Computational Neuropsychiatry

[Veritas Aequitas]

My point:
I am not trying to explore into the details of Computational Neuropsychiatry, but merely to point out scientists are making much headway into understanding of the human brain via the various neurosciences.

What is pathetic is, whenever I ventured to provide clues to new knowledge that can answer old age philosophical questions, e.g. on the question of moral facts supported by neurons in the brain, all they do to counter me is to resort to dictionary definitions or according to what my language supposedly tell me or worst because my god said so.

Those who do not keep up with the latest scientific findings re the neurosciences, other sciences and philosophical research should not be too arrogant with their archaic knowledge and arguments.

................
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/a ... 7314007351
The study of human brain networks with in vivo neuroimaging has given rise to the field of connectomics, furthered by advances in network science and graph theory informing our understanding of the topology and function of the healthy brain. Here our focus is on the disruption in neuropsychiatric disorders (pathoconnectomics) and how whole-brain computational models can help generate and predict the dynamical interactions and consequences of brain networks over many timescales. We review methods and emerging results that exhibit remarkable accuracy in mapping and predicting both spontaneous and task-based healthy network dynamics. This raises great expectations that whole-brain modeling and computational connectomics may provide an entry point for understanding brain disorders at a causal mechanistic level, and that computational neuropsychiatry can ultimately be leveraged to provide novel, more effective therapeutic interventions, e.g., through drug discovery and new targets for deep brain stimulation.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQEwZRY1Nds
Whole-brain computational models can help generate and predict the dynamical interactions and consequences of brain networks over many timescales in both health and disease. Computational neuropsychiatry may help provide biomarkers and novel, more effective therapeutic interventions. For more information, see Deco & Kringelbach in Neuron 84/5, http://www.cell.com/neuron/abstract/S....

[Iwannaplato]

So, what understanding of the human brain did you find in those links and that image that related to a philosophical topic? Perhaps especially to the philosophy of science since that's the sub-forum.

[FlashDangerpants]

So, what understanding of the human brain did you find in those links and that image that related to a philosophical topic? Perhaps especially to the philosophy of science since that's the sub-forum.

He has a fondness for organising things into structures. He likes diagrams and he likes making lists and it gives him a feeling that he understands confusing things if he can simply place them into something that to his mind resembles an intelligible order. It doesn't need to make any sense, and there doesn't need to be any sane justification for the ordering of said lists and diagrams, they just need to exist in order to provide the illusory comfort.

Unfortunately he has an obsession with Islam being evil, which as far as I am aware is the underlying first principle of all the weird shit he does. To justify that vendetta he has developed an obsession with his little pseudoscience of moral fact. Difficulties he got into with the latter caused him to veer off into a new obsession with antirealism. Presumably his new thing for arranging little dioramas illustrating neurology is to do with supporting the antirealism thing, although why he doesn't just crib from Dennett I couldn't possibly tell you.

[Iwannaplato]

He has a fondness for organising things into structures. He likes diagrams and he likes making lists and it gives him a feeling that he understands confusing things if he can simply place them into something that to his mind resembles an intelligible order. It doesn't need to make any sense, and there doesn't need to be any sane justification for the ordering of said lists and diagrams, they just need to exist in order to provide the illusory comfort.

I couldn't see a connection between the things he brought in to a particular philosophical issue or a philosophy of science issue, so, yeah, I asked to press on that and see if anything comes out.

I stay pretty up to date as a lay person on the brain and I think scientists and science groupies often overestimate how science has replaced philosophy and also seem to not realize that these are not separate realms.

Unfortunately he has an obsession with Islam being evil, which as far as I am aware is the underlying first principle of all the weird shit he does. To justify that vendetta he has developed an obsession with his little pseudoscience of moral fact. Difficulties he got into with the latter caused him to veer off into a new obsession with antirealism. Presumably his new thing for arranging little dioramas illustrating neurology is to do with supporting the antirealism thing, although why he doesn't just crib from Dennett I couldn't possibly tell you.

I think he's interested in other things. I don't think this thread or his morals threads are all, underneath, about Islam. And I am no fan of Islam. It's a pretty toxic belief system in y opinion. In my book there are other toxic belief systems weilding more power out there and doing more damage.

