It'll be great content for Netflix's next season of Unsolved Mysteries. — Nils Loc

There is a simple solution, buy a flexible hose like those used for washing machines and install it so that the U-bend is about the same shape as the gas trap tube. It works just as well and you only have to worry about the 2 ends.

Fine. Data is one of the properties of the brain.

But the mind is more than data, it is reaction to data, analyses of data, emotions. Do they have a location?

Yeah but that's only true for objects which have meaning projected onto them. An objects mass doesn't take up any extra space but mass still exists, but it exists as a property of an object that takes up space and not as an object itself. — Francis

OK, so the answer to the OP

Does the mind occupy a space? — Daniel

Is yes.

The mind then is a property of the brain.

Do all properties of an object take up mass of the object?

Why isn't this middle junction designed with a gasket? — Nils Loc

It should not need a gasket if installed properly. The seal is caused by the difference in the angles of the 2 sections, male and female. The principle is the same as the combustion engine's intake and exhaust valves.
There is a small difference in the angles so that when the two part meet with in a limited amount of degrees the tightening of the locking nut pushes them together and forms a contact point around the whole circumference.

Problems usually occur when the angle of contact is incorrect due to faulty alignment. That is why the are made in several sections, to give enough flexibility. Most people think that a leak means that the locking nut is not tight enough and proceed to over tighten it and warp the union.

Plumbing 101.

The electrons which correlate with the concepts that humans have mentally assigned to them certainly do occupy a space within computers and microchips. — Francis

But they would still be there even if there was no data on the chips. So the data is none existent in the sense that it occupies no extra space.

The complexity of our neural network indicates how much information we have stored in our brain, but brains are more or less the same size. — Harry Hindu

So does the mind take up space or not?

A blank drive occupies the same amount of physical space as a drive filled to capacity. What makes them different is the complexity of the patterns within that physical space. — Harry Hindu

So does the data take up space or not?


If your answer is yes to either of the questions above, please tell me how you define space.

So now we have a problem.

Let's stay with the computer hard disk for now instead of the brain.

A hard disk can be explained in the most simplistic way as a metallic disk that has its atoms rearranged to form specific magnetic patterns.
The atoms are part of the disk, no matter what the data or lack of data does to them. Filling the disk completely full will make no difference to the space occupied by the disk nor the space of the whole computer.
If the data occupies space then it would have to be added to the total of the disk, as we know that this does not happen we are obliged to accept that data is immaterial and does not occupy space.
The only other possibility is that they both occupy the same space but one of the two would still have to be immaterial for that to happen. The data occurs through the rearrangement of the atoms, not by adding to them

When you learn that the milk you put on your cornflakes is sour or that 2+2=4, does it add atoms or anything else to your body? No extra space is added to the space occupied by you body, it stays exactly the same. What happens is that neurons get rearranged, new synapse connections can appear. But the brain is not getting bigger, it is just a different arrangement.

So, either we need a proper definition of "a space" or we accept that the mind has no physical qualities except for the sensory organs that it uses as tools.

do you think there is a definition which would encompass every space there is? — Daniel

I have no idea, but for the sake of this discussion it would seem necessary to have a clear idea of exactly what is meant by "a space".

like, is there a feature which is common to all spaces so that they all can be classified as such in terms of such feature? — Daniel

Is there a difference between spaces? Could it be possible that the different spaces have nothing in common?

does my question make sense? — Daniel

Do my answers make sense?

Also, if they are separate, what does this mean? I mean, to be separate, wouldn't they have to occupy a different point in some kind of space? — Daniel

Would that not depend on it being a fact that they do actually occupy space? If they don't, then it is irrelevant.

Data on my computers hard drive does actually have a very specific location, but it does not exist as separate from the disk. The data in my mind might be the same.

No. The body cannot contain the mind, because the spatial aspect of the mind need not be confined to the body. — Possibility

So the mind of a person can be outside of the body?

The spatial location of the mind is a ‘fuzzy’ concept. The highest probability of ‘measuring’ it at any one time would locate the mind in the brain, but neither the brain nor the body appears to necessarily contain it. — Possibility

First of all, no one has yet provided any proof of spatial location of the mind, if it were so then this discussion would have ended already.
What is measured in the brain is electrical and chemical activity, is that what the mind is?

If there are other minds then it seems to be necessarily so that each mind occupies its own space. — Harry Hindu

If there are other minds only implies that they are separate, you cannot conclude that they occupy a space from that.

My mind does not overlap your mind or else how could we say that our mind are separate? — Harry Hindu

My computer memory does not overlap with yours, but I cannot prove that they occupy a space either.

