The brain is just a receiver, it's obvious that the brain

https://vimeo.com/60021612

>The brain is just a receiver
No, it receives, processes and emits information.
We cannot understand our own conscience because we're inside of it, this is why we need to keep in mind a constant idea of the ''transcendent'' in order to being self-conscient.

>>41821304
> The brain is just a receiver

retard, kill yourself

>>41821761
That it has those abilities is no counter argument to it having received them in the first place.
Subsequently your conclusion loses it bases if it had one in the first place.

>>41821929
Excellent argument.
The brain is just a hook for the causal chain.

>>41821304
I swear we can pick up signals (to a certain extent). I mean hasn't anyone else here just gone "huh I feel like so and so is gonna call me soon" then sure enough 3 seconds later you get a call from said person. Same goes for texts.

>>41821304
for all intensive purposes consciousness may as well be the totality of "everything", and our consciousness a heavily filtered version of. We are both inside and outside of this heavily filtered version, we can be attached or detached from our filtered version but only to a certain degree

Consciousness is the collapse of the quantum mechanical wave function.

>>41822187
A lame example would be feeling angry. This modifies our perception of the outside. We can be inside the feeling and act on it externally, or detached acknowledging there is anger brewing but not being inside the anger activity, instead observing it, however being outside of it, although it is within us which indicates layers of consciousness

File: transo.jpg (19KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 300x300px

>>41822052
I know what you mean, stuff like that can happen and one doesn't really know what to ascribe it to.

On another note, some people think there will be a plug, and then your brain is plugged to a pc, then you're transhuman, when
1. You're already plugged to it, there's a connection
2. Scanning the brain from the outside, and also sending information that way is much more clean

A computer is just an extension of your brain. Like a stick is the extension of the beak of a bird fishing something out of a hole.

>>41822187
That will take some time to process.

>>41821973
Wut? Your claim is that he brain is just a receiver.

Well, everything in the world receveives and emits information, you need to clarify your point.

>>41822436
I did, right in the OP.
>(Of course this also is the case for a stone flying through the universe experiencing forces, or the body as whole)

>>41822436
>the brain
>receives
fixed

>>41822324
UV light a force we cannot detect with our naked senses without the aid of science or technology, at one point to the human mind simply did not exist, our naked eyes could not see or , nor our senses detect it. Obviously it exists. How many other instances of of energy forces and phenomenon can we not detect today. Very hard to quantify, nay impossible, but our understanding of external phenomenon often is severely hampered by our sense filters that support us to remove "noise" we do not need in order to navigate our surroundings, yet that noise is real phenomenon taking place that we would need to, I suppose, you technology and science to detect again. Boy oh boy, there is so little we know in comparison to totality. Mankind certainly tries to his best tho to understand

>noise is real phenomenon taking place that we would need to, I suppose, *USE* technology and science to detect again

typo

>>41821304
Your sensory organs are part of your brain. The mind/body dichotomy is a western construct, in reality they are one and the same system.
>>41822324
>A computer is just an extension of your brain
Yes partly, only with very high input lag.

I want to elobaroate on further indicators that the brain is just a receiver.

When the computer is just an extension of the brain like a stock, is to a monkey's hand, fishing something out of a hole, then I should be able to project consciousness onto a projection field on a computer. I just did.

>>41822499
I think it's infinite, even if you was about to encounter the boundaries of the universe, you would push them away by creating further complexity through the act.

Man shall endourse forever more.

>>41822479
And I reaffirm what I said in my first comment. We can't fully understand human conscience because we're inside of it, we're part of it. We can only understand the universe by participation.

We know we have a conscience because some things are self-evident, but cannot be proven.

>>41821304
When subatomic particles are observed, they behave in a different manner. I don't think we're exclusive or outside of the present reality, we are it as much as anything else. The universe experiencing itself.

File: FilterBandwidth09B.gif (8KB, 403x302px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 403x302px

>>41821304
OP is correct...
The lump of gray jello inside our skulls is merely a densely interconnected antennae that receives, perceives, and dips into the pool of conscious energy that surrounds us.

Think about it. We are limited in the bandwidth of energy that we can process by our sensory system. Some people can pick up on more, and others don't have a clue.

As an analogy, the brain is akin to a cable subscription. Some people have the extended package with Starz, HBO, and the ability to watch 10 NFL games simultaneously. Others are destined to stumble through life with a 13" black and white t.v. that only picks up CBS.

There is far more energy traveling around us, through us, and within us than we are aware of.

I, for instance, am convinced that dolphins are a bit more conscious than we are. Their limbic systems are more densely interconnected, their gyri and sulci are more convoluted, and there are reports of telepathy in porpoises.

It's all about the bandwidth and the hardware/wetware...

