Friday, October 27, 2017

685: Is Introspection the Method...?

An influential answer to the question of what makes self-knowledge so special is found in the philosophical tradition that originates from the work of Rene Descartes (1596-1650). 
According to this tradition, we must see self-knowledge as a way of introspection, a kind of 'inner' perception. 
Just as there are things in the world that we can see by looking outside, there are things in our consciousness that we can see when we look inside.
Literally translated, this is exactly what introspection means: the Latin word ‘intra ‘means 'inward', and ‘spectare’ means ‘to watch / look’. 
The first question that arises here is of course this meaning: do we really LOOK INWARD? It is absurd to assume that we have eyes inside our skull.
And if we had, we wouldn’t see a thing because it must be dark inside, I guess. But I also can elaborate on this metaphor
You can imagine introspection as a flashlight shedding light in a dark treasure room, your consciousness, on all sorts of shiny objects, such as your convictions, desires, feelings and intentions. 
This approach of self-knowledge is also known as the introspection theory. 
In Cartesian tradition, self-knowledge is often associated with the following two characteristics: infallibility and omniscience. 
Infallibility means that you can not be mistaken when it comes to what mental state you have now.
If you think you are in pain, or you're in love, then that's actually the case. However, other people have no infallible knowledge of your thoughts.
If they think you are in pain, they may be wrong. Maybe you just try to fool them. 
Omniscience means that you have knowledge of all your mental states. It is impossible to not be aware of your thoughts, desires, intentions or beliefs. There is nothing that can escape your inner eye. 
These two features make sure that a significant difference arises between self-knowledge and the knowledge we have about the mental world of others. 
Today, most philosophers agree that infallibility and omniscience are too high a standard, when it comes to self-knowledge. 
Nevertheless this belief, that using  your inner eye, this method of introspection, is a reliable method of acquiring knowledge has been very influential.
Of course there is a main role for Descartes here in the history of philosophy, but there still exists also neo-cartesianism.
Edmund Husserl (1859 – 1938) was a German  philosopher who established the school of phenomenology.
“Cartesian Meditations: An Introduction to Phenomenology”  is a book (1931) by him, based on four lectures he gave at the Sorbonne, in the Amphithéatre Descartes on February 23 and 25, 1929. Typical….!
His whole philosophy was based on this looking inward at mental phenomena to  examine the essence of a mental object, be it a simple mental act, 
or the unity of consciousness itself, with the intention of drawing out the absolutely necessary and invariable components that make the mental object what it is.
And don’t forget his contemporary Sigmund Freud (1856 - 1939), Nowadays his name is sometimes spelled as Sigmund Fraud.
His whole theory of psycho-analysis is based on introspection. And he discovered all kinds of interesting things with his “flashlight shedding light in a dark treasure room”.
I do not deny the existence of introspection, but the “inner eye” metaphor is misleading. It suggests that we can see “things” in our mind and that we can see everything.
However, introspection is not a reliable method to acquire reliable knowledge about the self. 
The best description of what introspection really is, would be for me: it is thinking about your thoughts, feelings, emotions, intentions, that is: thinking about what goes on in your mind.
And by doing so you won’t find anything that looks like a Self, but yet you can learn a lot about yourself.
Thank you again for your attention…. ^_^

Main Sources:
MacMillan The Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2nd edition
Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 1995
John Searle: The Mystery of Consciousness (1997)
Antonio Damasio: Self comes to Mind (2010) Bruin/F. Jongepier/ Maargt: IK, Filosofie van het Zelf (2017)

