God is in the temporal lobes
I finally figured out the source of my mystical moments.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5z4B5BYb ... 1&index=23
Here is a video of me during my searching stage. I was really at a loss for explanations as to why I was having these experiences.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5jGQG8B7XU
The problem of 'binding' in vision and self is often attributed to temporal correlation, but it is unclear why temporal correlation should bind experience without an explanation of experience. Regarding transition from preconscious or implicit processing to consciousness itself, the physicalist view sees emergence at a critical level of neural-level computational complexity. But no conscious threshold is apparent, nor is there a reasonable suggestion why such an emergent property should have conscious experience. As physicalism is based on deterministic computation, it is also unable to account for free will or Penrose's proposed noncomputability. But the major problem remains experience, for which physicalism offers no testable predictions. Something is missing. I still have lots of questions.
_________________
As long as man continues to be the ruthless destroyer of lower living beings he will never know health or peace. For as long as men massacre animals, they will kill each other.
-Pythagoras
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5z4B5BYb ... 1&index=23
Here is a video of me during my searching stage. I was really at a loss for explanations as to why I was having these experiences.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5jGQG8B7XU
The problem of 'binding' in vision and self is often attributed to temporal correlation, but it is unclear why temporal correlation should bind experience without an explanation of experience. Regarding transition from preconscious or implicit processing to consciousness itself, the physicalist view sees emergence at a critical level of neural-level computational complexity. But no conscious threshold is apparent, nor is there a reasonable suggestion why such an emergent property should have conscious experience. As physicalism is based on deterministic computation, it is also unable to account for free will or Penrose's proposed noncomputability. But the major problem remains experience, for which physicalism offers no testable predictions. Something is missing. I still have lots of questions.
That is one of the most marvelously impenetrable pieces of language I have ever encountered.
I found the source of my mystical moments to be marijuana.
Seriously though. I do subscribe to logic, and to Occam's Razor. All be it, i admit, a cheap way out. Did this world always exist? Ever expanding from the supposed singularity proposed in most forms of the big bang theory (and always existing before as just nothing, or simply nothing existing, or the proposed 'yo-yo' theories) Or did at some point something create this universe? In which case who created that 'something' and who created what ever it was that created the 'something'? To believe in a god means you must also believe that at some point in that line of thought that can stretch to infinity that something had to have just been created from nothing. So to me to believe in god means you must also believe that our universe had the ability to be created from nothing, or to have just always been. So the simplest answer is the one that we have the most proof supporting, our world is merely the product of pure luck and chance. To add the thought of a creator creates too much complexity. (though the possibility is not ruled out, if anything, we are nothing more than an amusing science experiment)
_________________
?It's a sad thing not to have friends, but it is even sadder not to have enemies.? - El Che
techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,695
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5z4B5BYb ... 1&index=23
Here is a video of me during my searching stage. I was really at a loss for explanations as to why I was having these experiences.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5jGQG8B7XU
The problem of 'binding' in vision and self is often attributed to temporal correlation, but it is unclear why temporal correlation should bind experience without an explanation of experience. Regarding transition from preconscious or implicit processing to consciousness itself, the physicalist view sees emergence at a critical level of neural-level computational complexity. But no conscious threshold is apparent, nor is there a reasonable suggestion why such an emergent property should have conscious experience. As physicalism is based on deterministic computation, it is also unable to account for free will or Penrose's proposed noncomputability. But the major problem remains experience, for which physicalism offers no testable predictions. Something is missing. I still have lots of questions.
The problem seems like its still all nascent and incomplete science. The brain isn't exactly a can opener, that's for certain. If we can track everything, I mean everything, down to some materialist staple even one of these days - it will be great to have answers, I just hope that our emotional proclivities as to what to do with those answers or how to view them in reflecting upon ourselves by the time that happens aren't as banal or pathetic as how our society seems to currently look at things.
There is an fMRI experiment in progress to track the brain activity linking visual(at least) sensory input to neuro-electrical(thought) activity. A type of translation dictionary between the real world and our perceptions and thoughts.
It was touched upon in the mythbusters episode about lie detection, but that discovery was only a side effect of the research.
Anyway. They decided to do the process with higher mammals as well, such as dogs, cats and primates. It will give science a good idea of the relative intelligence of various non humans. Presumably they can also test for religious experiences and search for analogue experiences in those other mammals.
I'm not saying ANYthing about the validity of spiritual belief, but just wondering if dogs have a god concept. I dont think it will solve anything - the religious will say "See, animals believe in god", and the scientific will say "the brain, not soul, experiences those feelings".
On the other hand, it will likely improve the welfare of animals.
PETA is still stupid.
_________________
davidred wrote...
I installed Ubuntu once and it completely destroyed my paying relationship with Microsoft.
It was touched upon in the mythbusters episode about lie detection, but that discovery was only a side effect of the research.
Anyway. They decided to do the process with higher mammals as well, such as dogs, cats and primates. It will give science a good idea of the relative intelligence of various non humans. Presumably they can also test for religious experiences and search for analogue experiences in those other mammals.
I'm not saying ANYthing about the validity of spiritual belief, but just wondering if dogs have a god concept. I dont think it will solve anything - the religious will say "See, animals believe in god", and the scientific will say "the brain, not soul, experiences those feelings".
On the other hand, it will likely improve the welfare of animals.
PETA is still stupid.
I have spent a long lifetime observing animals and can read gestural and facial expressions reasonably well. In general they are far more intelligent and aware than people give them credit for and the way they are treated generally by people is, frankly, disgusting.
I have spent a long lifetime observing animals and can read gestural and facial expressions reasonably well. In general they are far more intelligent and aware than people give them credit for and the way they are treated generally by people is, frankly, disgusting.
I agree fully with you on this.
_________________
davidred wrote...
I installed Ubuntu once and it completely destroyed my paying relationship with Microsoft.
I don't think I'm schizophrenic, I think I might have temporal lobe seizures. This is the best explanation I've found so far.
Here is a video of Dr. Ramachandran explaining this "disorder".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=raT2PrTQqS0
_________________
As long as man continues to be the ruthless destroyer of lower living beings he will never know health or peace. For as long as men massacre animals, they will kill each other.
-Pythagoras
