Can you dismiss this problem?

[Atla]

Look closely at the letters in this post for a few seconds, you can see some blue and black letters. You probably can't deny that they are there, this experience is somehow happening.

This is the problem: by now we know that the 'physical stuff' inside the human head is somehow the same as 'human consciousness'. However, nothing known to science explains why there is also experience where there is physical stuff.

So why doesn't human consciousness just happen 'in the dark', without any experiences like blue and black?

[Lance Kennedy]

Human perception is via brain modeling. When we see something, it is not like a video camera. We input the data, and the brain then uses that data to create a model of what we saw. For example, we do not see a whole landscape in one fell swoop. Our eyes move and in any one moment, we see only a small part of that landscape. But the brain takes the inputs and puts them all together to make a model of the whole landscape. Our perception of the landscape is not directly through our eyes, but indirectly via the mental model.

This mental model is not only from the sensory input. It is also influenced by a wide range of other factors. For example, it is predictive. If our eyes miss something the brain will fill in the gap on the model by predicting what it should be. Sometimes this filling in the gaps creates a false image.

We are all familiar with optical illusions. It is easy to draw a couple of lines of equal length, that the brain "sees" as being one longer and one shorter. We have a habit of seeing faces in images that have nothing to do with faces. Like the virgin Mary in the burn pattern on a piece of toast. That is all a result of the mental modeling that includes non sensory input.

So what we see is not just from our eyes. It is also from so many other factors.

[Atla]

Human perception is via brain modeling. When we see something, it is not like a video camera. We input the data, and the brain then uses that data to create a model of what we saw. For example, we do not see a whole landscape in one fell swoop. Our eyes move and in any one moment, we see only a small part of that landscape. But the brain takes the inputs and puts them all together to make a model of the whole landscape. Our perception of the landscape is not directly through our eyes, but indirectly via the mental model.

This mental model is not only from the sensory input. It is also influenced by a wide range of other factors. For example, it is predictive. If our eyes miss something the brain will fill in the gap on the model by predicting what it should be. Sometimes this filling in the gaps creates a false image.

We are all familiar with optical illusions. It is easy to draw a couple of lines of equal length, that the brain "sees" as being one longer and one shorter. We have a habit of seeing faces in images that have nothing to do with faces. Like the virgin Mary in the burn pattern on a piece of toast. That is all a result of the mental modeling that includes non sensory input.

So what we see is not just from our eyes. It is also from so many other factors.

This is all correct, but you haven't addressed the question. Why do we experience any 'internal vision' at all?

[bobbo_the_Pragmatist]

Why?

Silly Hooman.

[Atla]

Why?

Silly Hooman.

It's fine if you can't do it.

[bobbo_the_Pragmatist]

Tiger Got to Hunt
Bird Got to Fly
Man Got to ask:
Why, Why, Why.

Statistically, there are an infinity of other universes where there is no life to ask why at all. Rocks don't participate.

[Atla]

Tiger Got to Hunt
Bird Got to Fly
Man Got to ask:
Why, Why, Why.

Statistically, there are an infinity of other universes where there is no life to ask why at all. Rocks don't participate.

So? :)

[[oo]]

Eat the blue flower, don't eat the black fruit...

[bobbo_the_Pragmatist]

So? :)

Exactly.

[Atla]

Eat the blue flower, don't eat the black fruit...

And this addresses the problem how?

[Atla]

So? :)

Exactly.

Apparently 'real skepticism' to you means pretending away the problem if you don't know the answer.

[bobbo_the_Pragmatist]

I'm not a skeptic. The real problem is making one when there isn't.

Why....the iconic whine of someone with nothing actually to do. Why has been studied as soon as homo sapiens became such. No answers. Science applied the same curiosity to observable things, and brought us progress.

Your choice.

[Atla]

I'm not a skeptic. The real problem is making one when there isn't.

Why....the iconic whine of someone with nothing actually to do. Why has been studied as soon as homo sapiens became such. No answers. Science applied the same curiosity to observable things, and brought us progress.

Your choice.

So are you saying that when you look at the blue and black letters in this comment, that experience isn't actually happening?

[[oo]]

Eat the blue flower, don't eat the black fruit...

And this addresses the problem how?

Without distinction, learning and accompanying reaction (call it emotion if you wish) imprinted you probably wouldn't be here asking your question(s).

Just enjoy the red and be happy.

[bobbo_the_Pragmatist]

Of course it is. Nothing to do with the MUSH of your OP. doesn't even rise to the level of word salad.

Did you read any of the long dithering undefined posts that already covered all the issues you want to address?

Try it.

[Atla]

Eat the blue flower, don't eat the black fruit...

