Philosophy Now Forum

Hobbes' Choice wrote:
You can keep up your trolling, but I'm putting you on ignore.

You shouldn't have started it if you can't take the heat.

TSBU wrote:

Hobbes' Choice wrote:
You can keep up your trolling, but I'm putting you on ignore.

me too please.

It's up to you but it's not really necessary, I hadn't even noticed you were there.

Kristofer wrote:Do you think there is a chance for us humans to be missing some sense (that no other animal has) that would totally change our life. What would it be?

The ability to sense when a body system is coming close to breaking down and action must be immediate (without serious pain or danger), eg. heart, cancer, emphysema.

A time based sense (beyond analytics) that allowed us to better see into the future or past from a current event.

The term sense needs to be disambiguated. First there are the phenomenological types of experiencing. Then there is the physical pathways that connect the matter that causes the experiencing to the external world. Now the latter is fairly easy to answer as the instruments that we are continually developing really do extend our ability to sense and we can sense ultraviolet or infrared or a host of other things now that we could not sense with our biology alone. More instrumental access will come for sure.

Those pathways can be rerouted even now and we can very easily be made to see sounds or hear colors etc. That can be done now and those techniques will be improved.

But the phenomenal side is much harder. We don't know for example, given an arbitrary biology, what the maximum number of types of primary color experiencings can be created. We don't know if sound experiencing can be extended. Perhaps what we hear as sound is only one type of primary sounding and pitch experiencing can be made multimate dimensional. Most likely additional smells can be created. All of these are the types of experiencing's that can be produced by engineering in the future.

But the question goes beyond what we call our senses. What is the total space of experiencing that can be created and how do we do the science to find out those possibilities? There are pain experiencing's and pleasure experiencing. Ontological experiencing are some of the most interesting and there is our knowing.

Well we need to engineer the brain - synthetic or organic - and we must make sure some memory experiencing remains and new vocabularies will be born.. A tall order but plausibly do-able in the future.

Greta wrote:

Kristofer wrote:Do you think there is a chance for us humans to be missing some sense (that no other animal has) that would totally change our life. What would it be?

The ability to sense when a body system is coming close to breaking down and action must be immediate (without serious pain or danger), eg. heart, cancer, emphysema.

We do have that system, it's called pain, lethargy, dysfunction, aches and many other signs. But it can be hard to interpret, even if you are a doctor. Evolution is not perfect it only "cares" if you don't produce viable progeny.

A time based sense (beyond analytics) that allowed us to better see into the future or past from a current event.

This is, of course, completely impossible. The future has not happened and so cannot be sensed; the past has gone, and so also cannot be sensed.

Hobbes' Choice wrote:

Greta wrote:The ability to sense when a body system is coming close to breaking down and action must be immediate (without serious pain or danger), eg. heart, cancer, emphysema.

We do have that system, it's called pain, lethargy, dysfunction, aches and many other signs. But it can be hard to interpret, even if you are a doctor. Evolution is not perfect it only "cares" if you don't produce viable progeny.

The signals are about as clear as mud and often their relationship between discomfort and damage is the equivalent of a fire truck arriving after half the house has burned down.

Hobbes' Choice wrote:

Greta wrote:A time based sense (beyond analytics) that allowed us to better see into the future or past from a current event.

This is, of course, completely impossible. The future has not happened and so cannot be sensed; the past has gone, and so also cannot be sensed.

Actually, we already have it, just very basic. If you see someone toppling over and there is a moment where you instinctively know there are definitely going to hit the deck. It's not analytically processed; everything happens too quickly. Some pick up on the cues of the present to instinctively extrapolate the future better than others.

Greta wrote:If you see someone toppling over and there is a moment where you instinctively know there are definitely going to hit the deck. It's not analytically processed; everything happens too quickly. Some pick up on the cues of the present to instinctively extrapolate the future better than others.

This reminds me of something Thaddeus Golas said in his book "Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment". He says that people vibrate at different rates. A fast-vibrating person will (for example) perceive a coffee cup just as it starts to tip over, and be able to respond quickly... whereas a slow-vibrating person will not realize what's happening until the cup has nearly hit the floor. (As a side note: Each kind of person tries to draw others to their own vibration level.)

