Wednesday, November 21, 2012

Noam Chomsky - "The machine, the ghost, and the limits of understanding"




Professor Noam Chomsky, Massachusetts Institute of Technology: "The machine, the ghost, and the limits of understanding: Newton's contributions to the study of mind" at the University of Oslo, September 2011. Q&A at 45:33


I push back on the limitations inferred by others so as to direct my mode of operation, "in a question form," so as to move forward and not be stalled in my efforts. I believe I have made clear the difficulties as a logical directed outcome in presentation.

Internet development today asks how evolutionary consequence may be to influence forehead development( ahem......frontal cortex) when thought with regard to full brain used and direction is revealed in the keyboard displayed in the comment box. So while not being a cabby.....your a writer, a journalist. What MRI imaging would actually represent your correlative use of brain research information collection and pathway construction?

Chomsky refers back to this evolutionary inherent trait of human being identification in uteri manifestation. While referencing innate points of discussion it is interesting that such innateness may be limited to block of time or a  frame of reference in the evolutionary development of that consciousness.

Chomsky discusses the euclidean direction of development toward the evoking apparent correlation in of historical development. While there is some difficulty as to pointing out this feature in the Amazon tribe child toward such comprehension. A triangle is used and it's comprehension as to the lines  of expression is explicit toward the imperfection of that triangle perceived.

See: A Priori Intuition of Space?

Link above brought forward contradictory data in  relation to the subject of innateness discussed by Chomsky.

There are a lot of things discussed that are included in the overall discussions I have had with others about how we perceive consciousness and perspectives shared by others that questions how it is that consciousness can be perceived apart from the body. How difficult it would be to make this measure if possible at all?
The empirical methodis generally taken to mean the approach of using a collection of data to base a theory or derive a conclusion in science. It is part of the scientific method, but is often mistakenly assumed to be synonymous with the experimental method. The empirical method is not sharply defined and is often contrasted with the precision of the experimental method, where data are derived from the systematic manipulation of variables in an experiment. Some of the difficulty in discussing the empirical method is from the ambiguity of the meaning of its linguist root: empiric.

The mind body problem is dismissed in this talk below as to demonstrate that the pathway to empirical methods had been established by Newton. For sake of clarity one would have to refer back to Chomsky video to clarify this issue and how we move forward in today's world having arrive at a settled perspective about the mind body problem.

Further to this discussion in terms of the evolutionary the status quo of consciousness has not changed for 50000 years and example to help direct that perspective were raised in the contrast of a baby born in a tribe in the Amazon being raised in our modern day society and function quite well and a baby born in this modern society doing equally as well in the tribe.

Bold emphasized in order to provide a move toward this explanation outside of the NDE consideration... to see the theoretical position adopted and the attempts at an empirical method toward the development of that theory.

In the Q&A part of the lecture there is some correspondence in which a question is asked about this correlation of bits. Chomsky's reference to Wheeler in that context.




UpDate:

Eben Alexander had some response to the idea of neural oscillation as to explaining away his reason for the NDE and what happened to his brain when attacked by the E coli. It was his son who suggested to him that he write of his experience without doing any research on the NDE until he had finished detailing the experience all in written form. Then he went out and did his research.

From his new perspective as he looked at the information he found many things as fluffy and questionable in terms of what happens with the brain. He had a critical analyses of this. Death by heart attack was brought up and how the shift to brain wave activity was the decisive factor as he went through his research.
Sleep is a naturally recurring state characterized by reduced or absent consciousness and proceeds in cycles of rapid eye movement (REM) and non-rapid eye movement (NREM) sleep. The normal order of sleep stages is N1 → N2 → N3 → N2 → REM. Sleep stages are characterized by spectral content of EEG, for instance stage N1 refers to the transition of the brain from alpha waves (common in the awake state) to theta waves, whereas stage N3 (deep or slow-wave sleep) is characterized by the presence of delta waves.
My question of consciousness based on this neural oscillation was a method in determination and function of brain waves in individual and youths. How one may see the relation of the Near death as a function of the brain in neural oscillation mode, but as mentioned Eben dismissed this because his brain was basically dead.
Other Brain Waves
Theta wave – (4–7 Hz)
Alpha wave – (8–12 Hz)
Mu wave – (8–13 Hz)
Beta wave – (12–30 Hz)
Gamma wave – (25–100 Hz)
Now as to focus levels and the idea of these gradation of consciousness induced into synchronization established by resonance,  is of interest to me as to how the brain/consciousness may be characterize by such rhythms. Hence,  featured and attributes expressed in the idea of those Brain Waves.

The idea of Biofeedback is a useful subject in terms of a measured response to teach the mind to relax, while recording body temperature, heart rate and skin conductance.

13 comments:

RBM said...

I have, in the vein of the experimental method (per Wiki) an ongoing hypothesis as stated herewith:


Given the two hemispheres of the brain with different functions (see Jill Bolte-Taylor/TED) resulting in different experiences of the individual note the more one operates from a right brain hemisphere the less one needs an intellectual explanation, which is of the left hemisphere, of the mind-body problem. Indeed an intellectual explanation will be provided post-right hemisphere brain access.