But let's see, maybe a rabbit will be pulled out of the opening post's hat and we have a good neuroscience related discussion of the philosophy of science in this thread. Who knows?

[FlashDangerpants]

He has a fondness for organising things into structures. He likes diagrams and he likes making lists and it gives him a feeling that he understands confusing things if he can simply place them into something that to his mind resembles an intelligible order. It doesn't need to make any sense, and there doesn't need to be any sane justification for the ordering of said lists and diagrams, they just need to exist in order to provide the illusory comfort.

I couldn't see a connection between the things he brought in to a particular philosophical issue or a philosophy of science issue, so, yeah, I asked to press on that and see if anything comes out.

I stay pretty up to date as a lay person on the brain and I think scientists and science groupies often overestimate how science has replaced philosophy and also seem to not realize that these are not separate realms.

Unfortunately he has an obsession with Islam being evil, which as far as I am aware is the underlying first principle of all the weird shit he does. To justify that vendetta he has developed an obsession with his little pseudoscience of moral fact. Difficulties he got into with the latter caused him to veer off into a new obsession with antirealism. Presumably his new thing for arranging little dioramas illustrating neurology is to do with supporting the antirealism thing, although why he doesn't just crib from Dennett I couldn't possibly tell you.

I think he's interested in other things. I don't think this thread or his morals threads are all, underneath, about Islam. And I am no fan of Islam. It's a pretty toxic belief system in y opinion. In my book there are other toxic belief systems weilding more power out there and doing more damage.

But let's see, maybe a rabbit will be pulled out of the opening post's hat and we have a good neuroscience related discussion of the philosophy of science in this thread. Who knows?

I wouldn't hold out much hopes there, I've seen his sciency speculations on how DNA and RNA can relate to his moral theory and it's so awful I can't even be bothered. I actually select his less shit threads to mean to.

He spent years learning Arabic in order to put the Quran onto a spreadsheet!.... and apply those organisational talents of his to the creation of an FSK of how evil Islam is. He had thousands of categories to describe the vileness of each paragraph. He will not show you the spreadsheet, he thinks it will become an academic masterwork. He will boast about those things, he thinks they add weight to his argument, he thinks these things are a source of gravitas.

You are underestimating his obsessional capabilities.

[Veritas Aequitas]

He has a fondness for organising things into structures. He likes diagrams and he likes making lists and it gives him a feeling that he understands confusing things if he can simply place them into something that to his mind resembles an intelligible order. It doesn't need to make any sense, and there doesn't need to be any sane justification for the ordering of said lists and diagrams, they just need to exist in order to provide the illusory comfort.

I couldn't see a connection between the things he brought in to a particular philosophical issue or a philosophy of science issue, so, yeah, I asked to press on that and see if anything comes out.

I stay pretty up to date as a lay person on the brain and I think scientists and science groupies often overestimate how science has replaced philosophy and also seem to not realize that these are not separate realms.

Unfortunately he has an obsession with Islam being evil, which as far as I am aware is the underlying first principle of all the weird shit he does. To justify that vendetta he has developed an obsession with his little pseudoscience of moral fact. Difficulties he got into with the latter caused him to veer off into a new obsession with antirealism. Presumably his new thing for arranging little dioramas illustrating neurology is to do with supporting the antirealism thing, although why he doesn't just crib from Dennett I couldn't possibly tell you.

I think he's interested in other things. I don't think this thread or his morals threads are all, underneath, about Islam. And I am no fan of Islam. It's a pretty toxic belief system in y opinion. In my book there are other toxic belief systems weilding more power out there and doing more damage.

But let's see, maybe a rabbit will be pulled out of the opening post's hat and we have a good neuroscience related discussion of the philosophy of science in this thread. Who knows?

I wouldn't hold out much hopes there, I've seen his sciency speculations on how DNA and RNA can relate to his moral theory and it's so awful I can't even be bothered. I actually select his less shit threads to mean to.

He spent years learning Arabic in order to put the Quran onto a spreadsheet!.... and apply those organisational talents of his to the creation of an FSK of how evil Islam is. He had thousands of categories to describe the vileness of each paragraph. He will not show you the spreadsheet, he thinks it will become an academic masterwork. He will boast about those things, he thinks they add weight to his argument, he thinks these things are a source of gravitas.