The Discussion

[13:17] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): thinks of see as a metaphor
[13:18] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): for introspection
[13:18] herman Bergson: Yes....
[13:18] herman Bergson: It puts you on the wrong track, I'd say
[13:19] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): we can access whats in our brain basically like a computer can access its disk drives but unlike the computer there is no way for other people to plug into and "download" what is in your head
[13:19] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): thus mind reading is an impossibility
[13:19] herman Bergson: lovely SF theme....mind reading :-)
[13:20] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): only you can know what you think and feel, the only way for others to know is if you tell them but sometimes, like when you lie this is incorrect information
[13:20] herman Bergson: Would be a disaster for first-person authority :-)
[13:21] herman Bergson: The main issue to me is this THINKING about what goes on in your mind
[13:21] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): yes
[13:21] herman Bergson: Some like to call this thinking 'introspection'
[13:21] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): ok
[13:21] herman Bergson: But I prefer to call it interpretation...
[13:22] herman Bergson: you can not look into your mind.....
[13:22] herman Bergson: that is a metaphor...
[13:22] CB Axel: Right. You can't actually look with your eyes into your own head.
[13:23] CB Axel: Even if you could, all you'd see is brain matter, blood vessels, etc.
[13:23] CB Axel: It wouldn't tell you much.
[13:23] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): or a black cat
[13:23] herman Bergson: no....but we use expressions like that.....look inward and search...
[13:23] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): indeed
[13:24] CB Axel: You might discover you have a brain tumor or have had a stroke, but it wouldn't tell you what you're thinking or feeling.
[13:24] herman Bergson: so the interesting thing here is to understand thie THINKING as an act....
[13:24] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): sure is
[13:24] herman Bergson: and brings it knowledge of the Self
[13:24] CB Axel: So, introspection isn't really a good word, I guess.
[13:24] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): especially when trying to meditate!!!
[13:24] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): ah
[13:24] herman Bergson: I would drop it indeed CB :-))
[13:25] CB Axel: When I try to think about what I'm thinking, I just start going in mental circles.
[13:25] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): what will we use then
[13:25] herman Bergson: to suggest a relation with "seeing" points you in the wrong direction
[13:25] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): true cb
[13:26] herman Bergson: You can but you don't do that every time CB....
[13:26] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): most of our thoughts seem to be about what is around us.... people... things... etc that affect us
[13:26] herman Bergson: When you think about your actions....oh my, what am I doing....for instance
[13:26] herman Bergson: or your emotions....
[13:26] herman Bergson: I really in love?
[13:27] herman Bergson: dozens of times a day you think about  what goes on in your mind
[13:27] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): true
[13:27] herman Bergson: I understand your circles idea CB....
[13:28] herman Bergson: It is exactly what we are dealing with here.....
[13:28] herman Bergson: When you say ...I am thinking about myself, which means everything that now goes on in you...
[13:28] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): we can say 'hush'to that moneky in our head , but it won't keep still
[13:29] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): yes beertje
[13:29] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): monkey
[13:29] herman Bergson: the interesting question is....WHO or WHAT is that "I" and how do I have to understand this act of thinking....
[13:29] herman Bergson: Here too Beertje...who is this "hush" sayer?
[13:30] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): i call the hush sayer 'me'
[13:30] herman Bergson: so in a way we can double ourselves.....
[13:30] CB Axel: Then who is the monkey?
[13:30] herman Bergson: Ask Beertje CB :-)
[13:30] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): the monkey is the thoughts that keep coming
[13:30] CB Axel: I have to admit that the annoying monkey in my head is also me.
[13:31] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako):
[13:31] CB Axel: The Mr. Hyde to my Dr. Jekyl. °͜°
[13:31] herman Bergson: Where is the Self of these two? :-)
[13:31] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): kohoh cb dualism
[13:32] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): interesting idea
[13:32] CB Axel: Freud would have said it's both the id and the superego.
[13:32] CB Axel: Or is the ego the self?
[13:32] herman Bergson: so there is Me and the one who I am thinking about (which happens to be me too:-)
[13:32] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): i think there are no two, just one..the self or the me
[13:33] herman Bergson: the EGO is just a term from psycho analytical theory
[13:34] herman Bergson: There is one brain and one mind indeed.....
[13:34] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): not alowwed in this class :))
[13:34] CB Axel: Yeah. I pretty much gave up on Freud because he thought everything was about sex.
[13:34] herman Bergson: but that mind plays the trick that it can look at itself...
[13:34] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): for Freud it was reality
[13:35] herman Bergson: yes is everything about sex indeed  but not in the sense Freud meant ^_^
[13:35] CB Axel: Since we don't even understand how thought works, what consciousness is, how can we explain being able to think about our thoughts?
[13:35] herman Bergson: That is the question indeed CB
[13:36] herman Bergson: But we we want to understand
[13:36] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): we know but we still dont know
[13:36] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): sort of
[13:36] herman Bergson: That's what philosophers do ^_^
[13:36] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): we know
[13:37] herman Bergson: At least we can say that this staring inward is no use...there is nothing to see ^_^
[13:37] herman Bergson: Better to stare at your bellybutton ^_^
[13:37] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako) whispers:
[13:37] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): hehe
[13:38] CB Axel: °͜°
[13:38] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): is that usefull Herman?
[13:38] herman Bergson: So in fact it boils down to the question.....
[13:39] herman Bergson: What kind of act or process is this thinking about your personal thoughts, feelings and so on
[13:39] herman Bergson: Some might conclude....
[13:40] herman Bergson: if it is thinking...then there is nothing special about my pricvate thinking and the thinking of others...
[13:40] herman Bergson: so...maybe there is kn knowledge of our Self at all...
[13:41] herman Bergson: But we'll discuss that in the next lectures :-)
[13:41] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): oki
[13:41] herman Bergson: Now I'll offer you a whole week to think about yourself....for no classes next week...I  need a vacation ^_^
[13:41] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): nice
[13:42] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako):
[13:42] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate) GIGGLES!!
[13:42] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): ...LOL...
[13:42] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): so do we
[13:42] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): op naar Schier:)
[13:42] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): very nice
[13:42] CB Axel: I'll spend the week thinking about thinking about what I'm thinking.
[13:42] herman Bergson: Yes Gemma...saves me one week of chaos due to wintertime shift
[13:42] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): ah
[13:42] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): very very true
[13:42] herman Bergson: I'll think about that too CB :-)
[13:42] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): tho in fall it is only half bad
[13:42] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): a lot of thinking about again
[13:43] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): spring is worse!!!!
[13:43] herman Bergson: Europe is palnning to abolish winter/summertime changes
[13:43] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): maybe this will be the last change of time, they want to quit it
[13:43] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): at least i can sleep for 1 hour LONGER this time and not the other way around
[13:43] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): oh nice
[13:44] CB Axel: I wish the US would. It's so stupid.
[13:44] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): we talk about it every year then go and do it
[13:44] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): doesnt matter much though since im always a zombie when i awake most of the time no matter how long i sleep
[13:44] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): at least im no morning guy
[13:44] herman Bergson: It is proven that it has a lot  of serious negative health consequences...this time shifting
[13:44] CB Axel: Twice a year I have to think hard about what time it is in Europe.
[13:44] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): true
[13:44] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): i love the mornings, the best time of the day
[13:44] CB Axel: And I never know what time it is in Arizona.
[13:44] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate) GIGGLES!!
[13:44] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): ...LOL...
[13:44] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): yes
[13:44] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): they dont change
[13:45] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako):
[13:45] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): have a good time
[13:45] CB Axel: The only time I see sunrise is if I've been awake all night. °͜°
[13:45] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): hope the weather is good and not too windy
[13:45] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): indeed this change back and forth is kind of crazy
[13:45] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): it's 22.45 h now CB
[13:45] herman Bergson: Well..then I wish you all a nice week off
[13:45] herman Bergson: Thank you all again
[13:45] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): ♥ Thank Youuuuuuuuuu!! ♥
[13:45] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): have a good time there now Herman
[13:45] Ciska Riverstone: have a nice week off herman
[13:45] Ciska Riverstone: thank you
[13:45] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako):
[13:45] herman Bergson: Class dismissed..^_^
[13:46] CB Axel: Have a nice holiday. °͜°
[13:46] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): thank you Herman:)
[13:46] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): cu
[13:46] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): bye all for now
[13:46] herman Bergson: Schiermonnikoog is waiting :-)
[13:46] Ciska Riverstone: bye everyone
[13:46] Ciska Riverstone: enjoy
[13:46] bergfrau Apfelbaum: byebye cb:-))
[13:46] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako):

Wednesday, October 25, 2017

684: How can we know our Self...?

If you see someone gesturing on the street with his hand, you might think he's waving to you. But you do not know for sure.
Perhaps he tries to hit an irritating fly, or to call a taxi. At the same time, you probably assume that this person himself 
knows what's in his mind at the moment, whether he's waving at you, hiting a fly, or trying to hold a taxi. 
Thus, there seems to be a significant difference between the knowledge we have of others and the knowledge we have of ourselves. 
While we are often just guessing what goes on in the mind of others, we usually have the intuition that we know ourselves very well. 
When you say to the bartender that you're very thirsty, you'd look surprised if he would ask 'Are you sure you're thirsty?' 
or 'Are you sure you're thirsty and not hungry?' because you yourself will know this best, don’t you? When it comes to our inner life, we ourselves are the experts of experience. 
If we make a statement about what we think or feel, then this statement is generally not questioned. 
In philosophy, this is also called 'first-person authority'. But what exactly is the difference between self-knowledge and knowledge of others? 
And is it actually true that we know ourselves best?
In the previous lectures we discussed a number of ideas that address the ontological question of what the Self actually IS.
Ontology is the philosophical theory of what is, what exists. Is it  a thing? Is it an abstract concept. Is it a function of the brain to organise our perception and experiences?