Data surely occupies space in the computer. This space may be no larger or less than it was previously but rather a specific pattern or configuration of "on" switches and "off" switches but no less the information occupies the space of the computer in a certain encrypted order. — Benj96

This reminds me of the guy that wanted his laptop cleaning out completely because it was to heavy to carry.
Data in a computer does not occupy any space at all.

This is why I said that someone needs to define what exactly space is supposed to be in this context.

In that sense, it ‘occupies’ all of the spacetime that I do - although all of this spacetime that I consist of need not occupy all of this mind. — Possibility

So basically you think your whole body contains your mind?

Some scientists think that different dimensions occupy the same space at the same time.
But that does not answer the question.
For the mind to occupy a space it would need to be something and there would need to be something to occupy. We have no idea exactly what the mind is so we would need an explanation of what a space is to be able to even start a discussion about it.

To answer this question we should surely try to figure out what the mind IS, right? — oni

I think it would be a good idea to actually define "a space" first. Exactly what would need to be occupied if the mind was to do so?

consequence of hot wings, — Hanover

Wow, you are reckless! :lol:

Welcome.

Philosophy is not so much about the amount of books you have read or the number of lectures you have attended nor the amount of their content that you retain.

Philosophy is more a way of thinking than anything else.

Lots of people think of themselves as philosophers because they have read and understood the writings of the greatest minds but, in my humble opinion, being a philosopher means that you are in some way adding to those ideas.
People that cannot find an argument either for or against a commonly accepted idea do not deserve to don the title philosopher.

Do not try to retain the all of the ideas and thoughts of the great philosophers, think of ways ways to apply their ideas to your life or reasons for not doing so. Finding those reasons will help you to retain the important stuff. Analysis creates more and better memory than reading or listening.

Honduras Central America

Also known as the devil's asshole. But it it really a nice place.

My password hasn't turned-up yet, but I now have no trouble logging on. — John Barnes

If you cannot log in, how can you post? :wink:

Oh, and welcome.

No harm, no foul. — Hanover

We cannot even go out when we want here. There is a law that says only people with the last number of their national ID can go out on one day of the week. Starting at 1 on the first Monday of the month until 5 on Friday. The next week Monday starts with six and ends Friday with 0. No one goes out at weekend.

My number is 7, Tuesday. I have classes all day and there is no way to go out.

They are allowing home delivery services for food and medical stuff everyday, but the people all have to be registered. The have even put a stop to the selling of booze.
Anyone caught out in the streets with a permission gets fined and has to do social work.

There are lots of complaints about the system, mostly because there are not so many deaths. But the hospitals are all over run and understaffed. If they cannot keep the number of infected down there will be a big shitty mess here.

LOL I copy-pasted that from a mod responding to a different thread. I guess my jokes blend in with my ernest posts; my own fault. — Noble Dust

And I guess my jokes blend in with mine as well. But I really cannot tell the difference between sarcasm and humor sometimes. :smirk:

How are you holding up my friend? — ArguingWAristotleTiff

Hey Tiff.
I am not at all happy about this freaking lockup or lockdown, whatever you want to call it. I have left the house only once in these last 3 months. :groan:
And the worst is yet to come. I will be working from home until the end of the year. :groan: :cry:

If I am not mistaken, the purpose of the original thread was to discuss why we thought that we had the last word on any particular thread. There were several possible reasons mentioned if I remember right.
1. the last poster had the written the most profound answer answer to the question
2. the last poster had come to a dead end and no one else after that could think of anything else to say
3. the OP had not bothered to answer any more questions
4. the last poster had said something so bloody stupid that no one wanted to continue.

From there on it continued into a competition to see who could get in the last word on that thread.
But maybe I am thinking of a different thread. :worry:

One flaw from this being the plan forward from the medical crisis....I am me! — ArguingWAristotleTiff

And you had better stay that way lady. :wink:

This thread does not meet the quality standards of the forum. — Noble Dust

Is that some sort of problem? It has not bothered anyone so far. Everyone has managed to contribute some kind of bullshit, so I doubt anyone else is worried about quality.
And I doubt that any of the mods are going to pay attention to your ploy, not original by the way, to close the thread without leaving their last word.

Does anyone remember the original purpose of this thread in the old PF?

I've also taken online IQ tests and struggled with them. — Wheatley

I did a few of those a few years ago. On one I got over 140, another gave me high 80's and everything in between.

Maybe the people that made them were not high IQ.

