Metaphysics LOL?

[mhss1992]

Re: Metaphysics LOL?

Ok...
Those discussions never work, do they?

[MrRubix]

Re: Metaphysics LOL?

Uhhh... Yeah, but, like I said, you have to consider coincidences. For example, I said that the only organs that make cells with meiosis are connected to the genitals. Why aren't there other organs like that around the body, useless ones, that don't keep you from living? What about the hormones and stuff?

What about something like the appendix? It's useless too but you can easily argue how it's a leftover part from an evolutionary process.

From Wiki:

"One potential ancestral purpose put forth by Charles Darwin[4] was that the appendix was used for digesting leaves as primates. Over time, we have eaten fewer vegetables and have evolved, over thousands of years to consume meats, hence this organ may have evolved to be smaller to make room for our stomach. It may be a vestigial organ of ancient humans that has degraded down to nearly nothing over the course of evolution. Evidence can be seen in herbivorous animals such as the Koala. The cecum of the koala is very long, enabling it to host bacteria specific for cellulose breakdown. Human ancestors may have also relied upon this system and lived on a diet rich in foliage. As people began to eat more easily digested foods, they became less reliant on cellulose-rich plants for energy. The cecum became less necessary for digestion and mutations that previously had been deleterious were no longer selected against. These alleles became more frequent and the cecum continued to shrink. After thousands of years, the once-necessary cecum has degraded to what we see today, with the appendix. [4] Evolutionary theorists have suggested that natural selection selects for larger appendices because smaller and thinner appendices would be more susceptible to inflammation and disease"

An evolutionary or genetic algorithm doesn't always have to have the maximum optimal solution. In metaheuristic programming, for instance, you can look up what's called "hill climbing" when looking for the best possible solution. I can solve a huge knapsack-problem variant of absurd difficulty that cannot hope to be directly calculated by brute force with a genetic algorithm that "climbs hills" by continually reproducing new populations of data with slight mutations here and there such that the "survivors" are the ones that are the most fit based on fitness criteria. Over time, these populations get better and better and mutate more and more as we climb up this "hill" for some solution.

What ends up happening is that, given enough time, I can find a solution to an INCREDIBLY complex problem with no intelligent design at all whatsoever.

[MrRubix]

Re: Metaphysics LOL?

Ok...
Those discussions never work, do they?

What did you not understand in the previous explanation?

You're asking why you're you and why you're not, for example, me. Like if we assume we're both made at the same time, why are you not seeing things through my brain, and why am I not seeing things through yours? Why am I me, and why are you you, specifically?

Someone's got to be at the helm of the mind, right? Thing is, the mind is what makes the person. If mhss1992's brain forms, mhss1992 is in control of that body. If MrRubix's brain forms, MrRubix controls that body. We *are* the products of our brains.

[MrRubix]

Re: Metaphysics LOL?

I think where most people get confused with randomness is the notion that "these complex things couldn't have possibly happened by chance or randomness."

I'd agree, insanely complex systems are unlikely to appear entirely by chance.

However, evolution is again very slow and non-random. The traits that are the most selectable win priority. If we have a population of creatures, some with razor sharp teeth, and some with gums, which type of creature is going to be more fit for passing on its genes? A basic example, to be sure, as evolution takes much longer and with much more gradual changes, but the point is that as you pass on genes more and more, you have to evolve to more advanced and fitter forms to beat out the lesser forms. Unhealthy lifeforms that have trouble reproducing won't last long, whereas healthier individuals will be able to life longer and produce more offspring, which are also more likely to be healthy.

Again, check out the eye video if you want to see how increasing complexity in this regard makes one more fit for natural selection. Naturally-forming, "intelligent" complexity: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rUOpaFVgKPw

[mhss1992]

Re: Metaphysics LOL?

What did you not understand in the previous explanation?

