Page 1 of 1

Thinking

PostPosted: Tue Dec 31, 2019 8:14 am
by Dan~
A majority of the human mind seems to me to want to take all of its experience, then categorize the experiences into groups of names.
Labels bounce around on the surface, then sensation comes from below the surface, upward.
The human mind is layered. One part is meant to do one task.
Instinct came before knowledge, during the evolution.
Instinct comes in its own form into the life.
We are born with instincts built-in, but knowledge, no.
We don't start with knowledge. We start with instinct.

Re: Thinking

PostPosted: Tue Dec 31, 2019 10:24 pm
by Meno_
Dan~ wrote:A majority of the human mind seems to me to want to take all of its experience, then categorize the experiences into groups of names.
Labels bounce around on the surface, then sensation comes from below the surface, upward.
The human mind is layered. One part is meant to do one task.
Instinct came before knowledge, during the evolution.
Instinct comes in its own form into the life.
We are born with instincts built-in, but knowledge, no.
We don't start with knowledge. We start with instinct.



The question of the will powered by instinct or cunning.

The overcoming is covered by a thin layer , politically justified or not.


Justification comes by objective subjective perimeters, transcending
the gaps created between experience , categories and labels.

Re: Thinking

PostPosted: Wed Jan 01, 2020 6:54 am
by Prismatic567
Dan~ wrote:1. A majority of the human mind seems to me to want to take all of its experience, then categorize the experiences into groups of names.
2. Labels bounce around on the surface, then sensation comes from below the surface, upward.
3. The human mind is layered. One part is meant to do one task.
4. Instinct came before knowledge, during the evolution.
5. Instinct comes in its own form into the life.
6. We are born with instincts built-in, but knowledge, no.
7. We don't start with knowledge. We start with instinct.

I agree the above is a very accurate presentation of the human condition except 2.

It is sensations that come from below the surface and then the intellect assign labels around the surface.

Then we have the faculty of reason to make sense of these labels [concepts] to facilitate greater level of self-improvements.

The competences of the faculty of reason ranges from crude [1/100] reason to advance rationality [99/100].

Those with more reasonable competence of reason [>60/100] will explore greater knowledge that has potential utility [also threats] that are of use to humanity, e.g. Science, Philosophy, etc., and these are grounded on the original experience-sensation-knowledge.

But there are those who are desperate and significantly driven by an existential crisis to resort to crude reason [<20/100] to generate ideas that are way off from any of the original experience-sensation-knowledge which has some utility.
These ungrounded ideas are those of God, the immortal soul, and all sorts of snake-oils and woo-woo ideas.

While the above has some psychological and other utilities, the dark side is the idea of God had brought forth terrible evil and violent acts committed in the name of an ungrounded God, e.g. from the ideology of Islam.

Re: Thinking

PostPosted: Fri Jan 10, 2020 1:16 am
by Fixed Cross
What is knowledge..... perhaps instinct is a kind of knowledge. At least a form of recognition.

Re: Thinking

PostPosted: Fri Jan 10, 2020 2:16 am
by Pedro I Rengel
Why a form of recognition?

Why not, recognition?

Re: Thinking

PostPosted: Fri Jan 10, 2020 2:21 am
by Aegean
Knowledge = perceived or adopted from a secondary source, of patterns. First hand knowledge = experience
Understanding = perception of patterns within the patterns, connecting knowledge in matrices of meaning.

Re: Thinking

PostPosted: Fri Jan 10, 2020 2:23 am
by Pedro I Rengel
Blabla? = blablablabla bla bla
Blabla? = blablabla bla blablabla

Re: Thinking

PostPosted: Fri Jan 10, 2020 2:41 am
by Aegean
I know...master didn't say it...so it's nonsense.

value ontology, buddy.
It's all there.

Re: Thinking

PostPosted: Fri Jan 10, 2020 2:45 am
by Pedro I Rengel
I'm sorry, I didn't mean to be mean.

You just laid it out there...

Re: Thinking

PostPosted: Fri Jan 10, 2020 2:56 am
by Aegean
I know buddy, you're angry and desperate. And lost.

I understand.
Bend over as America has her way with your people. Then blame the Iranians.

Will to Power!! Hail Odin!!!
Brah….cRap it to death.
Lay down the lyrics.

Re: Thinking

PostPosted: Fri Jan 10, 2020 2:57 am
by Pedro I Rengel
I'm sorry man...

Re: Thinking

PostPosted: Fri Jan 10, 2020 2:59 am
by Aegean
Why so angry bro?
chill.
Calm down.
The nonsense is getting to your brain. smoke a splif...or whatever you kids call it nowadays.

Re: Thinking

PostPosted: Fri Jan 10, 2020 3:01 am
by Pedro I Rengel
I wish I could take it back...

Re: Thinking

PostPosted: Fri Jan 10, 2020 3:15 am
by Aegean
Hush...go to church tomorrow and beg for forgiveness from your god.
I'll feel it.

Re: Thinking

PostPosted: Fri Jan 10, 2020 3:16 am
by Pedro I Rengel
Ok...

Re: Thinking

PostPosted: Fri Jan 10, 2020 10:46 am
by Tab
Dan~ wrote:A majority of the human mind seems to me to want to take all of its experience, then categorize the experiences into groups of names.
Labels bounce around on the surface, then sensation comes from below the surface, upward.
The human mind is layered. One part is meant to do one task.
Instinct came before knowledge, during the evolution.
Instinct comes in its own form into the life.
We are born with instincts built-in, but knowledge, no.
We don't start with knowledge. We start with instinct.


Hey Dan, long time etc. how are you doing..?