Now, however, I’ll discuss some philosophers who are not primarily interested in the ontological question of the Self. 
For them their primary focus is on the question of HOW we actually know our thoughts, convictions, desires, intentions and emotions. 
This is an epistemological question. Epistemology is the philosophical theory of knowledge, the question “What can I know (for certain)?.
In the next lectures I will discuss some answers to this epistemological question. First we ‘ll have a look at the Cartesian idea that self-knowledge is gained through the ability to introspect. 
Proponents of introspection say that this ability is the basis of the difference between self-knowledge and our knowledge of others, 
and also explains why we ourselves are experts when it comes to our inner lives. 
Then we’ll discuss two critical reactions to this idea: a philosophical criticism based on Ludwig Wittgenstein's work, and a scientific critique based on research in contemporary psychology. 
Then we’ll look at the theory of Gilbert Ryle, who states that self-knowledge is gained through our ability to interpret. 
According to Ryle, there is no significant difference between self-knowledge and the knowledge we have of others, and we should not assume that we know ourselves best. 
A next stop will be the theory of Richard Moran, who claims that self-knowledge is a matter of rational deliberation, actively determining what you think of something. 
Richard Moran is a Harvard professor who wrote the book “Authority and Estrangement -  An Essay on Self-Knowledge” (2002)

Thereafter I’ll show how so-called "unconscious prejudices" can influence our thinking, and what consequences this has for our understanding of self-knowledge. 
Finally, we’ll focus on Victoria McGeers idea of self-regulation, or the ability to match our behavior to what we think and vice versa.
Victoria McGeer is a research scholar and lecturer at Princeton University. She took her B.A. in Philosophy and Government at Dartmouth College
and her Ph.D. in Philosophy at the University of Toronto. She specializes in the philosophy of language and more prominently in the philosophy of mind.
As you see, we got a lot of work ahead. Get ready ! Thank you for your attention again…..

The Discussion 

[13:20] herman Bergson smiles
[13:20] herman Bergson: Oh....and  one special message....
[13:21] herman Bergson: Next week NO class...I'll enjoy a nicce vacation then :-))
[13:21] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): oki
[13:21] CB Axel: That will make it easier to deal with the time change. °͜°
[13:21] CB Axel: I hope you do have a nice vacation.
[13:22] herman Bergson: This was an easy lecture today ^_^
[13:22] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): aaa yes its winter time now soon
[13:22] herman Bergson: Again to the Island :-))
[13:22] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): nice
[13:22] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako):
[13:22] herman Bergson: Indeed Bejiita
[13:23] herman Bergson: This was just an introductory story for what is coming up next :-)
[13:23] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): ok
[13:24] herman Bergson: Guess I answered all your questions.....?
[13:24] CB Axel: That's nice for the people who didn't get here today.
[13:24] herman Bergson: Yes indeed.....
[13:24] herman Bergson: I'll post it immediately.
[13:25] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): thursday is as usual or?
[13:26] herman Bergson: Yes...Thursday as usual Bejiita...even though I have this in mind.......
[13:26] CB Axel: LOL
[13:26] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako):
[13:27] herman Bergson: So I'd say...see you all again on Thursday :-)
[13:27] herman Bergson: Class dismissed .....^_^

[13:27] CB Axel: OK. See you Thursday. °͜°

Friday, October 20, 2017

683: The end of the unique Self ?

The latest news! It was in my newspaper this morning and on dozens of news sites. I found this on the  The Telegraph (UK) site:
“Thousands of years of human knowledge has been learned and surpassed by the world’s smartest computer in just 40 days, 
a breakthrough hailed as one of the greatest advances ever in artificial intelligence. 
Google DeepMind amazed the world last year when its AI programme AlphaGo beat world champion Lee Sedol at Go, 
an ancient and complex game of strategy and intuition which many believed could never be cracked by a machine. 
AlphaGo was so effective because it had been programmed with millions of moves of past masters, and could predict its own chances of winning, adjusting its game-plan accordingly. 
But now the same team has created a machine that learns from scratch. AlphaGo Zero was taught how to play Go, 
but given no additional instructions. Instead it learned the best moves over time, simply by playing millions of games against itself. “ -end quote-
For me, as a Go player myself, this is exciting news, but more exciting is that we have here a machine that learns from scratch.
The development of these self learning algorithms in Artificial Intelligence looks like a huge breakthrough.
Is this the beginning of the end? I mean this: in my newspaper of last Saturday they published an award winning essay.

A translation of the headline could be: The human mind unique? Forget it….
Pretty disappointing message, if you take into account, that we are spending our time on discovering how to understand the unique Self we have.
The argumentation of the author of the essay, Gijsbert Werner, is like this:
The question is: which scientific developments forces us to redefine ourselves and our position in the universe?
After every redefinition we have to conclude that we have become less unique than we thought we were in the universe.
1. The invention of the telescope forced us to accept that our universe is heliocentric and that earth is just a tiny spot in an endless universe.
2. Geology as science forced us to accept, that the earth is not as the bible says five or six thousand years old.
The earth is more than 4 billion years old and only a few million years ago man appeared on that earth.
So, we are not the center of the universe nor are we the crown on creation. We are just a rather unobtrusive species on a hardly noteworthy planet.
We have a complex brain, because our thoughts and experiences have a useful evolutionary function.
From an evolutionary point of view our mind is not a goal as such, but our mind is nothing more than a useful set of tools to stay alive in our (social) environment.
Research already has demonstrated that self-awareness is not a unique feature of homo sapiens anymore.
Neuroscience  still may be in its infancy, but with every discovery of the actual patterns and mechanisms 
that encode specific experiences and thoughts in the brain, it becomes clearer that our mind has a physical basis. 
At a very substantial level our thoughts are formed by interacting molecules and neurons. 
The more we can manipulate and intervene in these processes, the more undeniable it will be.
Fortunately, there remains a last line of defence for the defenders of the uniqueness of the human mind. 
After all, even if we fully understand how thoughts are formed in our brain, notions like self-consciousness may eventually be specific tothe  human brain. 
With a bit of luck, we may become more and more clear and transparent, but at least still unique in that respect.
With a computer, which accumulated real knowledge in 40 days which took Go players some 3000 years
and with a Self, which moved from the center of creation and universe to a result of physical processes on a hardly noteworthy planet,
I guess the moment is near, that we have to redefine ourselves again and our place in the universe.
Thank you again for your attention….. ^_^

