For the discussion of all things philosophical.
https://canzookia.com/
So you are saying mind doesn’t behave according to laws of nature? Can you give examples of where matter is in an undecided state and mind intervenes, producing matter acting not according to natural laws?
Yes, mind is free. That is body that behaves according to the laws of nature.
Matter always acts according to laws of nature but it can reach to an undecided state. An example of such a situation is when a chain of causality forks. Another example when you are sitting. Our bodies are close in an undecided state when it is in motion too. That is why we can plan the motion of our bodies.
There is obviously uncertainty at the quantum level, where there is no definite state known about quanta, or where for example decay may happen a certain % time. I am not sure I would apply this same uncertainty to the macro world of our bodies. There is a sense in which, even though we can’t predict the motion or momentum of every single particle in our bodies, they follow causal laws, and as such are in theory predictable. The problem arises due to the sheer complexity of our bodies, or indeed, any physical system beyond a few particles. The three body problem is an example where complexity outweighs our ability to deterministically predict with any accuracy the outcome of interactions between a system of more than two Newtonian bodies. Physics has found ways around this, though they are unable to greatly scale up such a simulation to predict behaviour of a system, as such, they must rely on statistical means of making predictions and modelling complex systems.bahman wrote: ↑Mon Jun 21, 2021 3:20 pmYes, mind is free. That is body that behaves according to the laws of nature.
Matter always acts according to laws of nature but it can reach to an undecided state. An example of such a situation is when a chain of causality forks. Another example when you are sitting. Our bodies are close in an undecided state when it is in motion too. That is why we can plan the motion of our bodies.
Believing that one's ignorance of something is some kind of understanding is absurd. Just because you do not know what a quantum state is, does not mean there is not one. There are lots of things in physics that cannot be known, such as the next state after an identified one in any system based on, "chaos" or, "strange-attractor," mathematics.
So, what are the 'laws of nature', which this mind thing supposedly does not behave according to?
What is a 'decided state', and, what is an 'undecided state'?
The term 'chain of causality' means or refers to NOT being able to be broken NOR fork, does it not?
None of this makes ANY sense to me. And, I do NOT even know where to begin to try and makes sense of this. Firstly I hope you defined what an 'undecided state' is, above.
I don’t disagree that there could be hidden variables which underly the “uncertainty” found in quantum electrodynamics. That’s not the currently accepted view, however, I tend to be skeptical of the shut up and calculate view of physics. And yes, I am aware of chaos theory, the three body problem is an example of chaos theory. Where I disagree with bahman is, he is trying to insert mind into this uncertainty. As you mentioned, uncertainty could just be our ignorance, our inability to know, which is not truly non deterministic, and therefore not an area to “insert” mind into the matter intervention process.RCSaunders wrote: ↑Tue Jun 22, 2021 4:49 pmBelieving that one's ignorance of something is some kind of understanding is absurd. Just because you do not know what a quantum state is, does not mean there is not one. There are lots of things in physics that cannot be known, such as the next state after an identified one in any system based on, "chaos" or, "strange-attractor," mathematics.
Re the last part, as I've mentioned elsewhere, that something is non-deterministic doesn't imply that the possible outcomes are equiprobable.Dimebag wrote: ↑Wed Jun 23, 2021 10:30 amI don’t disagree that there could be hidden variables which underly the “uncertainty” found in quantum electrodynamics. That’s not the currently accepted view, however, I tend to be skeptical of the shut up and calculate view of physics. And yes, I am aware of chaos theory, the three body problem is an example of chaos theory. Where I disagree with bahman is, he is trying to insert mind into this uncertainty. As you mentioned, uncertainty could just be our ignorance, our inability to know, which is not truly non deterministic, and therefore not an area to “insert” mind into the matter intervention process.RCSaunders wrote: ↑Tue Jun 22, 2021 4:49 pmBelieving that one's ignorance of something is some kind of understanding is absurd. Just because you do not know what a quantum state is, does not mean there is not one. There are lots of things in physics that cannot be known, such as the next state after an identified one in any system based on, "chaos" or, "strange-attractor," mathematics.
