Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Greg or e who wrote (81961)	12/4/2009 2:22:51 AM
From: Solon	1 Recommendation Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

"Using the immaterial reality known as thought to explain the immaterial reality known as reason is not a very satisfying explanation" You can label thought in any silly way you wish. Just be aware that if your brain is not TOO damaged materially (and if you are not unconscious or asleep)--then you will be able to think in support of your existence. If your brain IS "materially" damaged, you WILL NOT be able to think! In the same way...the "thinking" (computations, translations, etc.) done by your computer--will cease when the cpu or the hard drive fails! Thought is a function of chemical processes relying ABSOLUTELY on the material integrity of brain matter! You don't need to "absolutely" understand thought in order to understand this completely well known and scientifically approved factoid!! We adulterate the chemistry of the brain and we distort thought. We destroy the chemistry of the brain and we ELIMINATE IT!! Thought is a function of matter. Like duh...what else!!!??? It is created by a vacuum?? LOL!!

To: Greg or e who wrote (81961)	12/4/2009 2:53:52 AM
From: Solon	1 Recommendation Respond to of 82486

"there can be no free thinkers or free thinking." It is certainly free from a subjective perspective. Of course, nothing is truly free. FREE is an idea we have. One need not comprehend all thought and all reality (our imaginary "God" concept) in order to rationally comprehend the truly ridiculous--and the obviously primitive and nonsensical. Thus we know the biblical cure for leprosy was primitive nonsense and we know that the rapes and atrocities in the bible (even though myth and legend) were even so uncivilized and savage...and farther removed from any "possible" God than any decent human being can or could imagine. It is okay by me if you dislike calling thinking "free"! I think of it as free. I may not have the "absolute" proof but that is not overweening for me. Without this acknowledgment, humanity has no legitimate premise-based argument for responsibility and accountability. And that is why thought is FREE. Without that premise there is no moral basis for inducing conformity to civilized rules and regulations. Nothing (nor thought) can ever be "free" as in operating outside of or independent of all existence. You are in and of the universe and so are your thoughts.

To: Greg or e who wrote (81961)	12/8/2009 11:42:41 AM
From: one_less	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

"Using the immaterial reality known as thought to explain the immaterial reality known as reason is not a very satisfying explanation from a materialistic perspective. If it is as you imply, a strictly mechanistic process; then there can be no free thinkers or free thinking." Thought is not entirely immaterial. It involves electro-chemical processes which occur within neurons and transfer across neuron synapses. Receptor sites are then encoded as thought taking form on neurons. This thought may be recalled from the neuron as memory, although practical memory is much more complicated involving large numbers of neurons working in collaboration. Or the thought may be integrated in some synthesis of new thoughtful ideas, new to the thinking agent at least. "The adult human brain is estimated to contain from 1014 to 5 × 1014 (100-500 trillion) synapses. Every cubic millimeter of cerebral cortex contains roughly a billion of them." Ideas full of thought are actually what is being realised by the thoughtful agent to exist. What exists is not created by thought but it may be revealed by thoughtfulness. What exists simply is ... what is, is. Does thought exist separately from these processes? Does what 'is' exist separately from any thought of it? We have no evidence either way. You can't do much about what is, except maybe to think about it in order to gain a better understanding of it, and maybe find useful ways of adapting to it. Of course if you find a way to free the tree from it's bark, fish from it's water, or humans from their reasoning, I'd be interested in hearing about it.