:26] Doodus Moose: and yes - the mathematics change between the quantum & the universe we observe[13:27] Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): ♥ LOL ♥[13:27] Doodus Moose: ...just as Mr Bergson has demonstrated between the mind's determinism & atomic process[13:27] BALDUR Joubert: second. the bacteria and other theories.. every scientist today in his field of speciality thinks he has to include the brain..[13:27] herman Bergson: Welll it is an open question still Doodus...[13:28] herman Bergson: That was my point Baldur.....[13:28] herman Bergson: is the emergence of the Mind such a leap?[13:28] BALDUR Joubert: atomic processes..we are FFFFFAAAAAR from knowing that in the brain..as we still try to figure out the atom and its parts[13:28] Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): it is interesting to see the conflicts in theories about the brain and the mind[13:29] Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): all in its infancy[13:29] Bejiita Imako: aa yes indeed[13:29] Bejiita Imako: kind of new it seems[13:29] BALDUR Joubert: as i said everyone wants to add his grain..lol[13:29] herman Bergson: Well Gemma...more interesting is to see how in the newspapers ...at least in mine, this brain - mind debate is alive...[13:29] Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): oh yes[13:29] Bejiita Imako: ah¨[13:29] :: Beertje :: (beertje.beaumont): which newspaper Herman?[13:29] Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): have been lots of discussions on tv and the radio too[13:29] BALDUR Joubert: papers want to be sold so the subject is in .. nothingh more..[13:30] Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): cynic[13:30] Doodus Moose: lol[13:30] herman Bergson: plz Baldur.....![13:30] Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): there must be a huge interest if the newspapers are doing that with all the other news[13:30] BALDUR Joubert: its true..go through the history of science and press...[13:30] herman Bergson: I really think we are dealing with something else here than just a popularity contest of subjects[13:31] herman Bergson: no....I dont buy that Baldur...[13:31] herman Bergson: Read Damasio first[13:31] BALDUR Joubert: it is becoming a popularity contest..and waters down the main questions..[13:31] herman Bergson: I dont agree Baldur....[13:31] BALDUR Joubert: ok i'll send you a dvd to think about...[13:32] BALDUR Joubert: in german:)[13:32] Mick Nerido: I think the advent of the internet etc. has hightened intrest in the mind[13:32] Ciska Riverstone: which one baldr?[13:32] herman Bergson: It is not the internet Mick....[13:32] BALDUR Joubert: AI has been a subject since years..[13:32] Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): that is true too[13:32] BALDUR Joubert: i'll send it to you too ciscka:)[13:32] herman Bergson: Scientiffic development is only reported on internet[13:33] Mick Nerido: To create Ai we must understand our brain[13:33] herman Bergson: Well the AI issue and the mind is a special subject Mick...we'll get to that later[13:34] BALDUR Joubert: if you consider the brain as harware.the problem AI is mind...the software:)[13:34] herman Bergson: Especially because AI hasn't made true its promises...[13:34] Mick Nerido: yes Baldur good point[13:35] herman Bergson: That is a general concept already.....that the brain is the hardware and the mind the software[13:35] Bejiita Imako: a indeed[13:35] BALDUR Joubert: ty,,didn't know..[13:35] Bejiita Imako: the brain runs the mind like a computer runs windows or linux[13:35] herman Bergson: but it has its consequences….[13:36] BALDUR Joubert: in your last lecture you cited a lot of guys who didn't understand that lol[13:36] herman Bergson: logically it leads to the conclusion that everything could have a mind,[13:36] Ciska Riverstone: gosh - hope not vista...[13:36] Bejiita Imako: haaha hope not[13:36] herman Bergson: based on the idea that the software is not necessarily dependent on the type of hardware it is using[13:36] Bejiita Imako: my laptop does not feels so good on that system[13:36] herman Bergson: an issue we'll discuss later too .. ^_^[13:37] herman Bergson: Can my laptop have a headache ^_^ ???[13:37] Bejiita Imako: but a computer doesn't have a mind cause its a machine that only follows exactly what its told to do[13:37] Doodus Moose: no - but it can run a temperature[13:37] BALDUR Joubert: everything could have a mind' ' then we should know what mind is.. still the question[13:37] BALDUR Joubert: for scientist and philosophers..[13:38] Bejiita Imako: basically its just an advanced calculator that use mathematical formulas to do everything[13:38] BALDUR Joubert: that could go for the brain as such beji[13:38] herman Bergson: Bejiita...you will love the Chinese Room argument of John Searle :-)[13:38] Bejiita Imako: and that works cause mathematics is the language of the nature so thats why sound pictures and everything else can be input into a computer[13:38] Bejiita Imako: ㋡[13:39] BALDUR Joubert: mathematics is the language we use to understand[13:39] Mick Nerido: Conciousness comes with Mind I think[13:39] Bejiita Imako: yes[13:39] Bejiita Imako: thats the difference[13:39] BALDUR Joubert: understand nature not the other way around beji[13:39] Bejiita Imako: we directly see and feel what we do[13:39] herman Bergson: Well…Bejiita…I guess the chinese room argument also applies to mathematics...