The Discussion

[13:20] herman Bergson: btw..the glasses in the picture behind me are my own RL glasses :-))
[13:20] CB Axel: LOL
[13:20] CB Axel: Nice touch
[13:20] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): ha
[13:21] herman Bergson: Take your time to redefine yourself today :-)
[13:21] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): even if a computer can self learn it can still not feel what it is doing, behind this is a toolset that basically says, if true, store in your code, if false throw away and then it repeats this over and over and thus programs itself by only accepting the correct parts
[13:21] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): here are the tools they use and I myself just started to explore( note a bit of python knowledge is good here)
[13:22] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): this is the machine learning toolkot
[13:22] herman Bergson: Yes Bejiita...remember the Chinese room argument of John Searle to begin with
[13:22] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako):
[13:22] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): and here a tutorial series how to use it
[13:22] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): this is i think wat go zero uses
[13:22] herman Bergson: a second matter is that computers are good at simulating cognitive process
[13:22] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): to learn by itself
[13:23] herman Bergson: AI is mainly about cognitive processes....
[13:23] herman Bergson: Why waisting money on simulating feelings by a computer?
[13:24] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): not a good idea i think too
[13:24] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): i think it is all about how to make safe self driving cars in the end
[13:24] CB Axel: Maybe computers will take over some day because they don't have feelings to get in the way of thinking.
[13:24] herman Bergson: Take the train Bejiita and you got one :-)
[13:24] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): bad thought cb
[13:24] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): hehe
[13:25] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): but the train never works here in Sweden, you don’t get any value for your money
[13:25] herman Bergson: That indeed is a beloved SF theme CB...
[13:25] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): maintenance is not what it should be and they always say IT COST TOO MUCH TO FIX, LETS WAIT ¤= YEARS MORE
[13:25] herman Bergson: Terminator 1,2 and 3 are based on it
[13:25] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): 40
[13:25] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): thats sad cause trains are smooth in general to ride
[13:25] CB Axel: Vulcans made it work, but their world was destroyed in the end anyway.
[13:26] herman Bergson: was happy Spock survived :-))
[13:26] John Howard Cassio (sticaatsi): ;-)
[13:26] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako):
[13:26] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): I think that the future will be very interesting with the changes in genetic knowledge
[13:26] CB Axel: But he was half human. He did have emotions that got in the way occasionally. °͜°
[13:26] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): to the brain and the mid
[13:27] herman Bergson: But this new achievement of Google DeepMind is significant...
[13:27] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): and perhaps self
[13:27] herman Bergson: The rules of Go are very simple...
[13:27] herman Bergson: Yes Gemma...
[13:28] herman Bergson: give such a computer the basic rules of whatever...genes....DNA...
[13:28] herman Bergson: and let it reckon
[13:28] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): it is interesting, i just need to get a grasp of this tensor flow thing, its not entirely easy to understand how it works, basically it operates with 2 or 3 dimensional matrixes of data (tensors)
[13:28] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): i want to find out how it works, its exciting stuff
[13:28] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): it has been discovered that ocd is caused by  two genes that are lacking something
[13:28] CB Axel: Really?
[13:28] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): so may be controlled in the future
[13:28] CB Axel: Interesting.
[13:28] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): yes
[13:28] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): ok
[13:28] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): just heard about that the other day
[13:29] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): so perhaps other mental problems will be changed also
[13:29] herman Bergson: that is what the developers of AlphaGo Zero hope for too Gemma
[13:30] herman Bergson: Yet I think that again we see that the cognitive achievements of machines are somehow equated with the human MIND
[13:30] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): one very early example of ai (if this is ai now) is a computer who foresaw a totally unknown physics phenomenon by combining all known physics phenomenon, it sorted out a deadly flamethrower like fire disatster in londins subway,
[13:30] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): the phenomenon is called the trench effect
[13:31] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): a computer figured it out by itself after being fed data from the disaster
[13:31] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): they tested it and ut turned out to work just like that
[13:31] herman Bergson: yes Bejiita...that may be the future
[13:31] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako):
[13:32] herman Bergson: But I wonder...what does it mean to design a machine that has feelings...
[13:32] herman Bergson: ~Like our brain produces
[13:32] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): it says nothing about a computer figuring it out but that was how it was done
[13:33] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): hmm indeed, can it be possible even?
[13:33] John Howard Cassio (sticaatsi): Sooner or later human consciousness will be uploaded into computer memories, and we'll be immortal
[13:33] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): a computer just see on and off, 1 and 0 no matter what it does
[13:33] John Howard Cassio (sticaatsi): I mean, they will
[13:33] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): we on the other hand are analog
[13:33] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): or are we, how does the brain process our senses?
[13:34] herman Bergson: Theoretically you may be right John....
[13:34] CB Axel: Our brains are digital, but in a very complex way, aren't they?
[13:34] herman Bergson: But is it possible to create machines for all individual biochemical/neural processes of all individuals?
[13:34] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): i doubt anything consisting of billions of electrical on and off switches can feel however, 1 and 0 is so far from the analog continuous world
[13:35] John Howard Cassio (sticaatsi): Neurons are like bits I think
[13:35] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): and who is paying for it all
[13:35] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate) GIGGLES!!
[13:35] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): ...LOL...
[13:35] CB Axel: A neuron is getting a signal or not.
[13:35] John Howard Cassio (sticaatsi): they are interconnected
[13:35] herman Bergson: GOOD QUESTION Gemma ^_^
[13:35] John Howard Cassio (sticaatsi): and all works on electrical signals, as in a computer
[13:35] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): you need DACs and ADCs to translate between the analog world and the computer
[13:35] herman Bergson: and what would be the goal of it...immortality??
[13:35] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): frightning thought
[13:35] herman Bergson: and what when we run out of electicity John???
[13:36] John Howard Cassio (sticaatsi): Even now computers are like prothesis to our brains
[13:36] herman Bergson: instant death to all?
[13:36] John Howard Cassio (sticaatsi): they enhance our memory
[13:36] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): almost
[13:36] John Howard Cassio (sticaatsi): our devices are memory aids and boosters
[13:36] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): indeed, computers are awesome machines and they are much faster then we on doing stuff and what they do they repeat over and over without mistake (as long there is no bugs lurking somewhere)
[13:37] herman Bergson: yet not persons....not a Slef...
[13:37] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): but they are still dumb,
[13:37] herman Bergson: at least not in my computer :-)
[13:37] John Howard Cassio (sticaatsi): when a strong electrical current interferes with the electrical impulses that make our heats go we die
[13:37] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): but tensorflow and similar tools might be a bit on the way to smarter computers, a must for a traffic safe auto driving car or something similar
[13:38] John Howard Cassio (sticaatsi): people can be programmed like computers and often are
[13:38] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): you dint want to travel at 100 km/h and suddenly crash into a wall or lorry because the computer missed something
[13:38] John Howard Cassio (sticaatsi): pavlov and pedagogy
[13:38] herman Bergson: Let's conclude that computers are better at cognitive tasks than man....
[13:39] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): ok
[13:39] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): ah
[13:39] herman Bergson: but that they still are symbol manipulating machines only
[13:39] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): how do you make a computer "see" what is a road and what is not for example
[13:39] herman Bergson: The big difference is that WE know what we are doing because we have a Self....computers don't
[13:40] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): it have no concept of either roads driving or safety
[13:40] herman Bergson: they just do what they do
[13:40] John Howard Cassio (sticaatsi): roads can be installed sensors to guide cars
[13:40] John Howard Cassio (sticaatsi): Computers are evolving fast
[13:40] herman Bergson: Just imagine the computer that says...oh my..what am I doing...should I be doing this?
[13:40] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): but what it does it repeats with great accuracy, far better and faster then we, it is the interpretation of our analog world , images sounds ect that is difficult for a computer to do
[13:40] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): as said it sees only 1 and 0
[13:41] John Howard Cassio (sticaatsi): I bet we are computers too in a way
[13:41] John Howard Cassio (sticaatsi): most of what we do responds to an inner program we have
[13:41] herman Bergson: it is the other way around John....
[13:41] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): self
[13:41] John Howard Cassio (sticaatsi): main objective of the program is reproduction and survival of the species
[13:41] John Howard Cassio (sticaatsi): it is both ways
[13:41] herman Bergson: computers do thing s WE also do but not as good as the machine
[13:41] John Howard Cassio (sticaatsi): we create machines that imitate ourselves
[13:42] John Howard Cassio (sticaatsi): look at a car attentively, you'll see a car has eyes, a nose and an anus
[13:42] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): in the computers infancy (ENIAC time) they were referred to as gigant electric brains)
[13:42] John Howard Cassio (sticaatsi): and the anus is behind while the eyes are in the front
[13:42] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate) GIGGLES!!
[13:42] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): ...LOL...
[13:42] herman Bergson: we are not like computers but computers are like us :-)
[13:42] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): (falls over anime style) THUD!
[13:42] John Howard Cassio (sticaatsi): we make what we know.
[13:42] John Howard Cassio (sticaatsi): computers are going to be integrated into the human body
[13:43] herman Bergson: But computer can make what we do not know....
[13:43] John Howard Cassio (sticaatsi): right now there are workers that are inserted microchips underskin
[13:43] John Howard Cassio (sticaatsi): they are already out there
[13:43] CB Axel: There are also people with computer aided prosthetics.
[13:43] herman Bergson: The AlphaGo Zero computer played Go in a way even the professional never had thought of
[13:43] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): yes
[13:44] herman Bergson: In opening and end games it came up with totally new strategies...and WON always..
[13:44] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): just like that other computer program foresaw the trench effect, even way before the time of tensorflow although i think tensorflow is a bit mor advanced, that other computer had all known physics data in it and knew how to combine it
[13:44] herman Bergson: really amazing...
[13:44] John Howard Cassio (sticaatsi): in information processing tasks they must be imbattable
[13:44] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): it is indeed
[13:45] herman Bergson:  conclude this advise..
[13:45] herman Bergson: Buy yourself all a computer,,,,
[13:45] herman Bergson: Quite handy :-)
[13:45] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): try tensorflow!
[13:46] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako):
[13:46] herman Bergson: Thank you all again for your participation :-)
[13:46] Gemma (gemma.cleanslate): ♥ Thank Youuuuuuuuuu!! ♥
[13:46] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): i’ll at last see if i can learn something of it
[13:46] Ciska Riverstone: thank you
[13:46] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): as said it seem a bit tricky
[13:46] herman Bergson: Class dismissed....^_^
[13:46] Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): nice again