>>41822753
>>41822698
What bullshit is this...
http://www.wisdomofchopra.com/

>>41822696
Yeah, I think mankind has great difficulty charting biological interactions as they are very complex and don't really follow predictable paths that can be forecast. It's tough going.

I believe we have already created tech which passes the turing test, however, I am highly skeptical computer AI will develop the complexity of consciousness we have, beyond being a primitive approximation.

File: eternal.jpg (14KB, 179x281px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 179x281px

>>41822324
We are already plugging brains in.
I know for a fact that DARPA is pursuing a project to implant/alter memory chips in the human hippocampus. Of course our government always pursues such endeavors for "the greater good", right? Wink Wink..

>>41822822
>http://www.wisdomofchopra.com/

i'd rather people who need to follow a dogma follow this rather islam. Lesser of all evils m8

Our senses don't pick up on everything though right? Everything we perceive isn't everything that is there??

File: science.jpg (47KB, 680x626px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 680x626px

>>41822822
It's called science Gustav, google it.
Do you even neurophilosophy?

>>41822892

because we a restless, we need to fiddle with shit to justify to ourselves we are "the most" intelligent species we know of. However, from a totality perspective, we are still monkey tier

>>41822903
>>41822970

Chopra is a retard.

Anyone who thinks anything he says about the universe carries more than a grain of weight is even more retarded.

>>41821761

Wait, explain .

File: Clementine.jpg (149KB, 1200x784px) Image search: [Google]

149KB, 1200x784px

>>41822951
Nope.. there are misfires all the time.
Just like a cable glitch or bandwidth lag as someone earlier pointed out.

The pool is deep...
(Not as deep as Belgium though)

>>41822951
Yes, our senses heavily filter, by design. If we were acutely aware of all phenomenon around us, I predict we could not walk down the street, it would be a case of total sensory overload. Even the street itself would become but 1 physical phenomenon amongst hundreds or thousands.

Probably just curl into fetal position, nothing more you could do.

>>41822951
Kant says that the fact we can't se the ''things in itself'' is because we have a ''flaw'' in our senses.

But it's actually not true, we can't see the ''everything'' because the ''thing in itself'' cannot show all its properties at the same time. It's not a human flaw but it's the nature of things.

For example: the fact you can't see your own intestines isn't a flaw in your senses, but it's the real nature of things.

>>41823004
Definitely not saying Chopra isnt a retard, however, I'd prefer 1 billion Chopra retards, to 1 billion exploding kebabs retards.

>>41823093
Both are hell.

>>41823072

But how do we know that we're aware of everything if our senses are all we can go by? I mean we have infared and shit but that just proves that our eyes don't pick up on everything.

File: s03_sellout_mix1_l.jpg (7KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 300x300px

>>41823004
Chopra's not a retard, but he sold out.
The almighty dollar corrupted him.
That and vanity.

Try David Chalmers, Crick and Koch, Penrose, Damasio, LeDoux, and Hameroff for some real scientists devoted to consciousness that haven't sold out yet. Koch is close, but not quite yet.

So you don't need your frontal lobes then? I mean, they don't perceive anything, they kinda sorta just sit there according to your theory.
I propose you do a lobotomy and report back.

>>41822951
That's a good question, if we believed that the others also experience, than there must be more than the personal experience will tell you.

>>41822698
>The universe experiencing itself.
I think that too, and everyone experiences something diffirent. So he universe experiences the world from many diffirent perspectives.

As a fractal, since everything is fractal, you can do this too.

>>41823169
Our senses are not all we go by. That's why we have technology to study such phenomena.
And also causality. If something exists, it has an effect on the universe we live in.

>>41823120
not sure, does he preach conversion or death? Im comfortable with people following dogma if it is kept the fuck out of face, they are welcome, because at the end of the day, dogmatic understandings change over time. A 20 year olds perception / dogma will not be the same as they hold at age 50, dogma is malleable. That is the nature of dogma. Still science also re invents itself constantly, other than having an evidential thresh hold required to prove phenomenon

File: mind_blown.gif (2MB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 200x200px

>>41823072
Aussie Bro is speaking the truth.
Unconscious processing is what allows us to function on a daily basis.

Otherwise, BOOM... Mind blown...literally.. It would overheat like an old Datsun and leak out the ear canals.

It's a sad reflection that the concept of God isn't even mentioned in this thread.

>>41823169
>how do we know that we're aware of everything if our senses are all we can go by?

We are literally not aware. All phenomenon will have an effect on other phenomenon, but only until such point we can measure or observe the effect against phenomenon we can detect, do we realize or have awareness of that energies existence.

Our senses aren't faulted, but are designed or evolved to allow us to navigate our surroundings, that filtering by virtue must leave a lot out, its survival based, not totality based.