Furthermore, if mind were non deterministic, or a causal, how could it produce useful actions to guide the body?
But what happens at the quantum level of things is the EXACT SAME as what happens in the classical level of things, and which is the EXACT SAME state as well.Dimebag wrote: ↑Tue Jun 22, 2021 11:19 amThere is obviously uncertainty at the quantum level, where there is no definite state known about quanta, or where for example decay may happen a certain % time.bahman wrote: ↑Mon Jun 21, 2021 3:20 pmYes, mind is free. That is body that behaves according to the laws of nature.
Matter always acts according to laws of nature but it can reach to an undecided state. An example of such a situation is when a chain of causality forks. Another example when you are sitting. Our bodies are close in an undecided state when it is in motion too. That is why we can plan the motion of our bodies.
Dimebag wrote: ↑Tue Jun 22, 2021 11:19 am I am not sure I would apply this same uncertainty to the macro world of our bodies. There is a sense in which, even though we can’t predict the motion or momentum of every single particle in our bodies, they follow causal laws, and as such are in theory predictable. The problem arises due to the sheer complexity of our bodies, or indeed, any physical system beyond a few particles. The three body problem is an example where complexity outweighs our ability to deterministically predict with any accuracy the outcome of interactions between a system of more than two Newtonian bodies. Physics has found ways around this, though they are unable to greatly scale up such a simulation to predict behaviour of a system, as such, they must rely on statistical means of making predictions and modelling complex systems.
The human body is too complex to model in a leplacian demon manner. But there is a sense that, given enough knowledge about the human body, it would be possible in theory to predict future actions. In practice it is not possible, and the practical resolution of measurement of the arrangements of matter would be limited, but possibly not affected by the quantum uncertainty, if we were able to track the states of matter at a coarse enough level for quantum uncertainty to be insignificant yet allow enough predictive power to guide models. Given such a possibility, at what level would this causal branching human body exist?
If the quantum level were so causally influenced and prone to such stochastic intervention, would we not see far more unpredictable behaviour, as well as matter itself not following laws of classical physics more? If you need mind to insert itself into these areas of uncertainty, why even have a nervous system capable of transmitting neural signals to the limbs, why not simply have the signal sent directly to each muscle group in question?
Okay, so here you seem to be proposing that the volition of mind in such a scenario described above is one which can influence possible actions.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Wed Jun 23, 2021 11:36 amRe the last part, as I've mentioned elsewhere, that something is non-deterministic doesn't imply that the possible outcomes are equiprobable.Dimebag wrote: ↑Wed Jun 23, 2021 10:30 amI don’t disagree that there could be hidden variables which underly the “uncertainty” found in quantum electrodynamics. That’s not the currently accepted view, however, I tend to be skeptical of the shut up and calculate view of physics. And yes, I am aware of chaos theory, the three body problem is an example of chaos theory. Where I disagree with bahman is, he is trying to insert mind into this uncertainty. As you mentioned, uncertainty could just be our ignorance, our inability to know, which is not truly non deterministic, and therefore not an area to “insert” mind into the matter intervention process.RCSaunders wrote: ↑Tue Jun 22, 2021 4:49 pm
Believing that one's ignorance of something is some kind of understanding is absurd. Just because you do not know what a quantum state is, does not mean there is not one. There are lots of things in physics that cannot be known, such as the next state after an identified one in any system based on, "chaos" or, "strange-attractor," mathematics.
Furthermore, if mind were non deterministic, or a causal, how could it produce useful actions to guide the body?
It's possible that we can dynamically bias non-equiprobable outcomes (so that the probabilities change--gradually or in spurts or whatever, in other words), to a point where during the process, one outcome goes from a non-100% probability to 100% via our volition. Re how that would work, it can simply be via more than one outcome being possible, and as we contemplate the options, we start to favor one or the other until we make up our mind and put the rest of our body into action.