Thursday, October 19, 2017

682: The Self as a Center of Narrative Gravity

“What is a self? I will try to answer this question by developing an analogy with something much simpler, 
something which is nowhere near as puzzling as a self, but has some properties in common with selves. 
What I have in mind is the center of gravity of an object. This is a well-behaved concept in Newtonian physics. 
But a center of gravity is not an atom or a subatomic particle or any other physical item in the world. 
It has no mass; it has no color; it has no physical properties at all, except for spatio-temporal location. 
It is a fine example of what Hans Reichenbach would call an abstractum. It is a purely abstract object. 
It is, if you like , a theorist's fiction. It is not one of the real things in the universe in addition to the atoms. 
But it is a fiction that has nicely defined, well delineated and well behaved role within physics.”
This is how Daniel Dennett begins his article “The Self as a Center of Narrative Gravity” (1992).

We can manipulate centers of gravity. For instance, I change the  center of gravity of a water pitcher easily, by pouring some of the water out.

So, although a center of gravity is a purely abstract   object, it has a spatio-temporal career, which I can affect by my actions. 

It has a history, but its history can include some rather    strange episodes. As an abstractum, it is not bound by all the constraints of physical travel.
A self is also an abstract object, a theorist's fiction. 
The theory is not particle physics but what we might call a branch of people physics; 
it is more soberly known as a phenomenology or hermeneutics, or soul-science (Geisteswissenschaft). 
The physicist does an interpretation, if you like, of a chair and its behavior,
and comes up with the theoretical abstraction of a center of gravity, which is then very useful

in characterizing the behaviour of the chair in the future, under a wide variety of conditions. 
The hermeneuticist or phenomenologist, or anthropologist sees some rather more complicated things 
moving about in the world, human beings and animals, and is faced with a similar problem of  interpretation.
Dennett concludes that The Self can be considered as a Center of Narrative Gravity. On the question “Who are you”, we begin telling stories about ourselves,
as if it is about a character in a novel, we tell our history and adventures in life and the novelist is our brain.

Thank you for your attention again ….. ^_^

The Self as a Center of Narrative Gravity
in F. Kessel, P. Cole and D. Johnson, eds, Self and Consciousness: Multiple Perspectives, Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1992.