Why do human beings use such little portions of their brains? Or do we use most of it but just don't understand how it works? As time goes on, and we evolve, will we learn how to use more of our brains? Maybe we will be able to have senses that we never thought was possible, like telepathy. I'm really sorry if i sound retarded, i'm very unneducated about this.

>>41823315
Just do it.

>>41822052
It's been proven something is going on, but the mechanism is still not known.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_nonlocality

>brain is a receiver
>get alzheimer
>loose memories
broh, its the fucking outter core of the reciever... it broke ant cant receive those memories.

OP, you just went full retard. There are many other brain related illnesses which prove you wrong.

File: blood vessels of a hand.jpg (210KB, 1067x1600px) Image search: [Google]

210KB, 1067x1600px

>>41823190
Frontal lobes filter, inhibit, initiate, plan, and feel.
They are the last to develop, the first to decline, and the least understood region of the brain/mind.

Frontal Pole (Brodmann area 10) is the most advanced region of the brain in humans, and likely what enables us to think outside of ourselves and mentally travel to other perspectives.

On another note, how's the combat going?

>>41823367

>Our senses aren't faulted, but are designed or evolved to allow us to navigate our surroundings, that filtering by virtue must leave a lot out, its survival based, not totality based.

Wow never thought of it like that, thanks for taking the time to explain.

>>41823403
>Why do human beings use such little portions of their brains?
because each part of the brain is responsible for different tasks. If you wanted to use much of your brain, you would have to do multitasking.

For example listening, talking, doing pushups and thinking about math problems at the same time. Of course, if you could do that...

>>41823403
Dude, I know top tier physicians that made patents for huge companies, with their inventions in mass products in global use, and they believe in some weird stuff normies would put off as soucery or some shit.
Enjoy the ride.

>>41823403

What if, infact we do use all of our brains, yet do not realize as we have yet to measure the actual activity in what we refer to as "unused" portions.

>>41823440
What if your memories are on a cloud and your receiver just broke?

>>41823403
>Why do human beings use such little portions of their brains?
Thats a myth, your entire brain is active all the time.

>>41821304
>But also all the other forces that act on it, inside the natural laws everything obeys to, are received.

i've been choking on this sentence for like 5 minutes trying to figure out what the fuck you're trying to communicate.

File: God.gif (27KB, 572x381px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 572x381px

>>41823315
God is what/whom you believe it to be, and an ideal that is inside of everyone. Beautiful idea, but the book version(s) are pretty bogus.

Raised strictly catholic, and glad in retrospect, because that allowed me to realize the guilt that is associated with strict dogma. I've always struggled with the concept of god not needing to be inside of a book or a building.
As I get older, am becoming more comfortable with it. Also, scientist, but not atheist by any means.

>>41822698
>>41823200
You guys should look into the works of quantum physicist Dr. Amit Goswami aka The Quantum Activist aka wrote the text book on quantum mechanics 101 still used today. This idea is very similar to his.

>>41823403
We use all of it and we understand very vaguely how it works. (search ablative neurosurgery)
We don't have telepathy, simply because a brain encased in a thick bone armor is not conductive to telecommunication.

>>41823404
>>41823554
Conscience is not a random creation of the brain, it's printed in the own nature of the universe. Humans can only be conscient because conscience is a latent possibility in the universe, which is an actual character of God.

If you deny God, you simply can't know anything and there's no point in discussing things at all.

>>41823513

Damn i think this is my favorite thread ever on /pol/

File: Dice-Onion6.jpg (24KB, 500x350px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 500x350px

>>41823440
Neuropsychological models are elegant, but the brain is an onion. Alzheimer's strips the brain from it's outer layers first, thus decreasing the efficacy of the machine.
It's all about the hardware/wetware Croatia bro.

>>41823549
my understanding, the concept of our brains receiving information that we have not yet measured or named in a scientific white paper level, yet is interacting / being received by our brain s right now, and/or determining our behavior / functioning right now.

Anon, correct me, If I am wrong.

>>41823315
I treat God as the ultimate truth, that that is perceived and all that that is not perceived, the ONE.
But I don't regard the statements about God as ultimately true, or complete. Religion make statements about God, I don't think they are complete.
I like all religions but I accept none.

There's always something lacking.

>>41823636
shit, the brain is not an onion. Neuron axons have an outer layer called myelin, without it neurons lose their conductive properties.

>>41823678

I agree, i think it's arrogant for human beings to think they are capable of fully comprehending god. I don't know if he does or doesn't exist, but if it created everything we know, who are we to think we know what it really is.

>>41823678
You can't find the truth denying the existence of truth.

There will always be something lacking, it's the nature of things, it's the reality.

File: go on.png (109KB, 897x602px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 897x602px

>>41823608
Sounds a bit dogmatic, maybe I'm not fully understanding. Could you expand on your idea?