Hobbes' Choice wrote:The future has not happened and so cannot be sensed

So you don't believe in the vast experiences of precognition throughout human history? Although the "future has not happened yet", there could be "awareness" that transcends the linear movement of the physical world. How else could countless people have known/sensed what was going to happen?

I've heard that early Native American Indians, who had no way of communicating long distances with other tribes, would just KNOW instinctively that there was to be a meeting... and they would travel to gather together. It's sounds like a totally organic process to me... on a level/frequency that we (currently) are usually clueless about... but which naturally exists!

I, like many people, have had a sudden awareness of things that were going to happen -- without any noticeable/explainable cues at all. So, although I agree with you that the future has not happened yet, there seems to be SOME KIND OF SENSE through which we can be informed of "other parts of the system, and the paths that are unfolding" beyond ourselves. How do you explain such a thing?

A time based sense sounds really good. I was thinking about something like that, yes.

Greta wrote:

Hobbes' Choice wrote:
This is, of course, completely impossible. The future has not happened and so cannot be sensed; the past has gone, and so also cannot be sensed.

Actually, we already have it, just very basic..

No - not in any sense.

Lacewing wrote:

Hobbes' Choice wrote:The future has not happened and so cannot be sensed

So you don't believe in the vast experiences of precognition throughout human history? How do you explain such a thing?

Utter nonsense. Not one single instance of this, that is not more easily explained by selective bias and and luck.

Statistically there ought to be better prediction by sheer chance.
I'd want to be able to explain why, when we have all the facts in front of us, and a good understanding of physics, and human behaviour why on earth we cannot predict the most simple events. yet we cannot, do not, and never have.

I would say a time-based sense is possible. Animals, including humans, can anticipate future events through instinct and other means. For example, before crossing the street, you look both ways for oncoming traffic. This may be from instinct or being taught.

PhilX

Hobbes' Choice wrote:

Lacewing wrote:So you don't believe in the vast experiences of precognition throughout human history?

Utter nonsense. Not one single instance of this, that is not more easily explained by selective bias and and luck.

Does lack of sight indicate truth?

Why in the world should we conclude that we are functioning FULLY with all of our potential capabilities right now... and why should we conclude that the limitations of some people invalidate the capabilities of others? Can't we see a vast range of abilities and limitations among all humans? Why wouldn't this naturally apply to extra sensing capability too?

Philosophy Explorer wrote:I would say a time-based sense is possible. Animals, including humans, can anticipate future events through instinct and other means. For example, before crossing the street, you look both ways for oncoming traffic. This may be from instinct or being taught.

PhilX

Anticipation is not precognition.
You can imagine a possible future, and prepare for it . This is not a 'sense'.
You are not sensing a future but imagining a possible one.
Thus you are off topic.

Lacewing wrote:

Hobbes' Choice wrote:

Lacewing wrote:So you don't believe in the vast experiences of precognition throughout human history?

Utter nonsense. Not one single instance of this, that is not more easily explained by selective bias and and luck.

Does lack of sight indicate truth?
why should it. What kind of a question is that here?
Why in the world should we conclude that we are functioning FULLY with all of our potential capabilities right now... and why should we conclude that the limitations of some people invalidate the capabilities of others? Can't we see a vast range of abilities and limitations among all humans? Why wouldn't this naturally apply to extra sensing capability too?

You cannot 'sense' something which does not exist. The future is not made yet, it is only conceptual as we live in a constant present.

Hobbes' Choice wrote:You cannot 'sense' something which does not exist. The future is not made yet, it is only conceptual as we live in a constant present.

Whether you call it "sense" or an aggregation of unconscious processing, one certainly can anticipate the future and we do it routinely. The example I gave cannot be in dispute - you see someone in a state of imbalance and there is a point where you know a fall is certain, but it's not consciously deduced. Further, one might unconsciously recognise signs that lead to that state of imbalance. The fact that the conscious mind immediately "takes ownership" of the anticipation does not take away from the initial unconsciously "sensed" impressions.