I think it sometimes helps here to focus on whim choices, though--a la "'randomly' choose the left or right button," because in that case, we're making a choice but it doesn't have to do with "favorable" outcomes, and it's at least difficult to figure what the starting biased probabilities would be.Dimebag wrote: ↑Wed Jun 23, 2021 12:15 pmOkay, so here you seem to be proposing that the volition of mind in such a scenario described above is one which can influence possible actions.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Wed Jun 23, 2021 11:36 amRe the last part, as I've mentioned elsewhere, that something is non-deterministic doesn't imply that the possible outcomes are equiprobable.Dimebag wrote: ↑Wed Jun 23, 2021 10:30 am
I don’t disagree that there could be hidden variables which underly the “uncertainty” found in quantum electrodynamics. That’s not the currently accepted view, however, I tend to be skeptical of the shut up and calculate view of physics. And yes, I am aware of chaos theory, the three body problem is an example of chaos theory. Where I disagree with bahman is, he is trying to insert mind into this uncertainty. As you mentioned, uncertainty could just be our ignorance, our inability to know, which is not truly non deterministic, and therefore not an area to “insert” mind into the matter intervention process.
Furthermore, if mind were non deterministic, or a causal, how could it produce useful actions to guide the body?
It's possible that we can dynamically bias non-equiprobable outcomes (so that the probabilities change--gradually or in spurts or whatever, in other words), to a point where during the process, one outcome goes from a non-100% probability to 100% via our volition. Re how that would work, it can simply be via more than one outcome being possible, and as we contemplate the options, we start to favor one or the other until we make up our mind and put the rest of our body into action.
I don’t discount that this happens. In fact, I am almost certain it most likely does happen.
I agree with your above regarding the way in which actions which are produced can be selected from possibilities.
I would suggest the way these possible outcomes are instantiated is via mental “prediction”. That is, our mind runs mini simulations of the outcome of possible actions, and thus, there is some ability to “choose between” those possibilities. Or maybe viewed from another angle, the different possible action simulations run, and the most favourable and probable outcome is selected for in a Darwinian manor. Such a competing of mental simulations might be the sensation of choice.
Our bodies are macroscopic. It definitely contains so many particles that make it difficult to simulate it. Here, we are not interested to see what would be the result of this microsimulation. We are happy to know that our bodies obey causal laws.Dimebag wrote: ↑Tue Jun 22, 2021 11:19 amThere is obviously uncertainty at the quantum level, where there is no definite state known about quanta, or where for example decay may happen a certain % time. I am not sure I would apply this same uncertainty to the macro world of our bodies. There is a sense in which, even though we can’t predict the motion or momentum of every single particle in our bodies, they follow causal laws, and as such are in theory predictable. The problem arises due to the sheer complexity of our bodies, or indeed, any physical system beyond a few particles. The three body problem is an example where complexity outweighs our ability to deterministically predict with any accuracy the outcome of interactions between a system of more than two Newtonian bodies. Physics has found ways around this, though they are unable to greatly scale up such a simulation to predict behaviour of a system, as such, they must rely on statistical means of making predictions and modelling complex systems.bahman wrote: ↑Mon Jun 21, 2021 3:20 pmYes, mind is free. That is body that behaves according to the laws of nature.
Matter always acts according to laws of nature but it can reach to an undecided state. An example of such a situation is when a chain of causality forks. Another example when you are sitting. Our bodies are close in an undecided state when it is in motion too. That is why we can plan the motion of our bodies.
When the human body is in equilibrium for example. Of course, I mean macroscopic level when I talk about equilibrium.Dimebag wrote: ↑Mon Jun 21, 2021 7:06 am The human body is too complex to model in a leplacian demon manner. But there is a sense that, given enough knowledge about the human body, it would be possible in theory to predict future actions. In practice it is not possible, and the practical resolution of measurement of the arrangements of matter would be limited, but possibly not affected by the quantum uncertainty, if we were able to track the states of matter at a coarse enough level for quantum uncertainty to be insignificant yet allow enough predictive power to guide models. Given such a possibility, at what level would this causal branching human body exist?