Too many people come here, act stupid then bitch about the moderators. not fair.

They do at least warn you if you are going in the wrong direction and try to make things better for everyone. If you are having problems, it is probably because you do not consider yourself as part of "everyone" here.

Damn, I have been banned from posting in a few places for expressing ideas that are normal and acceptable here. I have even been banned from posting on yahoo news and several newspaper page comments section for my statements.

Compared to other places, this is one of the best there is.

No I am not sucking up to the mods either.

Just in case the spelling police are here, I made a couple of mistakes and dropped a comma or two. :victory:

Keep on rocking lady. I am beginning to wonder if hell might be better. Last week it was almost a hundred, temperature and humidity. You could not breath without sweating.

Screaming is a reflex and it is totally related to calling for help. I could agree it could have other functions as well, like scaring the animal or provoking mercy, I don't know, but it is definitely related to the instinct of calling for help. — Eugen

Some evidence of this would be nice, and something more concrete than what you think.

the body reactions are in fact fabricated by the brain. — Eugen

Is that not what I just said? So you imagine her and get a hard on.

This is so ridiculous, sorry to tell you that. People imagined traveling to parallel worlds long before inventing the boat, and this is a scientific fact, not an assumption. — Eugen

So now you believe me, they imagined going to places. That was what made them desire to go there. Them they started imaging how they were going to get there, thus came invention.
Please provide some sort of link to this scientific fact, I am always interested in this stuff.

So in your case, the invention of a super space ship comes first, and then you imagine and wish to travel to different universes? It makes no sense. — Eugen

Where on earth did you get that idea? And you totally missed the point, or have no answer for it.

How could you explain wanting(desiring) to visit far away places as instinct? — Sir2u

Same as for the boat - they wanted to get from point A to point B, it is exactly the same principle as going from a universe to another. — Eugen

So you say that wanting to go from A to B is a desire, something instinctual? Again, I cannot imagine how you are going to explain that.

As for those who didn't travel, they did so because of other factors, not because they couldn't desire or imagine doing so. — Eugen

So now you have to explain how it is possible that all those millions and millions of people throughout time over came this instinct and just stayed at home.

The boat is a tool, a space ship is a tool, they are nothing more than means to satisfy one desire and that is to travel from A to B. Simple. As for those who didn't travel, they did so because of other factors, not because they couldn't desire or imagine doing so. — Eugen

So man desired to go from A to B and built a boat? Would it not be more sensible to say that he saw a log floating in the river and imagine how he could use it to get to the other side and see what was over there? Without seeing the principle of flotation at work I doubt that all of his desires would get him far.

Again, name me ONE technology that serves directly or indirectly to a desire that wasn't there already. — Eugen

A plastic bag. Which of the humans' desires led to that being invented.

Now you answer the question I asked.

Tell us what part of our instinct=desire made it possible to discover electricity. — Sir2u

So the issue I have raised in the first place was that after we satisfy all possible desires/ideas on the list that I've mentioned above, what will happen? Will our brain invent others or we will simply stop there? — Eugen

I am sure that he will imagine something that will awaken new desires in human. By the way, do you think that vanity is an instinct?

Luck is nothing more than the coincidence of circumstances and time.

Circumstances are about you, your physical condition, education, age, the effects of the environment upon you. the place you are occupying in the universe, etc, etc.
Time is about, well time obviously.

Bad lucky is when there is no coincidence. You are going for a job interview and it is raining, there are no taxis, the train station is 10 blocks from the office you are going to. You get there late and miss out on the job. If your education had been different you might left home an hour earlier and got it.

Good luck is when you see the $20 bill on the ground when there are 30 other people that might have seen it but were to busy looking at a busker playing music you hate.

It all boils down into Murphy's Law in the end.

Keep the people happy and dancing.
Instead of burning the streets-



No, they are just burning any old mother down.

Well... the desire of surviving the cheetah attack. I believe the survival instinct obviously comes first, so in my example the desire comes first, not the imagination. Therefore, it's exactly vice-versa the way you said. — Eugen

The instinct to survive and the idea to call someone from far away are two separate things. Instinct would say fight or run, or maybe scream. The scream is not a call for help, but a reaction to the situation, one does not think that just by screaming help would come. Then the third option is imagined, call for help. It would not be a big step to then imagine calling to someone far away.

But even if you were right, that wouldn't change much the fact that the ideas that lie at the base of absolutely 100% of today's technologies are old as hell. — Eugen

Who said they were not? I don't think that this has even been part of the discussion.