You're asking why you're you and why you're not, for example, me. Like if we assume we're both made at the same time, why are you not seeing things through my brain, and why am I not seeing things through yours? Why am I me, and why are you you, specifically?

Someone's got to be at the helm of the mind, right? Thing is, the mind is what makes the person. If mhss1992's brain forms, mhss1992 is in control of that body. If MrRubix's brain forms, MrRubix controls that body. We *are* the product of our brains.

I understand, I really do. But there's a thought I have that's very clear to me, but never works for other people because I don't hve good words to describe it. MrRubix would always be MrRubix, with MrRubix personality and etc. But if I exchanged parts of your brain, it would still be possible that this new person would now have the same first person perspective from the previous MrRubix. I mean, it would still be "you", because you would still feel the world from that brain.
Do I sound absurd? What part of MrRubix brain defines this first person view?

[MrRubix]

Re: Metaphysics LOL?

Exchanging parts of the brain? Like if we somehow traded parts or something?

Theoretically, if we traded parts of our brains and were somehow able to, I think it would depend on what parts we traded. It would be like taking two computers and switching various parts. Neither computer is technically the same as it was before.

If we somehow traded parts of the brain that contained the structures essential for our personalities/memories/etc, I would imagine we would become two different people with a mix of, say, shared memory banks, personality attributes, etc.

EDIT:

My "perspective" as PURELY MrRubix would cease but I would not die. My perspective would be "split" into two, as would yours, as we'd both occupy two bodies. However, we would still feel as if we have one perspective each, just a newly-formed one from previously-established components.

Call my body A and yours B. We exchange parts of our brains.

Body A and B now contain pieces of each other as well as parts of each other's brain that are responsible for self-awareness, perspective, thought, memory, etc.

Body A sees things through a newly-created perspective derived from these parts. Body B sees things through a newly-created perspective as well.

[mhss1992]

Re: Metaphysics LOL?

Exchanging parts of the brain? Like if we somehow traded parts or something?

Theoretically, if we traded parts of our brains and were somehow able to, I think it would depend on what parts we traded. It would be like taking two computers and switching various parts. Neither computer is technically the same as it was before.

If we somehow traded parts of the brain that contained the structures essential for our personalities/memories/etc, I would imagine we would become two different people with a mix of, say, shared memory banks, personality attributes, etc.

EDIT:

My "perspective" as PURELY MrRubix would cease but I would not die. My perspective would be "split" into two, as would yours, as we'd both occupy two bodies. However, depending on how well the part-integrations go, we would still feel as if we have one perspective each, just a newly-formed one from previously-established components.

But what specific part of your brain defines that your perspective, the "I", remains on MrRubix's body and not another? I mean, you can't feel the world from two bodies at once. I think.

[Flaming_Dingleberry]

Re: Metaphysics LOL?

I mean, consider how many stars there are in a given galaxy... billions. Imagine how many planets that could infer. Multiply that by the billions and billions of galaxies out there. The number of planets out there is staggering. I would say it's extremely unlikely that our solar system is the only permutation in which life is sustainable on one planet.

I ALWAYS SAY THIS. Whenever anyone tells me there's no such thing as aliens, I basically say this (^^^) and let them know it's actually more outrageous to believe there ISN'T life out there.

[MrRubix]

Re: Metaphysics LOL?

But what specific part of your brain defines that your perspective remains on MrRubix's body and not another? I mean, you can't feel the world from two bodies at once. I think.

Again, the makeup of the brain determines the perspective, much like the hardware and software of my computer allows for the generation of the text on my screen that I am currently reading and typing right now.

No, you can't feel the world from two bodies at once, but if my "perspective" parts are split in two and swapped, I wouldn't feel like I am suddenly living in two bodies at the same time.

They're still separate bodies. The perspectives would technically be entirely new ones, only each person would have a newly-joint set of memories, personality traits, feelings, thoughts, etc.

Again, the makeup of the brain MAKES the perspective. If I chop up a brain and mix it around with other brain components, that is an entirely new brain and an entirely new "perspective."