The Discussion

[2017/10/17 13:19]  herman Bergson: Feel free to throw in your questions and remarks :-)
[2017/10/17 13:20]  Ciska Riverstone: thank you herman
[2017/10/17 13:20]  herman Bergson: -Was it to o difficult?
[2017/10/17 13:21]  herman Bergson: I find the description of the Self by Dennett brilliant....
[2017/10/17 13:21]  Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): the best way to describe center of gravity would be as a mathematical value or measurement of distances where balance occur in all directions but can you describe self in some similar way, both however are non physical things
[2017/10/17 13:21]  herman Bergson: Indeed Bejiita....
[2017/10/17 13:21]  herman Bergson: Center of gravityI S a mathematical concept....
[2017/10/17 13:22]  herman Bergson: we use it to organize our world...predict for instance behavior of objects..
[2017/10/17 13:22]  Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): and self is also some kind of concept
[2017/10/17 13:22]  Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): not mathematical but still a concept
[2017/10/17 13:22]  herman Bergson: mentioned that already some time organizing concept
[2017/10/17 13:22]  herman Bergson: I agree  with you
[2017/10/17 13:23]  Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): ah
[2017/10/17 13:23]  Zorba (code2.hax): I must be missing something. Center of gravity is not a mathematical concept, but an observed reality. Things really do work that way. It's not an abstraction, and bejita's description is quite good.
[2017/10/17 13:23]  Zorba (code2.hax): It's something that can and is modeled by mathmatics.
[2017/10/17 13:23]  Zorba (code2.hax): can be and is*
[2017/10/17 13:23]  Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): you can calculate the center of gravity but also observe it
[2017/10/17 13:23]  herman Bergson: I am sorry to say Zorba....but it is not a reality....
[2017/10/17 13:23]  Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): an object will not tip if at center of gravity
[2017/10/17 13:24]  Zorba (code2.hax): calculation can be difficult if you want to precisely find the COG
[2017/10/17 13:24]  herman Bergson: you can not see a center of has no color takes no space and so on
[2017/10/17 13:24]  Zorba (code2.hax): It's as real as anything in our universe, Herman.
[2017/10/17 13:24]  Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): you can see its effect however
[2017/10/17 13:24]  Zorba (code2.hax): or are you a Solipsist ?
[2017/10/17 13:24]  Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): but not the point itselv
[2017/10/17 13:24]  Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): itelf
[2017/10/17 13:24]  herman Bergson: Hold on.....
[2017/10/17 13:24]  herman Bergson: Now we are drifting into an ontological discussion....
[2017/10/17 13:25]  Zorba (code2.hax): The COG is always there and can be demonstrated
[2017/10/17 13:25]  Zorba (code2.hax): .. observed
[2017/10/17 13:25]  herman Bergson: as a materialist I say that it is a mathematical concept and only real as a concept
[2017/10/17 13:25]  herman Bergson: it has no real existence as an atom
[2017/10/17 13:26]  Zorba (code2.hax): well, if you wanted to you could say that about anything in the universe that we observe, yes?
[2017/10/17 13:26]  CB Axel: You can observe that there is a center of gravity, but you cannot see a thing that is the center of gravity.
[2017/10/17 13:26]  Zorba (code2.hax): I don't think you can make that claim, Herman.
[2017/10/17 13:26]  Zorba (code2.hax): magnetic, gravitational fields are really things, but they're invisible yes.
[2017/10/17 13:27]  herman Bergson: If I would agree with you, Zorba, the Self would be a thing....which you can find inside my body
[2017/10/17 13:27]  Zorba (code2.hax): real*
[2017/10/17 13:27]  CB Axel: I can observe a block of wood, but I cannot observe a thing that is a center of gravity. I cannot remove the center of gravity and say, "Here it is!"
[2017/10/17 13:27]  herman Bergson: you apply the property REAL to a concept, which is a category mistake, which we discussed in the previous lecture
[2017/10/17 13:27]  herman Bergson: a stone is real, an atom is....
[2017/10/17 13:28]  Zorba (code2.hax): Herman, you're defining gravity by backing into it by using the analogy of self. You made a tie that you believe to be a valid analogy, and now are defining gravity by the nature of self. Did you really mean to do that?
[2017/10/17 13:28]  herman Bergson: Guess you misunderstood...
[2017/10/17 13:28]  Zorba (code2.hax): yep, must have.
[2017/10/17 13:28]  Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): the importance is that both of these are concepts and not physical thing
[2017/10/17 13:28]  Zorba (code2.hax): None of this really makes much sense to me.
[2017/10/17 13:29]  herman Bergson: the center of gravity is an abstract mathematical concept.....
[2017/10/17 13:29]  herman Bergson: it is not real like a stone or atom....
[2017/10/17 13:29]  Zorba (code2.hax): Physics in my world is a reality.. Gravity is real, not a concept ;-)
[2017/10/17 13:29]  herman Bergson: yet an organizing principle in our understand and predict events
[2017/10/17 13:29]  herman Bergson: I am not talking about gravity
[2017/10/17 13:30]  herman Bergson: I am talking about a mathematical point in an object
[2017/10/17 13:30]  Zorba (code2.hax): I think it's fine to use analogies to try and explain things we don't understand, but it's not good to lose sight of the fact that gravity is not like the self, and the self is not really like gravity. To believe it to be so to me would be conflation in the extreme.
[2017/10/17 13:30]  herman Bergson: And Dennett uses this analogy to show that the concept of the Self is such a kind of concept too
[2017/10/17 13:31]  Zorba (code2.hax): Yes, I understood what he's trying to say
[2017/10/17 13:31]  CB Axel: He's not talking about gravity. He's talking about the concept of a center of gravity in an object.
[2017/10/17 13:31]  herman Bergson: As I said...I am NOT talking about gravity...
[2017/10/17 13:31]  Ciska Riverstone: I think you dislike the fact that the concept of self cannot be calculated as the concept of gravitiy zorba
[2017/10/17 13:31]  Ciska Riverstone: which of course is true
[2017/10/17 13:31]  herman Bergson: I am talking about a mathematical point in objects caused by gravity
[2017/10/17 13:31]  Zorba (code2.hax): objects that exhibit gravity tend to have centers of gravity as described by Bejita
[2017/10/17 13:32]  Ciska Riverstone: maths is just a relational concept which explains certain physical phenomenons in a way which is repeatable
[2017/10/17 13:32]  Zorba (code2.hax): It's not a matter of like or dislike, Ciska, it's a mater of physics and logic.
[2017/10/17 13:33]  herman Bergson: I think I am still quite logical in what I claim :-)
[2017/10/17 13:33]  herman Bergson: What this is all about is about the concept of the Self...
[2017/10/17 13:33]  herman Bergson: liek a canter of gravity, it is a center of narrative gravity....
[2017/10/17 13:34]  Zorba (code2.hax): Herman, I don't believe it to be a 'mathematical point'. It's a real physical point that the object can physically be balanced on. The math is only a map or model that could possibly describe it's location, but the location is real, not a 'concept'
[2017/10/17 13:34]  CB Axel: So the self is not real?
[2017/10/17 13:34]  herman Bergson: It means that when we try to understand what the Self is, we have to conclude that it is an organizing principle, concept produced by the brain to understand  a person and his behavior
[2017/10/17 13:35]  Ciska Riverstone: what’s math for you zorba?
[2017/10/17 13:35]  herman Bergson: no CB, not in the sense as an atom or a tree is real
[2017/10/17 13:35]  Zorba (code2.hax): I agree that understanding the self to be an issue. I don't disagree. Perhaps I see the analogy as being poor
[2017/10/17 13:35]  herman Bergson: Yet it exists in our mind.....
[2017/10/17 13:35]  Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): yes
[2017/10/17 13:35]  Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): but it is not a thing
[2017/10/17 13:35]  CB Axel: Right. And the center of gravity is not real in the sense that and atom or a tree is real.