No man, it isn't. When I was a kid I have a sexual desire for a girl in my class in the form of erection, but I had no idea what sex was and how it was supposed to be made. — Eugen

So as soon as this poor young lady appeared you got a hard on and you had no idea why? Of course your body has its own reactions to situations in which it finds itself, in this case a reaction to pheromones in the air. But that was your body reacting , not you. Unless of course you want to admit that you are nothing more that a zombie reacting to the environment without the capability to think. Along the same lines do you desire to sweat when you get hot? No right it just happens.
Now if you start to think about how well her blouse is filled and get a hard on, then it is the imagination that is fueling the desire.

Sorry to give you this maybe inappropriate example, but it is obvious that in the case of biological creatures like humans, instincts come first and in many cases, instinct = desire. — Eugen

No idea why the mention a perfectly normal function of the human body would be inappropriate , but whatever. But i really do disagree with you that instinct and desire are always the same thing.

How could you explain wanting(desiring) to visit far away places as instinct? Until less than a couple of hundred years ago few people had traveled more that a few miles from their places of birth, and those that had been motivated to travel afar were mostly considered eccentrics or worse.
The possibility of easy travel has made people imagine going to those places thus creating desire. And no, someone inventing a boat was not a desire to float on water, it was a way to get a job done easier. The desire to work less did not create boats, imaging a way to do that did. And then they imagined what else could be done with a boat, like visiting places that were over river.

The desire of human being to have his door/gate opened without the effort of the owner is OLD AS HECK!!! Come on dude, really? Of course King Richard didn't imagine a remote control, but the desire of having his gate opened was there.
Desire - ...... - Invention — Eugen

Do you really think that King Richard would have put the bloody gate there in the first place if there had not been a way to open it? Do you really think that he would have not put it there if he had not first imagined a way to protect himself from the enemy?
Alright, protecting himself is instinct, but he had to imagine a way to do it or he would not have had the wall to put his bloody get in. The desire to protect himself did not protect him, his imagination created the wall. Where in anyone's instinct is there a wall and gate reaction to being attacked by large groups of enemies?

Again, name me ONE technology that serves directly or indirectly to a desire that wasn't there already. — Eugen

As soon as you give me one that is. But we started talking about desire creating things and now we have moved to direct or indirect responsibility for creating them.

We can say that artificial vaginas that are connected to your computer and from there through the internet to a woman's artificial penis connected to her computer that are used to stimulate sexually both participants are instinctual in the sense that they are born from the human instinct to procreate.
But that would be a bullshit answer. Firstly because there is no procreation involved, secondly because it is based in the instinct to feel pleasure.
How then did anyone get from the instinctive desire(if you insist on calling it that) to feel pleasure to inventing a fake dick and pussy?
Even being motivated by desire to pleasure one's self, there had to be a lot of imagination involved.

But none of this would have been possible if someone had not first come up with the idea to harness and use electricity, so please just explain how desire did that.

Tell us what part of our instinct=desire made it possible to discover electricity.

People are not in the habit of justifying their lives to one another. That is what life is for. My life speaks for itself, as do my words. If I say I live by my philosophy and that has positive benefits in my life then that is true. — Pantagruel

Please don't bother answering anything I say here, because it is obvious that you have nothing to say.

You stated quite clearly that you endorsed meliorism and that it was obvious that I did not.
I asked you to give some evidence that there was a way to make the world a better place, which you did not do.
I then asked for you to at least give me an idea of the way you practice meliorism, what you do to make the world a better place.
You have failed on all counts to show that meliorism has any more value as a way of life that stroking cats.
Thank you for your time.

Unless of course you are seeing what you desire and there is no need to imagine it. — Nils Loc

So then either it is a part of nature and not part of the discussion on the evolution of technology or someone as already imagined it and invented it.

There must be some animals that still desire despite a complete lack of imagination. — Nils Loc

My cats have lots of desires, but I seriously doubt that any of them have imagined having a remote control door to get into the house. Thus, unless I give them one they will never invent it.

I rather suspect that the machinations of democratic politics would be better effected if parliaments, congress etc were conducted in the nude.
Would you agree? — A Seagull

Now that would be one of the few things I would like to see televised. Those, what would be a polite way to say shitheads, would be moving things so fast the parliaments, congresses of the world would only need to convene for a couple of weeks a year. Look at all the money that could be saved.
Best idea I have heard in a long time.

The Quottle. I can't imagine it but desire it. — Nils Loc

Hang around long enough.

https://www.owler.com/company/quottle
https://github.com/RubenKuilder/quottle

There you go.