Matter always follows the laws of physics.
This is an interesting question but it is beyond the scope of this thread. I think that the brain is the seat of the mind.
The laws of Newton for example.
Mind is free so it does not behave according to anything.
It is what it is.
Decided like when you decided what you want to do with your body and your body follows it. Undecided like when you are in a situation that a decision is needed.
Matter just follows and it cannot decide. That is the mind which decides.
A chain of causality can reach to an undecided situation/fork.
Matter follow chaing causality when it is in decided state.
I did.
Ok.
I did.
I said that we can plan motion of our body.
You can.
What are the "laws of newton", EXACTLY, to you, and, HOW does this "mind" thing NOT behave according to those "laws of newton"?
Is this another way of saying that 'you' have ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA NOR CLUE?
Decided like when you decided what you want to do with your body and your body follows it. Undecided like when you are in a situation that a decision is needed.[/quote]
So, WHY say and CLAIM that matter "can reach to an undecided state"?
Will you provide an example, so that we, at least, have SOME 'thing' to LOOK AT and SEE.
You JUST SAID, only two sentences ago, that matter CANNOT DECIDE.
You wrote, and claimed, that; an 'undecided state' is like when you are in a situation that a decision is needed.
What you ACTUALLY said and stated was:
Okay. So, what you were 'trying to' say is NOT what you ACTUALLY said, and stated.
But you are the one CLAIMING otherwise.bahman wrote: ↑Wed Jun 23, 2021 3:56 pmOur bodies are macroscopic. It definitely contains so many particles that make it difficult to simulate it. Here, we are not interested to see what would be the result of this microsimulation. We are happy to know that our bodies obey causal laws.Dimebag wrote: ↑Tue Jun 22, 2021 11:19 amThere is obviously uncertainty at the quantum level, where there is no definite state known about quanta, or where for example decay may happen a certain % time. I am not sure I would apply this same uncertainty to the macro world of our bodies. There is a sense in which, even though we can’t predict the motion or momentum of every single particle in our bodies, they follow causal laws, and as such are in theory predictable. The problem arises due to the sheer complexity of our bodies, or indeed, any physical system beyond a few particles. The three body problem is an example where complexity outweighs our ability to deterministically predict with any accuracy the outcome of interactions between a system of more than two Newtonian bodies. Physics has found ways around this, though they are unable to greatly scale up such a simulation to predict behaviour of a system, as such, they must rely on statistical means of making predictions and modelling complex systems.bahman wrote: ↑Mon Jun 21, 2021 3:20 pm
Yes, mind is free. That is body that behaves according to the laws of nature.
Matter always acts according to laws of nature but it can reach to an undecided state. An example of such a situation is when a chain of causality forks. Another example when you are sitting. Our bodies are close in an undecided state when it is in motion too. That is why we can plan the motion of our bodies.
If you, now, think that the brain, which is, OBVIOUSLY, just made up of matter, ONLY, is the " seat of the "mind" ", then HOW does this "logically follow" on from your previous statements and CLAIMS that:bahman wrote: ↑Wed Jun 23, 2021 3:56 pmWhen the human body is in equilibrium for example. Of course, I mean macroscopic level when I talk about equilibrium.Dimebag wrote: ↑Mon Jun 21, 2021 7:06 am The human body is too complex to model in a leplacian demon manner. But there is a sense that, given enough knowledge about the human body, it would be possible in theory to predict future actions. In practice it is not possible, and the practical resolution of measurement of the arrangements of matter would be limited, but possibly not affected by the quantum uncertainty, if we were able to track the states of matter at a coarse enough level for quantum uncertainty to be insignificant yet allow enough predictive power to guide models. Given such a possibility, at what level would this causal branching human body exist?
Matter always follows the laws of physics.
This is an interesting question but it is beyond the scope of this thread. I think that the brain is the seat of the mind.