[2017/10/17 13:35]  herman Bergson: indeed Bejiita...
[2017/10/17 13:35]  CB Axel: *an atom
[2017/10/17 13:36]  Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): its a rcursive concept when you sefer back to yorself
[2017/10/17 13:36]  herman Bergson: and the analogy is NOT about gravity, but about mathematics in fact
[2017/10/17 13:36]  Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): when I say I i refer to myself but not when I say you
[2017/10/17 13:36]  Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): then i refer to someone else
[2017/10/17 13:36]  Zorba (code2.hax): it's a collection of gravitations forces of the particles that make up the object, and their gravitational summary center.
[2017/10/17 13:36]  Zorba (code2.hax): real stuff ;-)
[2017/10/17 13:36]  herman Bergson: Because we understand people as a a Person we can understand and sometimes predict their behavior
[2017/10/17 13:37]  herman Bergson: the same way we can predict the behavior of a chair calculation with tis center of gravity
[2017/10/17 13:38]  CB Axel: The self is a collection of experiences in our lives.
[2017/10/17 13:38]  Ciska Riverstone: i'd disagree there herman - because math will not bring u to understand and predict a person ;)
[2017/10/17 13:38]  Ciska Riverstone: whereas math will do it for the gravity center of a chair
[2017/10/17 13:38]  herman Bergson: no no...that is not what I am saying...
[2017/10/17 13:38]  herman Bergson: psychology applies here....
[2017/10/17 13:38]  Ciska Riverstone: right
[2017/10/17 13:39]  herman Bergson: math applies to the chair
[2017/10/17 13:39]  Ciska Riverstone: math applies to physics - as a concept
[2017/10/17 13:39]  Zorba (code2.hax): /me watches the analogy break down... :-(
[2017/10/17 13:39]  Ciska Riverstone: psychology applies to self as a concept
[2017/10/17 13:39]  Ciska Riverstone: no it still works zorba
[2017/10/17 13:39]  Zorba (code2.hax): not really
[2017/10/17 13:39]  Ciska Riverstone: u just need to be specific about it
[2017/10/17 13:39]  Zorba (code2.hax): I don't
[2017/10/17 13:39]  Zorba (code2.hax): it's not mine ;-)
[2017/10/17 13:39]  Ciska Riverstone: hehe yes of course
[2017/10/17 13:40]  Ciska Riverstone: u can  describe it differently too
[2017/10/17 13:40]  Ciska Riverstone: thats a matter of language
[2017/10/17 13:40]  Zorba (code2.hax): /me nods
[2017/10/17 13:40]  herman Bergson: Zorba...:-)
[2017/10/17 13:40]  herman Bergson: The Self as a Center of Narrative Gravity
 in F. Kessel, P. Cole and D. Johnson, eds, Self and Consciousness: Multiple Perspectives, Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1992.
[2017/10/17 13:40]  herman Bergson: There you find the original article of Dennett
[2017/10/17 13:40]  herman Bergson: Search on that title and you can download it as PDF
[2017/10/17 13:40]  Zorba (code2.hax): In a very abstract sense, I don't disagree, Herman
[2017/10/17 13:41]  herman Bergson: This is an abstract matter
[2017/10/17 13:41]  herman Bergson: The concept is an abstractum as Dennett said referring to Reichenbach
[2017/10/17 13:41]  Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): and saved to computer already
[2017/10/17 13:42]  Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako):
[2017/10/17 13:42]  Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): for later reading
[2017/10/17 13:42]  Zorba (code2.hax): But some of the claims about the nature of gravity that are tossed about in this are simply not truth
[2017/10/17 13:42]  Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): was not hard to find
[2017/10/17 13:42]  Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako):
[2017/10/17 13:42]  Zorba (code2.hax): gtg. Thanks for the presentation, Herman. Tc all
[2017/10/17 13:42]  herman Bergson: as I said....I never talked about gravity. here...
[2017/10/17 13:42]  herman Bergson: good discussion :-))
[2017/10/17 13:43]  Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako):
[2017/10/17 13:43]  herman Bergson: our hearts we all carry a center of gravity  ^_^
[2017/10/17 13:44]  Ciska Riverstone: hehehe buddha would agree with u fully ,)
[2017/10/17 13:44]  herman Bergson: and when you displace it you get aout of balance :-)
[2017/10/17 13:44]  Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako):
[2017/10/17 13:44]  Ciska Riverstone: (although he might suggest it could be in our toe too ;) )
[2017/10/17 13:44]  Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): ah
[2017/10/17 13:44]  herman Bergson: Taht's a mattter of maths Ciska :-)
[2017/10/17 13:45]  Ciska Riverstone: hahahah
[2017/10/17 13:45]  herman Bergson: Some have it in their head, some in there genitals , some in their toes, I'd say...
[2017/10/17 13:45]  herman Bergson: looking at human behavior
[2017/10/17 13:45]  Ciska Riverstone: i'd like to reckon where mine is ,)
[2017/10/17 13:45]  .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): some behind their "ellebogen"
[2017/10/17 13:45]  Ciska Riverstone: u have the formular?
[2017/10/17 13:45]  Ciska Riverstone: heheheh beertje
[2017/10/17 13:45]  herman Bergson: good one Beertje :-)
[2017/10/17 13:46]  .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): grins
[2017/10/17 13:46]  Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako):
[2017/10/17 13:46]  herman Bergson: I think it is ellbow in english
[2017/10/17 13:46]  .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): i didn't know how to spell it
[2017/10/17 13:46]  Ciska Riverstone: ellenbogen its in german - so i'm very happy with ellebogen
[2017/10/17 13:47]  herman Bergson: interesting....did the Brits learn this word from us?
[2017/10/17 13:47]  CB Axel: Probably
[2017/10/17 13:47]  herman Bergson: why would that be...? :-))
[2017/10/17 13:47]  herman Bergson: knee.....Dutch knie
[2017/10/17 13:48]  .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): kindergarten...
[2017/10/17 13:48]  herman Bergson: ellbow and knee....
[2017/10/17 13:48]  .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): german
[2017/10/17 13:48]  CB Axel: It's all from whatever the first language was.
[2017/10/17 13:48]  herman Bergson: interesting...these joints are derived from Dutch terms :-)
[2017/10/17 13:48]  Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): hmm ok
[2017/10/17 13:48]  .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): question...
[2017/10/17 13:49]  CB Axel: Since we've all had knees and elbows from the beginning of language, the names for them are all related.
[2017/10/17 13:49]  herman Bergson: Allthough not a philosophical question yet quite interesting ^_^
[2017/10/17 13:49]  .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): when a person gets another heart, sometimes his or hers identity changes
[2017/10/17 13:49]  .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): how is that possible?
[2017/10/17 13:50]  CB Axel: It's probably a psychological thing, Beertje.
[2017/10/17 13:50]  herman Bergson: that is just a psychological issue, I'd say
[2017/10/17 13:50]  .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): taking over the givers haert and idientity?
[2017/10/17 13:50]  .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): how can one know how that person was?
[2017/10/17 13:51]  herman Bergson: no....just the belief that the heart you got , is related to the identity of the donor
[2017/10/17 13:51]  CB Axel: And you know that person was a kind and generous person.
[2017/10/17 13:51]  herman Bergson: At least...yes
[2017/10/17 13:52]  herman Bergson: But you  never know the color of his or her hair...
[2017/10/17 13:52]  herman Bergson: you not even know if it was a man or a woman
[2017/10/17 13:53]  herman Bergson: But I guess there is some TV documentary in which someone tells he / she is  in contact with the donor :-)
[2017/10/17 13:53]  herman Bergson: we love such stories
[2017/10/17 13:53]  .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): i didn't know about  a tv documentary
[2017/10/17 13:53]  herman Bergson: Implies an afterlife and so on
[2017/10/17 13:54]  herman Bergson: Neither do I Beertje :-))
[2017/10/17 13:54]  herman Bergson: But when you can think of it, it exists somewhere, is my experience :-))