And this addresses the problem how?

Without distinction, learning and accompanying reaction (call it emotion if you wish) imprinted you probably wouldn't be here asking your question(s).

Just enjoy the red and be happy.

Of course the 'human consciousness' has evolved to navigate the surface of this planet.
But that wasn't the problem, why do you think that went over your head?

[Atla]

Of course it is. Nothing to do with the MUSH of your OP. doesn't even rise to the level of word salad.

Did you read any of the long dithering undefined posts that already covered all the issues you want to address?

Try it.

Getting more and more defensive are we. I think you suspect that there's a major issue that you have blocked out all your life, and this borders on insanity.

[bobbo_the_Pragmatist]

I doubt it. Just good advice. More fun to discuss issues with people you have broad agreement and who differ only in details. Dime is currently back at it in the "new threads" you should see on your initial search for Unread posts?

Re read your OP. Can you really not form a better question? I can..........and I still think its mush.......even when polished.

[Atla]

I doubt it. Just good advice. More fun to discuss issues with people you have broad agreement and who differ only in details. Dime is currently back at it in the "new threads" you should see on your initial search for Unread posts?

Re read your OP. Can you really not form a better question? I can..........and I still think its mush.......even when polished.

If you're only after fun then fair enough.
Btw another thing: we know everything about the successes of the scientific process through direct experience. Though direct experience itself can't be measured, there is also no way around it.

[bobbo_the_Pragmatist]

The great majority of my knowledge is gained second hand by reading.

[Atla]

The great majority of my knowledge is gained second hand by reading.

Yes, and reading is a direct experience.

[bobbo_the_Pragmatist]

No its not. Basic vocabulary. Speaking of your lack of basic understanding, lets review.

Look closely at the letters in this post for a few seconds, you can see some blue and black letters. You probably can't deny that they are there, this experience is somehow happening. /// Agreed. The somehow is the product of evolution.

This is the problem: by now we know that the 'physical stuff' inside the human head is somehow the same as 'human consciousness'. /// No. consciousness is an emergent property of the physical stuff. NO IDENTITY at all. This is basic vocabulary/precepts of the field. You are not qualified to do anything but stumble around until you read a few books.

However, nothing known to science explains why there is also experience where there is physical stuff. /// Quite a bit is known, and more everyday. I assume most of the issue you actually have is simply still inchoate given your poor communication skills/lack of vocabular/lack of basics.

So why doesn't human consciousness just happen 'in the dark', without any experiences like blue and black? /// That makes no sense at all.

[Atla]

No its not. Basic vocabulary.

Yes it is. Unless you are deliberately confusing the direct experience with what you are reading about, which obviously you would do.

Look closely at the letters in this post for a few seconds, you can see some blue and black letters. You probably can't deny that they are there, this experience is somehow happening.

/// Agreed. The somehow is the product of evolution.

And let's stop right here because the rest of your ignorant word salad rests on this.
The 'human consciousness' has evolved to navigate the surface of this planet, obviously.
However nowhere does evolution explain why experience also happens where all the neurological processing happens.

[bobbo_the_Pragmatist]

How do you define "direct experience."

[Atla]

How do you define "direct experience."

It's for example the blue and black you see right now.

[[oo]]

Eat the blue flower, don't eat the black fruit...

And this addresses the problem how?

Without distinction, learning and accompanying reaction (call it emotion if you wish) imprinted you probably wouldn't be here asking your question(s).

Just enjoy the red and be happy.

Of course the 'human consciousness' has evolved to navigate the surface of this planet.
But that wasn't the problem, why do you think that went over your head?

I don't think it's my head over which something went...

[Atla]

Eat the blue flower, don't eat the black fruit...

And this addresses the problem how?

Without distinction, learning and accompanying reaction (call it emotion if you wish) imprinted you probably wouldn't be here asking your question(s).

Just enjoy the red and be happy.

Of course the 'human consciousness' has evolved to navigate the surface of this planet.
But that wasn't the problem, why do you think that went over your head?

I don't think it's my head over which something went...

Well this time you're wrong.

[bobbo_the_Pragmatist]

Well, thats three strikes.

Thats not even a definition, its an example just as your own lead in notes. You are unskilled, undisciplined to do the very simplest of basics. Starting with basic English........the rarefied field of epistemology to remain a virgin while you stroke your pud.

Direct experience is the process of acquiring knowledge by fully and directly participating in an activity. Generally speaking, this produces more usable and vivid knowledge than learning about something with indirect experiences such as a game, video or book.Nov 9, 2017
9 Examples of Direct Experience - Simplicable

https://simplicable.com › new › direct-experience

See..........your ignorance is "textbook."................and, my direct experience.