[MrRubix]

Re: Metaphysics LOL?

(LOL anyone coming into this thread right now would probably be like WTF why are they talking about chopping up brains?!)

It's a theoretical discussion, people! Haha :P

[mhss1992]

Re: Metaphysics LOL?

Again, the makeup of the brain determines the perspective, much like the hardware and software of my computer allows for the generation of the text on my screen that I am currently reading and typing right now.

No, you can't feel the world from two bodies at once, but if my "perspective" parts are split in two and swapped, I wouldn't feel like I am suddenly living in two bodies at the same time.

They're still separate bodies. The perspectives would technically be entirely new ones, only each person would have a newly-joint set of memories, personality traits, feelings, thoughts, etc.

Again, the makeup of the brain MAKES the perspective. If I chop up a brain and mix it around with other brain components, that is an entirely new brain and an entirely new "perspective."

I get what you said, but we're not talking about the same "perspective". I mean, there are two people, MrRubix and A. What part of MrRubix's brain must I exchange with A's in order to make the MrRubix's "I" live in A's brain, while MrRubix's personality remains basically the same, but with A inside of it? I mean, YOU, the MrRubix's "observer", being material or not, will feel with A's brain, have A's personality and body, and vice versa. The two people, MrRubix and A, remain the same, but with exchanged "I"s. That's what I meant by first person, observer, etc.

I'll come back later. Can I add you?

[Ice wolf]

Re: Metaphysics LOL?

This is getting weird. >.> How is all this supposed to justify claims for a god? Or are we past that?

[MrRubix]

Re: Metaphysics LOL?

I get what you said, but we're not talking about the same "perspective". I mean, there are two people, MrRubix and A. What part of MrRubix's brain must I exchange with A's in order to make the MrRubix's "I" live in A's brain, while MrRubix's personality remains basically the same, but with A inside of it? I mean, YOU, the MrRubix's "observer", being material or not, will feel with A's brain, have A's personality and body, and vice versa. The two people, MrRubix and A, remain the same, but with exchanged "I"s. That's what I meant by first person, observer, etc.

I'll come back later. Can I add you?

Sure.

Again, though, I think it would depend on what parts of the brain you exchanged. I don't know if such parts like personality or memory exist as fully localized units (it's been eons since I've studied the frontal, parietal, temporal, and occipital lobes, etc). I would assume that whatever "I" am, it's based on the combination of the components that make up my brain. Combining memory centers, visual centers, muscle memories, personality traits, thoughts, processes, strength of neural networks, etc etc. Or if you mean some kind of "self awareness," then sure, I'll run with that. If we had localized parts that produce self-awareness as to who we are, then simply exchanging those parts, I feel, would have little effect. "I" would be the same "I" because I am simply using an awareness function to make myself aware of what I am, or becoming aware that I have access to all these other brain components that have specific characteristics.

Even if I am using your self-awareness brain component, I'm still going to have the same personality, the same thoughts, the same memories, the same networks, etc, as I did before. If we exchange hearts, we're still the same people. My heart may use a different means of pumping blood through my body, but the net effect is the same.

Similarly, I think if we exchanged "self-awareness" pieces, we wouldn't really change, much like in the heart example. The net effect is the same: We're still ourselves. We haven't exchanged anything that changes who we are as people.

If we exchanged personality components, I'd still be "me," but with your personality.

So the next question becomes, at what point am I no longer "me"? "Me" is always going to be the sum of the parts that make up that body and brain. In every example, my perspective is simply altered based on what parts we swap.

If I laid on a red bench and you on a blue bench, and we went to sleep and had our parts switched around randomly, when we'd wake up, the person who wakes up with my memory bank would recall going to sleep on a red bench, while the person who wakes up with your memory bank would recall going to sleep on the blue bench. I don't know how much "muscle memory" and "event memory" are interlinked, nor do I know how personality would fit in (do people with hardcore amnesia act the same way as they did before?), but my point is that no matter what is exchanged, that is now a new brain.