Usually when unknown things are part of your imagination they are nameless. Is it really possible to put a name on something you do not know. If you already have a name for something, must that object already exist in some form. If it exists only in your imagination then you should be capable of describing it to us. could you try doing that please. What does it look like, what is its purpose, what is it used for, how do you use it, is there a reason for its existence?
What motivates you to desire it, are you hungry, randy, do you think that it will fulfill any of your other basic needs? Will it calm you anxiety or temper your spirit for a battle forthcoming?

If it is desired then there has to be a motivation for desiring it, even if it is so that you can be one up on your neighbor, but them you would have to explain why your neighbor had or wanted one.

It is impossible to desire something without being able to imagine it.

Who are you to pronounce truths about my life? — Pantagruel

Let me go back a bit.

You have absolutely no grounds for saying I am doing nothing to make the world a better place and are essentially offering me personal insult. That does not say much for your own philosophy. — Pantagruel

I did not even try to pronounce anything about your life. All I did was to say that you have not presented anything to make me think that you practice what you preach.And that is the truth to which I refer.

I have absolutely no grounds for thinking that you are doing something for the world either.
A simple explanation of the effort you are making to make the world a better place would be sufficient.

That is black letter ad hominem and I am offended. It is certainly a commentary on you. — Pantagruel

Oh dear, I had no idea that there were levels to that.

ad hominem: Appealing to personal considerations (rather than to fact or reason)

I had no idea I was appealing to anything, I thought that I was simply stating the fact that you have failed to present any evidence of your belief in meliorism.

The human species is as much a part of the world (universe) as everything else, and so deserves the benefit of melioration. Unless you are an anti-meliorist. — Pantagruel

I have decided that you insulted me here and taken it upon yourself to judge the truths of my life without even knowing me.

Last chance, why is the human deserving of the benefits of melioration? How do you reason this out?
If there is no answer then I could quite easily come to the conclusion that the rest is just melodramatics to cover that fact.

:lol: I hate farcehook but there are times when it has its use.
https://www.facebook.com/MetroPR/videos/386605718891355/

:rofl:
Imagination, desire, invention. In that order.

I think attempting to live by a set of universalizable rules is the most practical way to make the world a better place, expressing itself in one's every action.

You have absolutely no grounds for saying I am doing nothing to make the world a better place and are essentially offering me personal insult. That does not say much for your own philosophy. — Pantagruel

If the truth hurts, you have three options
Take an aspirin
Grin and bear it
Change the truth

There is no insult intend. The questioning of beliefs is something that is commonly done here.

You know nothing of my philosophy, except that I ask a lot of questions, I have made no mention of my beliefs and your assumption that I believe in anything could be mistaken for an insult.

Yo were the one that brought up the topic of meliorism, the belief that the world can be made better by human effort, and your belief in its virtues. But you have failed to defend your opinion in any way at all. The burden is on you to provide evidence of the benefits of that belief to convince others that you are correct.

In fact, I truly believe they are simply instinctive. — Eugen

Ask some old people if they ever imagined being able to talk to someone across the other side of the world from a tiny box in their pocket. I am only in my mid 60's, but as a kid I never even gave it a thought never mind desiring it.

They might have dreamed about being able to talk to someone that lived a long way from them, but I doubt that desire played much of a part of their dreams until after they had already imagined doing it.

Let's take the need of communication because you've mention it. Imagine a woman in a cave being attacked by a cheetah while her male partner is hunting far away. Of course she would wish not only to communicate instantly and ask for help, but also for his husband to be there instantly (teleportation). — Eugen

You even say so here yourself, the person imagines the act and then desires it.

Please name one thing that you can desire without imagining it first.

I don't see it that way. The cell-phone was just a step ahead towards pre-existing goal: to communicate with others from distance wherever you are. Nothing new in this. — Eugen

For something to have been a desire, you would first have to imagined it to be possible. I doubt that stone age people even gave it a thought, so it cannot have been an ancient desire.

I'm conforming to my own system, thank you very much. And the standard to which I hold that conformance is the currency of my own happiness and the happiness of those around me. And I very much feel I am living up to my personal philosophy every day. I stand by my philosophy and I make every effort to live by it every day, as anyone who knows me personally will vouchsafe I am sure. — Pantagruel

So apart from following your own philosophy and trying to live a happy life you are doing nothing to make the world a better place.
Endorsing meliorism and practicing it are apparently two very distinct things then. Much better to not endorse something if you cannot practice it.

Yeah, mother nature, Gaia, plenty of them around that have similar ideas.