[13:39] Bejiita Imako: a computer doesn't see its running sl it only sees 1+1 or 1-2 = then ect milions of times per second[13:40] Bejiita Imako: and that in turn creates the sl program[13:40] herman Bergson: Basically it asks...how can symbol manipulation get semantic meaning?[13:40] herman Bergson: Which means....[13:40] Mick Nerido: How could a computer be concious?[13:40] herman Bergson: how can my mathematical calculations tell me that the bridge I am constructing will hold?[13:41] Bejiita Imako: as said, it cant cause all it does is dealing with mathematical formulas billions of times per sec which in turn is made up of just small switches that turn on and of[13:41] Mick Nerido: Physics[13:41] Bejiita Imako: in no way a computer can "see" that it runs second life ex[13:41] Bejiita Imako: its as dumb as the light switch[13:42] Bejiita Imako: or a relay[13:42] BALDUR Joubert: compared to speed of neuron exchange in the brain.. beji..[13:42] herman Bergson: a computer is a symbol shuffler[13:42] Bejiita Imako: flipping on and off[13:42] Mick Nerido: Hal wasn't dumb[13:42] BALDUR Joubert: lol[13:42] Bejiita Imako: hahah thats a Sci Fi machine[13:42] herman Bergson: And HAl was hell ^_^[13:42] BALDUR Joubert: was he' ' if we look around us men are hell[13:43] Doodus Moose: i always saw HAL as the ultimate "A"-type personality[13:43] Bejiita Imako: its like the LHC, that huge machine seems it have a mind when it even can say things about what it do[13:43] Bejiita Imako: but its not smarter that my computer here[13:43] herman Bergson: There is Sartre.....L'enfer c'est l'autre ^_^[13:43] Bejiita Imako: an advanced machine but still just a machine[13:43] herman Bergson: But anyway.....[13:43] Mick Nerido: Any advanced tech looks like magic to the ignorent[13:43] BALDUR Joubert: right..but we are l'autre for the others too[13:44] herman Bergson: What I wanted to show you before continuing on the biology of emotins is....read your newspaper with philosophical glasses on...[13:44] Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): will do[13:44] herman Bergson: yes Baldur and we are enjoying a hell of a time together here ^_^[13:44] BALDUR Joubert: always read with a critical mind..that's the philosophers obligation:)[13:45] herman Bergson: When you keep the BRAIN/MIND issue in mind and chech your newspaper....[13:45] BALDUR Joubert: yes herman..if we couldn't argue..would be dull[13:45] herman Bergson: 80% chance some article is related to the issue[13:46] Mick Nerido: I'll keep that in mind:)[13:46] herman Bergson: Well...this applies to my newspaper...a dutch one...[13:47] herman Bergson: Just imagine..why are there so often discussions about what sense religion makes for instance?[13:47] Mick Nerido: Thanks Professor, I must leave[13:48] herman Bergson: OK...I hope you got my message......[13:48] BALDUR Joubert: good question herman.. but we should start to try to understand how religion came to being..[13:48] herman Bergson: This is not just a philosophical project like lecturing on 100 philosophers[13:49] herman Bergson: Just start re-reading to begin with lecture 266 Baldur and you'll get the answer[13:49] BALDUR Joubert: 266..i'll give you my comment...[13:49] herman Bergson: We are in the middle of a worldwide debate... a public one and a scientific one and a philosophical one[13:50] herman Bergson: and I find it exciting ^_^[13:50] Bejiita Imako: its interesting[13:50] Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): very[13:51] :: Beertje :: (beertje.beaumont): has there ever been such a debate?[13:51] herman Bergson: So...a reward for the firs tone of you who shows up with some newspaper article related to our quest![13:51] BALDUR Joubert: smile..i kept that in mind:)[13:52] BALDUR Joubert: smile thanks to my brain:)[13:52] herman Bergson: Ok...you have your assignment....[13:52] herman Bergson: Thank you all for your participation....[13:52] herman Bergson: .[13:52] herman Bergson: Class dismissed[13:53] Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): ♥ Thank Youuuuuuuuuu!! ♥[13:53] Gemma Allen (gemma.cleanslate): herman[13:53] BALDUR Joubert: ty herman[13:53] :: Beertje :: (beertje.beaumont): thank you Herman:)[13:53] BALDUR Joubert: man..[13:53] Ciska Riverstone: thank you Herman[13:53] Bejiita Imako: nice as usual ㋡[13:53] herman Bergson: Thank you Bejiita ^_^[13:53] Doodus Moose: this is going to be tough, but i appreciate the challenge, Professor[13:54] bergfrau Apfelbaum: thank you herman & class![13:54] Ciska Riverstone: Enjoy your day /night everyone[13:54] bergfrau Apfelbaum: now i go THINKING :-)))[13:54] herman Bergson: thnx[13:54] :: Beertje :: (beertje.beaumont): lol Bergfrau[13:55] bergfrau Apfelbaum: see u soon:-)[13:55] :: Beertje :: (beertje.beaumont): bye bye[13:55] Bejiita Imako: ㋡[13:55] Bejiita Imako: cu[13:55] bergfrau Apfelbaum: byebye :-)