How do you know you're you and not me? You have memories of you being you. You experience things right now in real-time and they're consistent with your past memories as well. Your personality is a certain way. Your thought processes are built in a specific fashion. All of those individual things come together to make "you," and your self-awareness and sensual input devices allow you to make sense of all these things.

[mhss1992]

Re: Metaphysics LOL?

Sure.

Again, though, I think it would depend on what parts of the brain you exchanged. I don't know if such parts exist as localized units. I would assume that whatever "I" am, it's based on the combination of the components that make up my brain. Combining memory centers, visual centers, muscle memories, personality traits, thoughts, processes, strength of neural networks, etc etc. Or if you mean some kind of "self awareness," then sure, I'll run with that. If we had localized parts that produce self-awareness as to who we are, then simply exchanging those parts, I feel, would have little effect. "I" would be the same "I" because I am simply using an awareness function to make myself aware of what I am, or becoming aware that I have access to all these other brain components that have specific characteristics.

Even if I am using your self-awareness brain component, I'm still going to have the same personality, the same thoughts, the same memories, the same networks, etc, as I did before. If we exchange hearts, we're still the same people. My heart may use a different means of pumping blood through my body, but the net effect is the same.

Similarly, I think if we exchanged "self-awareness" pieces, we wouldn't really change, much like in the heart example. The net effect is the same: We're still ourselves. We haven't exchanged anything that changes who we are as people.

Now, if we exchanged memory banks, I would still feel like "me," but my memories would simply be of your past (which would be wild because memories are what we base so much off of. That's about as close to a body swap as you can get IMO). If we exchanged personality components, I'd still be "me," but with your personality.

So the next question becomes, at what point am I no longer "me"? "Me" is always going to be the sum of the parts that make up that body and brain. In every example, my perspective is simply altered based on what parts we swap.

If I laid on a red bench and you on a blue bench, and we went to sleep and had our parts switched around randomly, when we'd wake up, the person who wakes up with my memory bank would recall going to sleep on a red bench, while the person who wakes up with your memory bank would recall going to sleep on the blue bench.

How do you know you're you and not me? You have memories of you being you. You experience things right now in real-time and they're consistent with your past memories as well. Your personality is a certain way. Your thought processes are built in a specific fashion. All of those individual things come together to make "you," and your self-awareness and sensual input devices allow you to make sense of all these things.

So you're saying that having A's body and mind and being able to speak to and look at MrRubix as another person is not possible without changing components of the memory?
Well, I was actually referring to a part that doesn't really requires thoughts or awareness, like a "center" that controls the brain, the point where perceptions go to.

[MrRubix]

Re: Metaphysics LOL?

For me to look at MrRubix in the third person, I would have to carry my entire brain over into A's body. I would be able to say, "Hey, that's my body! I am MrRubix! What am I doing in here?" because my brain hasn't changed at all, it's just in a different body. I'm still "MrRubix" in terms of brain composition.

It would not be possible for me to look at MrRubix and think, "Hey, I'm A" unless I had A's memory. For me to think I am A, I would have to think of what I was before. In doing so, I would be recalling everything that A perceived and experienced, and therefore I would feel like I am A looking at Rubix.

There are various parts in the brain that control where perceptions go. We feel and experience different things in all sorts of different parts of the brain in terms of information storage and sensual interpretation and thought processing.

If we're exchanging hard drives from our computers, my hardware is going to display all your **** when I boot up. If we simply exchange screens that are used to make sense of/interpret the data signals from the hardware, we're still using the same computers with the same software and harddrives, only now it's all just displaying through a different screen, but the net result is, again, the same.


EDIT: This reminds me of FF7... something about Zack's memory melding with Cloud's, confusing him into thinking he was a SOLDIER Elite, when really he was experiencing Zack's memories, haha!