You are underestimating his obsessional capabilities.

You're a gnat in terms of human knowledge and speak with arrogance from ignorance.

Re the inherent evilness of the religion of peace, I have been trying hard and am all willing to pass over my detailed research to anyone credible and brave enough to publish it.

[Ansiktsburk]

Those who do not keep up with the latest scientific findings re the neurosciences, other sciences and philosophical research should not be too arrogant with their archaic knowledge and arguments.

What kind of knowledge and arguments do you refer to here? Any examples of statements that should be avoided due to lack of keeping up with the latest findings in neuroscience?

[FlashDangerpants]

Re the inherent evilness of the religion of peace, I have been trying hard and am all willing to pass over my detailed research to anyone credible and brave enough to publish it.

Show us then.

[Veritas Aequitas]

Re the inherent evilness of the religion of peace, I have been trying hard and am all willing to pass over my detailed research to anyone credible and brave enough to publish it.

Show us then.

I have provided some outlines earlier.
I am not going further but when I have got someone to publish the findings I will direct you there.

Meanwhile note the statistics from the Quran and Hadiths published here
https://www.cspii.org/education/article ... cal-islam/
mine will be in more details and sophisticated than the above.

Note a cruder one here;
https://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/
with analysis on the following;
Injustice
Intolerance
Cruelty and Violence
Absurdity
Good Stuff
Women
Science and History
Contradictions
Interpretation
Family Values
Sex
Language
Homosexuality
Prophecy

[FlashDangerpants]

Re the inherent evilness of the religion of peace, I have been trying hard and am all willing to pass over my detailed research to anyone credible and brave enough to publish it.

Show us then.

I have provided some outlines earlier.
I am not going further but when I have got someone to publish the findings I will direct you there.

Nobody credible seems to want to publish you for some reason...

Never mind. On the plus side, it looks like my intuition that all the other crazy shit you get up to is still in service of your vendetta against one religion in particular is resonably substantiated. so one person is getting some stuff right today even if that will never be you.

[Veritas Aequitas]

Show us then.

I have provided some outlines earlier.
I am not going further but when I have got someone to publish the findings I will direct you there.

Nobody credible seems to want to publish you for some reason...

Never mind. On the plus side, it looks like my intuition that all the other crazy shit you get up to is still in service of your vendetta against one religion in particular is resonably substantiated. so one person is getting some stuff right today even if that will never be you.

Making noises again as usual when you have not studied the Quran deeply and extensively.

They have not read my detail arguments and evidence yet.
The point I am hesitant to disclose my findings to them fully until they show an interest but somehow they are not receptive to it with the limited presentation.
If you personally know any person who is an expert and critique of Islam you can recommend him to me.

[FlashDangerpants]

I have provided some outlines earlier.
I am not going further but when I have got someone to publish the findings I will direct you there.

Nobody credible seems to want to publish you for some reason...

Never mind. On the plus side, it looks like my intuition that all the other crazy shit you get up to is still in service of your vendetta against one religion in particular is resonably substantiated. so one person is getting some stuff right today even if that will never be you.

Making noises again as usual when you have not studied the Quran deeply and extensively.

They have not read my detail arguments and evidence yet.
The point I am hesitant to disclose my findings to them fully until they show an interest but somehow they are not receptive to it with the limited presentation.
If you personally know any person who is an expert and critique of Islam you can recommend him to me.

I would never recommend you to anyone other than a clinical psychiatrist, you are a buffoon and outside of this forum I will never under any circumstances be associated with you in any way at all.

You have nothing to fear, nobody is going to steal your work and passit off as their own.

[Iwannaplato]

I am still not seeing how the links in the opening post and the diagram support a philosophical argument. I am not saying they don't. I just haven't seen it yet. Especially one related to the philosophy of science. I love brain research and I know that it can be integrating into philosophical arguments, but I don't know what the research in the OP is related to in philosophy. So far, it just seems like some fairly random choices of brain research, but a post using that research and diagram could certainly clear that up for me.