Philosophy of mind A phrenological mapping[1] of the brain – phrenology was among the first attempts to correlate mental functions with specific parts of the brain Philosophy of mind is a branch of philosophy that studies the nature of the mind, mental events, mental functions, mental properties, consciousness, and their relationship to the physical body, particularly the brain. The mind–body problem, i.e. the relationship of the mind to the body, is commonly seen as one key issue in philosophy of mind, although there are other issues concerning the nature of the mind that do not involve its relation to the physical body, such as how consciousness is possible and the nature of particular mental states.[2][3][4] Mind–body problem[edit] Our perceptual experiences depend on stimuli that arrive at our various sensory organs from the external world, and these stimuli cause changes in our mental states, ultimately causing us to feel a sensation, which may be pleasant or unpleasant. Arguments for dualism[edit]
Thoughts on Consciousness | OF MY OWN ACCORD So yesterday, I went to a lecture about consciousness by a neuroscientist called Murray Shanahan, from Imperial College. It was about how consciousness is constructed within the brain, how networks of neurons connect together to create hierarchies of thought and other such clever stuff. To be honest, most of it went right over my head. Total mindfuck. There was, however, an interesting thing about the way in which networks in the brain resemble social networks. This isn’t the best diagram in the world, but it hopefully helps explain how it works a bit. Its interesting to see how, whether by accident or design, we have come to create online networks that so closely resemble the processes that go on within our own brains. In the questions at the end of the lecture, one guy asked that if this system was how consciousness is created, then why is a social network such as Facebook, that relies on a very similar system, not itself a conscious entity? It got me thinking about Twitter though.
Panpsychism In philosophy, panpsychism is the view that mind or soul (Greek: ψυχή) is a universal feature of all things, and the primordial feature from which all others are derived. The panpsychist sees him or herself as a mind in a world of minds. Panpsychism is one of the oldest philosophical theories, and can be ascribed to philosophers like Thales, Plato, Spinoza, Leibniz and William James. Panpsychism can also be seen in eastern philosophies such as Vedanta and Mahayana Buddhism. During the 19th century, Panpsychism was the default theory in philosophy of mind, but it saw a decline during the middle years of the 20th century with the rise of logical positivism.[1] The recent interest in the hard problem of consciousness has once again made panpsychism a mainstream theory. Etymology[edit] The term "panpsychism" has its origins with the Greek term pan, meaning "throughout" or "everywhere", and psyche, meaning "soul" as the unifying center of the mental life of us humans and other living creatures
Much Earlier Split for Neanderthals, Humans? In the ranks of prehistoric humans, Neanderthals were our closest relatives. We were so close, in fact, that our species interbred with theirs. Tracing back our lineages, there must have been a last common ancestor of Homo sapiens and Neanderthals sometime in prehistory. But who was this mystery human? Picking out direct ancestors in the fossil record is tricky. In the last five years, anthropologists have used DNA to reconstruct the evolutionary history of humans. The dates range from more than 800,000 years ago to less than 300,000, with many estimates in the neighborhood of 400,000 years ago. But this may not be so. What's new? In a study published on Monday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, George Washington University anthropologist Aida Gómez-Robles and colleagues turned to teeth to test what had been gleaned from genetics. With that hypothetical shape in mind, Gómez-Robles and coauthors compared what was expected against fossils found so far. What does it mean?
Theory of mind Definition[edit] Theory of mind is a theory insofar as the mind is not directly observable.[1] The presumption that others have a mind is termed a theory of mind because each human can only intuit the existence of his/her own mind through introspection, and no one has direct access to the mind of another. It is typically assumed that others have minds by analogy with one's own, and this assumption is based on the reciprocal nature of social interaction, as observed in joint attention,[4] the functional use of language,[5] and the understanding of others' emotions and actions.[6] Having a theory of mind allows one to attribute thoughts, desires, and intentions to others, to predict or explain their actions, and to posit their intentions. Theory of mind appears to be an innate potential ability in humans; one requiring social and other experience over many years for its full development. Different people may develop more, or less, effective theories of mind. Development[edit] Autism[edit]
The Internet and the New Transformation of Consciousness John H. Van Ness (email: JohnVanNess@vngroup.com) What distinguishes human life from all other life forms? What makes human life unique on this planet? Jane Goodall , who spent 40 years studying the life of chimpanzees in Tanzania, has discovered that the chimps display many qualities that we had thought were uniquely human: personality, the ability to reason, the capacity for love and altruism as well as violence and cruelty. However only humans have developed a sophisticated spoken language. Anthropologist Mary Catherine Bateson recently described humanity’s new phase of evolutionary development. In The Web of Text and the Web of God , the late professor of English, Alan Purves finds that the internet is a major cause of this transformation into the post-modern world, which he calls the world of hypertext or the world of cyberspace. Since I am disabled and homebound, I spent some years being isolated from the rest of the world. Does the internet satisfy “all desire”? .
Cosmic consciousness Cosmic consciousness is a book published by Richard Maurice Bucke in 1901, in which he explores the phenomenon of Cosmic Consciousness, "a higher form of consciousness than that possessed by the ordinary man", a consciousness of "the life and order of the universe". History[edit] In 1901 Canadian psychiatrist Richard Maurice Bucke published Cosmic Consciousness: A Study in the Evolution of the Human Mind, in which he explores the phenomenon of Cosmic Consciousness, "a higher form of consciousness than that possessed by the ordinary man", a consciousness of "the life and order of the universe". Bucke discerns three forms or grades of consciousness: Simple consciousness, possessed by both animals and mankind;Self-consciousness, possessed by mankind, encompassing thought, reason, and imagination;Cosmic consciousness, a consciousness of "the life and order of the universe", possessed by few man, but a next step of human evolution, to be reached by all in the future. According to Juan A.