PlatoHagel said...

Science Deals with the Intangible

I believe your Hypothesis is limited. The reason this is seen in my view is that Jill Bolte Taylor's experience was limited to a right brain function.

Eben Alexander moves past that limitation.

I believe your hypothesis explains the observer view from the right brain but does not explain the removal of the self as an objective figure from the experience.

PlatoHagel said...

Stroke of insight:Jill Bolte Taylor

So who are we? We are the life force power of the universe, with manual dexterity and two cognitive minds. And we have the power to choose, moment by moment, who and how we want to be in the world. Righthere right now, I can step into the consciousness of my right hemisphere where we are -- I am -- the life force power of the universe, and the life force power of the 50 trillion beautiful molecular geniuses that make up my form. At one with all that is. Or I can choose to step into the consciousness of my left hemisphere. where I become a single individual, a solid, separate from the flow, separate
from you. I am Dr. Jill Bolte Taylor, intellectual, neuroanatomist. These are the "we" inside of me.

Which would you choose? Which do you choose? And when? I believe that the more time we spend choosing to run the deep inner peace circuitry of our right hemispheres, the more peace we will project into the world and the more peaceful our planet will be. And I thought that was an idea worth spreading.


The reality parameter is limited by the brain matter perspective.

Eben's notion of right/left brain was a limit of perspective about what he was experiencing. What it was like to go from a worm in the mud perspective, always assumed as a neurological surgeon as a basis of reality forming. As a scientist he did not disregard his obligation to science. He offers a new perspective by sharing that experience that
knocked him out of his loop.

There was no notion of self in regard of the experience so from my perspective, experiencing a range of matter defined associations from the mud, all the way toward freedom of the environs which held him to matter. "A melody" that would inspire a freedom. Successive visitation to repeatable experience offers a way with which to embed experience. So he wouldn't forget. Offers up the notion of the stance Eben had assumed in science as an example of what is present in science today.

Repeatability.

PlatoHagel said...

So I got up and I jumped onto my cardio glider, which is
a full-body exercise machine. And I'm jamming away on this thing, and
I'm realizing that my hands looked like primitive claws grasping onto
the bar. I thought "that's very peculiar" and I looked down at my body
and I thought, "whoa, I'm a weird-looking thing." And it was as though
my consciousness had shifted away from my normal perception of reality,
where I'm the person on the machine having the experience, to some
esoteric space where I'm witnessing myself having this experience.
Stroke of insight: Jill Bolte Taylor

PlatoHagel said...

I offer perspective and information to indicate that while we learned lots from Newton, recognizing these contribution in no way can discredit this aspect of Newtons engagement as a sign of failure on Newtons part. I do supply another perspective that indicates this failure by Newton(Sheldon Glasgow), but I think he lacked that deeper understanding of the subject and its relation to what was trying to be discoverable in Newtons nature, by Newtons introspection as a scientist.

One is quick to dislodge the subject of alchemy as a reach for that which, "to begin their speculations."

That part of the conversation can be wipe very easy from the totality
of this conversation. The symbolism is a deep truth correspondence and realization for those who have drawn their lines. It was so for Eben Alexander. Why the repeated experience of the worm.

PlatoHagel said...

I wanted to draw attention to her work in Neuroanatomy and the perspective
and frame of reference with which she said she is operating from.....in
particular to the right brain( I looked down at my body and I
thought, "whoa, I'm a weird-looking thing.
)

.
I also wanted to draw attention to the notion of correlated symbolism is a reality forming perspective as long as one accepts that model. If you lose the identification of self....you would not see the nature of self as being expressed through the views of the right mind, but Jill Bolte Taylor describes it that way. Eben relates the idea that the three brain is a description of a mater forming perspective of reality and that all things arise from that......but if you move away from such categorization.....then how did Eben loose sight of himself?

PlatoHagel said...

So as I questioned Eben's experience, I had asked if consciousness could have the same focus. As I penetrated the book of Eben's, he raised that question himself about delving into his experience. I didn't know that until I read of the association to Hemi-Sync so this was news to me with regard to "the Focus."

Brain wave correlations, as they are produced do help to identify some of what consciousness is able to do regardless of the sleep state or dreams. The question about what can be developed in terms of what consciousness can do. So that indeed is enlightening from my perspective. But what is this understanding of consciousness good for, even if you Smith see it as subtle?

Again what use a Leary, or the use of drugs to induce such correlative states of brain waves? Is that what drug inducement is doing, then I would say that any research method that helps to point toward the development of consciousness as a viable means of measure is a good idea given the context of drug related.

PlatoHagel said...

If consciousness dreams, where does it go? Does it always stay with the home body and measures would indicate that it does, but what information is consciousness grabbing that would make it worthwhile to see that consciousness could work to gain access at that subtle level?