[2017/10/17 13:54]  CB Axel: This Thursday is the anniversary of a surgery where a baby girl got a baboon heart. I doubt that she began to identify as a baboon.
[2017/10/17 13:54]  herman Bergson: Did it work, CB?
[2017/10/17 13:55]  CB Axel: Only for a short time. Days, I believe. She died before a human heart could be found.
[2017/10/17 13:56]  herman Bergson: Always a sad story....but they tried....
[2017/10/17 13:57]  Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): aw
[2017/10/17 13:57]  herman Bergson: Well...this was an interesting discussion again ^_^
[2017/10/17 13:57]  Ciska Riverstone: (just for the backround
[2017/10/17 13:57]  kirsche64: ist online.
[2017/10/17 13:57]  CB Axel: From wikipedia: Though she died within a month of the procedure, she lived weeks longer than any previous recipient of a non-human heart.
[2017/10/17 13:57]  Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): it was interesting indeed
[2017/10/17 13:57]  herman Bergson: ahh...let's have a look
[2017/10/17 13:58]  herman Bergson: The heart does not contain brain cells. It contains neurons that comprise its own intrinsic system for regulating cardiac function. Further, neurons alone do not equal mind or consciousness. It takes the specialized organization of neurons in the brain to produce cognitive processes that we experience as the mind.
[2017/10/17 13:58]  herman Bergson: Answers your question, I guess Beertje
[2017/10/17 13:58]  Ciska Riverstone: it shows that research is done
[2017/10/17 13:58]  Ciska Riverstone: thats how far it is atm
[2017/10/17 13:59]  herman Bergson: yes..interesting....
[2017/10/17 13:59]  Ciska Riverstone: its difficult to say where it will lead
[2017/10/17 13:59]  Ciska Riverstone: maybe
[2017/10/17 13:59]  Ciska Riverstone: just maybe
[2017/10/17 13:59]  Ciska Riverstone: there is some connection
[2017/10/17 13:59]  herman Bergson: make one remark....
[2017/10/17 13:59]  Ciska Riverstone: but right now that cannot be confirmed
[2017/10/17 13:59]  Ciska Riverstone: the pint is
[2017/10/17 13:59]  Ciska Riverstone: if people experience something
[2017/10/17 13:59]  herman Bergson: when we talk about the Mind, we tend to think of the BRAIN as the source....
[2017/10/17 13:59]  Ciska Riverstone: this could be a biological basis for that
[2017/10/17 14:00]  Loreen Aldrin: ist online.
[2017/10/17 14:00]  herman Bergson: but the brain is just a part of the whole central nervous system...
[2017/10/17 14:00]  Ciska Riverstone: yep
[2017/10/17 14:00]  herman Bergson: so the whole body can be the source of the mind
[2017/10/17 14:00]  Ciska Riverstone: as long as we do not know how things are stored where...
[2017/10/17 14:00]  Ciska Riverstone: we just don'T know ;)
[2017/10/17 14:01]  Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): i guess
[2017/10/17 14:01]  .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): can the mind die?
[2017/10/17 14:01]  herman Bergson: what do you mean Ciska...we know that our memories are in our brain...
[2017/10/17 14:01]  herman Bergson: BUT>....
[2017/10/17 14:01]  herman Bergson: there is something else...
[2017/10/17 14:01]  herman Bergson: our  muscles have a memory too...
[2017/10/17 14:02]  herman Bergson: I had my flute repaired....
[2017/10/17 14:02]  Ciska Riverstone: lets put it like that we can savely say up to now that something in the brain stores
[2017/10/17 14:02]  Ciska Riverstone: but we do not know about the rest
[2017/10/17 14:02]  herman Bergson: stared to ply afer almost ten years again....
[2017/10/17 14:02]  Ciska Riverstone: we assume most is done in the brain
[2017/10/17 14:02]  Ciska Riverstone: but braindead people for example have still reactions
[2017/10/17 14:02]  herman Bergson: and I said to the man who did the job...don’t know if I can play again...
[2017/10/17 14:02]  Ciska Riverstone: or can have
[2017/10/17 14:03]  Ciska Riverstone: good for you herman
[2017/10/17 14:03]  herman Bergson: He said....don't is like riding a bike....also after ten years you still can do it
[2017/10/17 14:03]  herman Bergson: It may be that my brain controls the movements of my fingers...
[2017/10/17 14:04]  herman Bergson: but the n muscles in my fingers seem to be pretty smart and quick learning again
[2017/10/17 14:04]  Ciska Riverstone: sure - u trott the old autobahns ,)
[2017/10/17 14:04]  herman Bergson: so...maybe the source of the mind is the  whole body
[2017/10/17 14:05]  Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): maybe
[2017/10/17 14:05]  herman Bergson: I agree Ciska, but I still can not drive 160 km an hour at the moment :-)
[2017/10/17 14:06]  .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): on his speed bike:)
[2017/10/17 14:06]  Ciska Riverstone: heheh
[2017/10/17 14:06]  Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako):
[2017/10/17 14:06]  Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): if you put a jet engine on it you can
[2017/10/17 14:06]  Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako):
[2017/10/17 14:06]  herman Bergson: It is a flute, bejiita :-))
[2017/10/17 14:07]  .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): the fastest bike in the Netherlands was 120 km hour
[2017/10/17 14:07]  Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): are we talking instruments or vehicles?
[2017/10/17 14:07]  CB Axel: /me is trying to imagine a jet powered flute
[2017/10/17 14:07]  herman Bergson: Me too CB :-))
[2017/10/17 14:07]  Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): that would be loud for sure
[2017/10/17 14:07]  Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): compressed air drive could wor, like an organ
[2017/10/17 14:08]  herman Bergson: Well I suggest you all try it out at home..:-)
[2017/10/17 14:08]  herman Bergson: For today we havedone enough, I'd say
[2017/10/17 14:08]  .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): you said the mind is in the whole body, if one looses a leg wil he loose a part of his mind?
[2017/10/17 14:08]  herman Bergson: So thank you all agin ...
[2017/10/17 14:08]  herman Bergson: Class dismissed..
[2017/10/17 14:08]  Ciska Riverstone: thanx herman
[2017/10/17 14:09]  Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): now im gonna read that pdf, then do some more JS scripts
[2017/10/17 14:09]  Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): then sleep
[2017/10/17 14:09]  Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): cu next time
[2017/10/17 14:09]  Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): nice as usual
[2017/10/17 14:09]  Ciska Riverstone: sleep well bejiita
[2017/10/17 14:09]  .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): welterusten Bejiita
[2017/10/17 14:09]  Ciska Riverstone: welterusten beertje
[2017/10/17 14:09]  bergfrau Apfelbaum: thank you Herman and class :-)
[2017/10/17 14:09]  Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako):
[2017/10/17 14:09]  bergfrau Apfelbaum: ***** APPPPPPPLLLLAAAUUUSSSSEEEEEEE***********
[2017/10/17 14:09]  herman Bergson: OK Bejiita...!
[2017/10/17 14:09]  Particle Physicist Bejiita (bejiita.imako): YAY! (yay!)
[2017/10/17 14:09]  CB Axel: Good night, everyone. See you Thursday. °͜°
[2017/10/17 14:09]  herman Bergson: Bye CB
[2017/10/17 14:10]  .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): welterusten Ciska en Herman
[2017/10/17 14:10]  bergfrau Apfelbaum: gute nacht :-) see you Thursday
[2017/10/17 14:10]  Ciska Riverstone:
[2017/10/17 14:10]  herman Bergson: Bye Beertje :-)
[2017/10/17 14:10]  .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): oops forgot you Bergie
[2017/10/17 14:10]  bergfrau Apfelbaum: #°*** BABA ***°#
[2017/10/17 14:10]  bergfrau Apfelbaum: :-))
[2017/10/17 14:10]  .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): Gute nacht
[2017/10/17 14:11]  bergfrau Apfelbaum: hihi :-)
[2017/10/17 14:11]  bergfrau Apfelbaum: sleep well beertje:-)
[2017/10/17 14:11]  Ciska Riverstone: *** Gute Nacht, Freunde, es wird Zeit für mich zu geh‘n ***
[2017/10/17 14:11]  Ciska Riverstone: ;)
[2017/10/17 14:11]  bergfrau Apfelbaum: turtles?
[2017/10/17 14:12]  herman Bergson: Was ich noch zu sagen hätte dauert nur ein zigarette und ein letztes glas im stehen
[2017/10/17 14:12]  bergfrau Apfelbaum: hehe
[2017/10/17 14:12]  bergfrau Apfelbaum:  *¨¨**''* Cheers *''**¨¨*

[2017/10/17 14:12]  herman Bergson: \o/