And do you mean conscience or consciousness? Two very different things.

>>41823608
Our consciousness could well be described as miraculous. Perhaps this is why it is so impossible to pin down. It could even be, but a single atom ( or smaller ) of God consciousness, or the closest we can experience to that which cannot be explained, yet is "real" not imagined

Guys... How can mirrors be real if our own eyes aren't?

>>41823808
They are real within the confines of our sense filter. We perceive the object "mirror" because we have filtered it down to be a reflective object to our physical phenomenon then labelled it "mirror" and installed it in bathrooms

File: do_go_on.png (150KB, 320x320px) Image search: [Google]

150KB, 320x320px

>>41823706
Talking about neurodegeneration, as in the example of Alzheimer's that Croatia bro mentioned.

So you are telling me the neocortex is at the same level computationally/developmentally as the basal ganglia? If you are talking about demyelinization as in ALS, then sure.

Do you even neocortex?

>>41821761
>We cannot understand our own conscience because we're inside of it

The brain cannot understand itself for the same reason you cannot bite your own teeth

Through the act of giving, one receives.
Karma.

>>41823520
I dont think thats the case.. You would remember your past lives then, since you dont loose your dropbox account when switching computers. If you dont believe in past lives, just think what are the odds that this is your first life in an infinite universe.

>>41823915
I think counciosness arises outside of brain. Its a feedback mechanism which allows you to shape your subconciosness. All your ideas and actions come from subconciosness. You are only aware of your decisions when they are already made. But conciosness helps you modify subconciosness for future decisions.

>>41823909
Onion is just a very bad analogy. You could say avocado or broccoli and that would be just as correct.
We have a more developed neo-cortex, but that doesn't equate to adding another layer. More like expanding a wing in a manor.

File: Im_out.gif (2MB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 320x240px

>>41821304
It's been real guys,
I need a cocktail.
Keep seeking the truth.
Neuroscientist out...

>>41823769
>>41823798
>Sounds a bit dogmatic
Dogmas are the foundation of our reasoning.
As I said above, you can't find the truth denying the truth. The dogma is affirming what is self-evident as being true.
When people say that everything they know may not be true, then there's no point in finding the truth or discussing metaphysics at all.

And yes, I mean consciousness (in portuguese, conscience and consciousness are the same thing, and they actually are).


I mean that everything that is possible to exist in the universe must be pre existent in the creator of the universe and latent in the universe itself.
Therefore, the creative force of the universe has consciousness.

File: linked list.jpg (15KB, 400x300px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 400x300px

The brain is literally a linked list of linked lists with gorillions of nodes and attached to sensory organs.

There is no soul. Consciousness is just a recursive traversal through the lists in a loop.

>>41821508
>>41821508

Good song

/sci/ here, there is no such thing as free will

also, no scientific evidence supports race

you people are retarded, and until you have phds in biomolecular study, dont even try and argue with me faggots

you have NO idea what you're talking about

File: anthro_pol_ogy.jpg (18KB, 400x244px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 400x244px

>>41826032
dude, you can't argue with science

>>41826148
yes all white people look like this and all black people look like that and the closer someone looks to a monkey the dumber they are its science

>>41826148
>differences is bone structure = separate species

ayyyyyyyyyyy

File: 1368308421482.png (361KB, 400x528px) Image search: [Google]

361KB, 400x528px

>>41826207
>race
>species

>>41826286
that's what pol seems to believe, that blacks are a separate species

no one disagrees with the notion of race, just that it is artificial and very abstract

>>41824106
I like you Brazilbro

>>41826032
LMAO FAGGOT HAVE FUN IN HELL

>>41826375
epic

>>41826032
>no free will

i like this, as it is a can of worms subject and interesting to me.

either everything is predestined or not. Most certainly our biology controls our behavior. Do we have options within this confine to behave in different ways. Perhaps. if so, our options will also be limited to our biological confines, we simply cannot behave outside of them.

All I know is nobody has the free will not to recognize their skin is burning if set on fire ( while awake ) however humans who are trained enough do have the free will to not react to the pain, although they will be aware their nerves are firing pain signals. Classic example the burning monks.

Ultimately, it could be the more "training" we have on the human condition the more freedom we have to respond , react to the stimulus, but again it is always biologically walled off.

I do not have the freewill to transform into a butterfly, at this time, and doubt I will within this life time.

File: hater.jpg (31KB, 439x532px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 439x532px

>>41826032
PhD in neuroscience back in this biatch.

So, fellow American bro, if there is no such thing as free will, what allowed you to question your own free will?

And you don't have to have a doctorate to be based, in fact many of the comments are spot on despite the lack of scientific jargon necessary to publish.

Are you a pure reductionist?

Educate, don't hate..