Epistemological Problems of Perception First published Thu Jul 12, 2001; substantive revision Sat May 5, 2007 The historically most central epistemological issue concerning perception, to which this article will be almost entirely devoted, is whether and how beliefs about physical objects and about the physical world generally can be justified or warranted on the basis of sensory or perceptual experience—where it is internalist justification, roughly having a reason to think that the belief in question is true, that is mainly in question (see the entry internalist vs. externalist conceptions of epistemic justification). This issue, commonly referred to as “the problem of the external world,” divides into two closely related sub-issues, which correspond to the first two main sections below. 1. What is it that we are immediately or directly aware of in sensory or perceptual experience? 1.1 The idea of immediacy or givenness 1.2 The Sense-Datum Theory Two main arguments have been offered for the sense-datum view.
Mirror neuron A mirror neuron is a neuron that fires both when an animal acts and when the animal observes the same action performed by another.[1][2][3] Thus, the neuron "mirrors" the behavior of the other, as though the observer were itself acting. Such neurons have been directly observed in primate species.[4] Birds have been shown to have imitative resonance behaviors and neurological evidence suggests the presence of some form of mirroring system.[4][5] In humans, brain activity consistent with that of mirror neurons has been found in the premotor cortex, the supplementary motor area, the primary somatosensory cortex and the inferior parietal cortex.[6] The function of the mirror system is a subject of much speculation. Discovery[edit] Further experiments confirmed that about 10% of neurons in the monkey inferior frontal and inferior parietal cortex have "mirror" properties and give similar responses to performed hand actions and observed actions. Origin[edit] In monkeys[edit] In humans[edit]
Culture Vaults : Resonant Frequencies and the Human Brain One of the great revelations of 20th century science is that all existence can be broken down into simple wave functions. Every photon, energy emission, and elementary particle rings with its own unique wave signature. When we see a color, we are actually seeing a distinct frequency of visible light. When we hear a sound, our eardrums are actually being vibrated by subtle waves in the air molecules around us. Even the neurochemical processes of human consciousness our very thoughts ring with their own distinct wave patterns. By studying the way that waves interact with other waves, researchers have found that even low-powered oscillations can have enormous effects on standing waves, physical structures, and even the human brain. Tesla first realized the massive potential of resonant waves in 1898 when he performed a simple experiment with an electromechanical oscillator the size of an alarm clock. "The principle cannot fail," Tesla would say. Monroe's Big Discovery The Neural Radio
Hylopathism Hylopathism, in philosophy, is the belief that some or all matter is sentient or that properties of matter in general give rise to subjective experience. It is opposed to the assertion that consciousness results exclusively from properties of specific types of matter, e.g. brain tissue. Etymology and specific definition[edit] The term is relatively uncommon even in philosophical discussion, and is often erroneously equated with panpsychism despite notable differences between the two views that are evident in the etymologies of the two words: "panpsychism" derives from the Greek pan, "all", and psyche, "soul" or "mind" (the terms consciousness and experience being preferred in philosophy), and implies the sentience of all things; hylopathism derives from hylo-, which is translated either as "matter" or "wood" depending on its context, and whose English equivalent is hyle, and pathos, "emotion" or "suffering" (and, by extension, experience). Hylopathism in popular culture[edit] Notes[edit]
Qualia Un article de Wikipédia, l'encyclopédie libre. Les qualia sont les propriétés de la perception et généralement de l'expérience sensible. C'est ce qu'on ressent lorsqu'on perçoit ou ressent quelque chose : qu'est-ce que ça fait de voir un objet rond, rouge et granuleux ? Les qualia constituent ainsi l'essence même de l'expérience de la vie et du monde. Par définition, les qualia sont inconnaissables en l'absence d'une intuition directe : on ne peut pas faire connaître le rouge, ou la couleur en général, à quelqu'un qui ne la connaît pas directement. Le mot qualia (à prononcer /ˈkwɑlia/, au singulier quale) vient du latin qualis qui signifie quel, de quelle sorte, de quelle espèce, de quelle nature[1]. Définition[modifier | modifier le code] Daniel Dennett distingue quatre propriétés généralement attribuées aux qualia : Les arguments[modifier | modifier le code] Arguments défavorables[modifier | modifier le code] Quelques questions à propos des qualia[modifier | modifier le code] Daniel C.
labos 29 mars 2005 Des découvertes révolutionnaires en sciences cognitives Les paradoxes et dangers de l'imitation Simon De Keukelaere Simon.DeKeukelaere@UGent.be Universiteit Gent - Belgique Cet article est le résumé d'un article paru en néerlandais, traduit en français par l'auteur, que nous remercions. Automates Intelligents La découverte des neurones miroirs est absolument renversante. Les neurones miroir L'une des plus grandes révolutions scientifiques de notre temps - selon moi, la découverte des "neurones miroirs" - n'a pas encore reçu beaucoup de publicité. The discovery of mirror neurons is the single most important "unreported" story of the decade. Les neurones miroirs sont des neurones qui s'activent, non seulement lorsqu'un individu exécute lui-même une action, mais aussi lorsqu'il regarde un congénère exécuter la même action. Zone F5 du cortex prémoteur Il existe donc dans le cerveau des primates un lien direct entre action et observation. Un dialogue prometteur