Ain't that a hoot?

I'll withdraw now but check back to see if you ever buy a clue. Good luck.

[[oo]]

>> I'll withdraw now but check back to see if you ever buy a clue. Good luck.

It gets tiresome, don't it...

[Atla]

Well, thats three strikes.

Thats not even a definition, its an example just as your own lead in notes. You are unskilled, undisciplined to do the very simplest of basics. Starting with basic English........the rarefied field of epistemology to remain a virgin while you stroke your pud.

Direct experience is the process of acquiring knowledge by fully and directly participating in an activity. Generally speaking, this produces more usable and vivid knowledge than learning about something with indirect experiences such as a game, video or book.Nov 9, 2017
9 Examples of Direct Experience - Simplicable

https://simplicable.com › new › direct-experience

See..........your ignorance is "textbook."................and, my direct experience.

Ain't that a hoot?

I'll withdraw now but check back to see if you ever buy a clue. Good luck.

So you found a quote that uses 'direct experience' in some totally different context. Just to avoid having to look into your insane denial of experiences like blue and black.
That's why I asked if you deny these exist, the truthful answer would have been yes.
You deny that you are actually experiencing these colors, sounds, feelings etc. you just think it's all just some neurological processing happening 'in the dark'. :)

[Atla]

>> I'll withdraw now but check back to see if you ever buy a clue. Good luck.

It gets tiresome, don't it...

But do you realize that it's you with a mental condition, and that's tiresome?

[bobbo_the_Pragmatist]

Eggs: I've always thought the same thing. It IS always YOU..........scrambled, I've always thought. Still a good one though.

[Atla]

Eggs: I've always thought the same thing. It IS always YOU..........scrambled, I've always thought. Still a good one though.

Didn't you withdraw for now?

[bobbo_the_Pragmatist]

4

[Lance Kennedy]

I think Atla has probably got a good question, but I do not think that question has been properly posed. I do not understand quite what is being asked. I am prepared to try to answer, if I get a better question.

My original answer, about how the brain creates a mental model of reality, was an attempt to answer. Bobbo tried to point out that this facility was a product of evolution. Humanity evolved the capability to make detailed mental models in order to perceive our surroundings and use that data to survive. This ability did not come quickly, and was undoubtedly the result of many millions of years of small and incremental improvements. Perceiving the colors of the letters on a computer screen is just a tiny part of the overall capability.

But if Atla can rephrase the query, and make it clearer what is wanted, I might be better able to answer.

[Atla]

I think Atla has probably got a good question, but I do not think that question has been properly posed. I do not understand quite what is being asked. I am prepared to try to answer, if I get a better question.

My original answer, about how the brain creates a mental model of reality, was an attempt to answer. Bobbo tried to point out that this facility was a product of evolution. Humanity evolved the capability to make detailed mental models in order to perceive our surroundings and use that data to survive. This ability did not come quickly, and was undoubtedly the result of many millions of years of small and incremental improvements. Perceiving the colors of the letters on a computer screen is just a tiny part of the overall capability.

But if Atla can rephrase the query, and make it clearer what is wanted, I might be better able to answer.

The problem is: why is there also experience (the experience you are 'having', 'percieving' right now like colors, sounds, feelings etc.), when nothing known to science explains why all those neural processes shouldn't just be happening 'in the dark'?

[Gord]

Perhaps asking "why" is the wrong approach, as it assumes there is a "why". Instead, try asking "how".


...that's all I got.

[Atla]

Perhaps asking "why" is the wrong approach, as it assumes there is a "why". Instead, try asking "how".


...that's all I got.

Yeah asking "how" is also good (more or less the same question).

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Look closely at the letters in this post for a few seconds, you can see some blue and black letters. You probably can't deny that they are there, this experience is somehow happening.

This is the problem: by now we know that the 'physical stuff' inside the human head is somehow the same as 'human consciousness'. However, nothing known to science explains why there is also experience where there is physical stuff.

So why doesn't human consciousness just happen 'in the dark', without any experiences like blue and black?

Dismissed.

[bobbo_the_Pragmatist]

Perhaps asking "why" is the wrong approach, as it assumes there is a "why". Instead, try asking "how".


...that's all I got.

Doesn't the "how" question assume there is a how?........aka a "thing" on which the how operates?

I think so. When the subject under discussion doesn't exist except as a failure of conceptualization, there is no why, no how. No when. There could be a "what if" if one were facile enough but usually if you are facile enough.......you don't suffer from a failure of conceptualization to begin with.

Its like when you unwrap the enigma from the mystery: theres nothing there. Well.............sometimes just a big fat FU.

Maybe my direct experiences have been too negative????