Perspective of NDE's as to locations and to looking from, other then the home body, was pointed too, with regard to Jill Bolte Taylor. That was her perspective as she related her experience on the glider about experiencing from her right brain. About speaking about creativity as a right brain benefit....while there are questions around this for me about that perspective with regard to location. It is as the consciousness looks as Being "outside the parameters" of the three brains.

This raised a question for me about what is "self centered and self less" as Eben experiences. This represents a evolution in the development of consciousness and recognition of the observer? Not a progression of a Ptolemaic ideology, as it relates to science.

PlatoHagel said...

I have tried to explain at length that the recognition of the experience by Eben does not have parameters like you and me when it came to assessing his experience. Eben looked at his experience more critically then you think you do. Your are hand-waving and being superfluous with your statements without challenging the framework that NDER's are experiencing.

Maybe offer a suggestive framework that makes psychological sense so that they can feel connected with themself again having to return to the earth orientated construct we live in. That is the difficulty, because the constraints that they felt while being alive, did not feel this way for them as they were having the experience. Suggestively, some do not
want to come back and how does a soul have any finality in the saying of? Do you think that such a decision cannot be made?

Jill Bolte Taylor became inspired after her experience and she speaks quite highly of the praises of what was experience through the right
brain. A right brain world she said.

PlatoHagel said...

The literature would have to be sifted. The NDE data base, as to heart being a decisive factor in death being called. Here on my part, an assumption about the pronunciation of death as a evolution of
protocol by Doctors?

This is where Eben saw a difference between his experience and those experiencing NDe with similar conscious state. The relevance to me in this research would be the understanding that conscious states exist similar too, the archive, of NDE experiences as fundamental aspects of our state of consciousness before that experiencing comes along. Why creating this map of consciousness is vital to expanding our horizons of
what each of us may come to experience someday.

Secondly, to show these are fundamental or conscious states that are natural in relation to what can be established as subtle, when in the comatose state suggests that consciousness is still working, see? It can travel in, in it's experiencing, even while such states have been measurable.

Whether you conclude that there is no life after death or not, this would not conflict with what is tangible in our experiencing. Just that
as a observer we recognize what it is we are doing in those subtle states. Then again if there is no reference to this I-ness as to identifying the self in experiencing, how is it one is aware of "just
experiencing?" If there is no identity of self then who is it that is experiencing?

PlatoHagel said...

It is their common commitment to a pluralist theory of what the
world contains that motivates Popper and Eccles in their argument for
interactionism. Their views diverge in other areas, with Eccles
displaying a strong concern to preserve the theoretical possibility of
the survival of human personality beyond bodily death, to which Popper
is comparatively indifferent and which is in any case uncongenial to his
evolutionary mode of thought about man's place in the universe.Popper
and Eccles both believe that the currency of a mechanistic view of man
has contributed to the modern disrespect for human life and dignity, a
belief that may be contested by those who, like the present reviewer....
John Gray

PlatoHagel said...

While we talked of Chomksy and mind body problem as being dead.....to a materialist anyway, it is not to far a leap to change one's foundational belief as to that problem and say, such things as Eben is saying. So
what. One assumes he does not make good use of his scientific background and has gone over the deep end. I hear that a lot from scientists who are materialistically bound.:)

It is feature we have amalgamated into consciousness as a given, and we are born into it. That blank slate is a measure between two points, and the line a life. It does not talk about the the point of as a beginning, or, where we came from before and is a problem as evidenced in the discussions about cyclical as a function of expression seen in the motivation of the universe eh?

PlatoHagel said...

Looking back beyond the the religiosity of belief and what ever guise it holds, it is a question about the position we adopt and that is foundation in terms of the divergence of ideas. That's okay. One form leads from a materialist sense, then does another. Yet, it is as simple as an adoption of "a position" that the approach is assume?

So you upset the order of things and say "from certain perspective I see in ways that I had not before" .....means that in life such experiences on the adoption of experience makes it easier to understand reformation of ideas and thoughts exposed by others? Seems quite natural to me no matter how well you dressed the experience.

So you dissect the experience. Not everybody can see my experience yet it is transforming. So it was a dream. So it was a real life physical situation that others seen. Prove it again. Life snuck up on
you with the why and how can I explain it?. Gravity, has been defied. Disavow it then, because you say it is not true?

So knowing the requirement for proof, you push ahead to understand why that one experience set the course for what and how you look at the world today.

Off in another location of the universe, something is happening that we say the effect of it's orbit is translating information of how close those two objects are rotating with respect to each other. Here on earth we may say those gravitational waves are helping us to discern that distance from each other. Prove it?

One does not say that the efforts to understand gravitational waves has been proven beyond any doubt yet we devise the methods and approach
to ascertain if this process is exacting us information in those gravitational waves?

So what better way to approach things then to discern the effect of targets/backdrops here on earth as backdrops as to what is happening out
there in the universe to sending information to earth? The LHC is good for something then, satisfying the inquisitiveness of humanity, eh?