Yes to all, maybe a quibble with...

The human mind is layered. One part is meant to do one task.


I think it has a lot of redundancies built in, like most of the body's systems. I think it's more like -

"The human mind is layered. One part usually performs one particular task better than the other parts, and becomes attuned to that role for as long as it continues to out-perform the rest."

but y'know, wordy.

And...

A majority of the human mind seems to me to want to take all of its experience, then categorize the experiences into groups of names


I wonder why it became this way, or was forced to.

Re: Thinking

PostPosted: Fri Jan 10, 2020 1:04 pm
by Dan~
Tab wrote:
Dan~ wrote:A majority of the human mind seems to me to want to take all of its experience, then categorize the experiences into groups of names.
Labels bounce around on the surface, then sensation comes from below the surface, upward.
The human mind is layered. One part is meant to do one task.
Instinct came before knowledge, during the evolution.
Instinct comes in its own form into the life.
We are born with instincts built-in, but knowledge, no.
We don't start with knowledge. We start with instinct.


Hey Dan, long time etc. how are you doing..?

I been feeling great.
I been playing robotrek, factorio, civilization 5,
All great games.

The reason why I say what i say,
is because i was taught that the various regions of the brain cover varions functions.
One aspect of the brain is facial recognition, for example.

I wonder why it became this way, or was forced to.

I think it was neither natural selection nor God.
Just something to do with probability.
Probability shapes our life more than natural selection id say.

Am glad to see you here.
I'm a mod at the religion area.
It's been over a year since i was elected.
I am proud of it.

Re: Thinking

PostPosted: Fri Jan 10, 2020 1:40 pm
by Tab
Nice. =D> Tough job I imagine.

I read around a bit and there seems to be some flexibility, when damaged the brain can sometimes make up for loss of function by co-opting other areas, but some damage is irreparable - neglect types for example, where the brain seems unable to comprehend some things, strange things like anything to the left of the field of view say. They can be circumvented behaviourally, training yourself to move your head to scan, but not always. The concept of 'left field' disappears, along with any sense of its loss. Having no sense of something lost, consciousness seems to just 'think' there is nothing wrong, nothing to compensate for or rewire.

Long shot - have you ever read "being no-one" by thomas metzinger..? Insanely hard book to get through usefully. Took me 6 months on and off and was still incomprehensable pretty much when I turned the last page. Sort of attention schema theory on steroids.

And wow. I don't think I've come across anyone share my ideas about probability in a very long time. I'm officially happy.

Good to see you again Dan.

Re: Thinking

PostPosted: Fri Jan 10, 2020 5:38 pm
by Meno_
Can You summarize the book, like You know Metzinger made simple?

Re: Thinking

PostPosted: Fri Jan 10, 2020 6:02 pm
by Tab
Meno_ wrote:Can You summarize the book, like You know Metzinger made simple?


Lol god no. I remember it having words in it. Then it summoned cthulhu.

Re: Thinking

PostPosted: Mon Jan 13, 2020 11:34 am
by Karpel Tunnel
Dan~ wrote:A majority of the human mind seems to me to want to take all of its experience, then categorize the experiences into groups of names.
Labels bounce around on the surface, then sensation comes from below the surface, upward.
The human mind is layered. One part is meant to do one task.
Instinct came before knowledge, during the evolution.
Instinct comes in its own form into the life.
We are born with instincts built-in, but knowledge, no.
We don't start with knowledge. We start with instinct.
I can go with those images.
This made me think of the issue or organization. Most minds will present themselves as organized, especially with minds that mind doesn't know well. Like 'all my opinions are logical' and 'I am consistant (that is, my thoughts and opinions don't contradict each other'. But I don't think this is the case, ever. Of course some minds are more organized than others and some minds try to be more consistant and to weed out 'irrational' thoughts. There is a heuristic that a streamlined mind with one philosophy is better than other minds.

I am not sure that is the case.

Further, I think having a mind that even has contradictions may well be very useful.

Of course I am on the pragmatist end of things. If it works, well, ok. So, ontology A may indicate that X does not exist, but it if works acting like it does, I don't care, and I feel in no rush to prove ontology A, and I may use ontology B on another occasion.

That all my models work well together is a lower priority than things working well for me.

Re: Thinking

PostPosted: Mon Jan 13, 2020 4:57 pm
by Arcturus Descending
Tab,

A majority of the human mind seems to me to want to take all of its experience, then categorize the experiences into groups of names

I wonder why it became this way, or was forced to.


Perhaps the human needs to compartmentalize. It keeps our mind to a certain extent organized and structured and neat. Like shelves in a room. Messy is not good. Everything identified and in its own particular place. A survival strategy of sorts?

Re: Thinking

PostPosted: Mon Jan 13, 2020 5:26 pm
by Meno_
Arcturus Descending wrote:Tab,

A majority of the human mind seems to me to want to take all of its experience, then categorize the experiences into groups of names

I wonder why it became this way, or was forced to.


Perhaps the human needs to compartmentalize. It keeps our mind to a certain extent organized and structured and neat. Like shelves in a room. Messy is not good. Everything identified and in its own particular place. A survival strategy of sorts?



But then lost in similitude ? The very expanding family of resemblances that purport to explain what things mean?

Like putting things away into different niches, fhen forgetting them. for not having used them a while?

Nice seeing You Arcturus, long time no hear!

Re: Thinking

PostPosted: Sat Jan 18, 2020 4:34 am
by Dan~
Although the brain is its own individual thing,
it has specific qualities per space.
Regions, hemispheres, etc.
A human mind has more than one type of thinking.
Example : dreaming. Much different than when awake.