What is an effective way to curb corruption in 3rd world countries mainly in Africa and south America? — Gitonga

I live in one, so I have a bit of experience with the topic.

Some of the proposed ideas might work, others no.

- ban private funding of election campaigns or cap it to a certain low maximum — Olivier5

Ban all funding, make the candidates or their followers pay for what they want or need. Personal checks only.

- get the state to reimburse election campaign costs within a certain treshold, for all candidates getting at least 5% of expressed votes. — Olivier5

Why should the tax payer have to foot the bill at all? In any country around the world the money is needed in health care.

- set up dedicated anti-corruption units in the judiciary to fast-track high-level corruption, and isolate such units from political pressure. — Olivier5

In most places they cannot afford to pay enough for these people not to be corrupted. Why would anyone work for a small wage and stick his neck out to catch crooks?

- for petty corruption (mainly) set up a dedicated phone line to report corrupt officials, cops, etc. — Olivier5

These guys sell or give the info to the bad guys to make a bit extra or keep their families safe.

- force all elected officials to declare and itemize their wealth, prior and after their turn, in a verifiable manner. — Olivier5

It would probable cost more to verify their declarations than what they are going to steal. These people are clever at hiding the money.

...for first world countries to get the fuck out. — Banno

Probably the best solution, but they should take their cash with them. If they want to help the starving people of the world they should take the food directly to them, not give it to governments.

Put an end to the global corporations. — David Mo

Great idea but not going to happen. I am surprised that terrorist have not worked this angle yet.

Well, it's an interesting line of inquiry because it uncouples the two essential qualities of matter - mass & volume. Is it possible for something to have mass and no volume or volume and no mass? — TheMadFool

Science says that it is possible, who am I to disagree.

Personally I think that like the old song said "you can't have one without the other". Maybe something has mass and they still don't have a method of measuring the volume. Or the other way around.

the five-dimensional structure of capacity or the six-dimensional structure of freedom. — Possibility

Just curious, where can I find more information about this?

But there is a tendency to assume that by actual ‘space’ we mean the three-dimensional structure of the objects in conceptualised reality. — Possibility

Which is why I asked at the beginning for someone to set a proper definition of "a space". I could not think of any definition that would allow the mind to have its own space.

The relationship of the mind to the brain is, I think, an established fact. But exactly what that relationship is, is not so well defined.
Many still refuse in this day and age to believe that the "person" is nothing more than a group of cells interacting with each other on a molecular level.

If the mind is the brain then, yes. If not then, no. Also it mind depend on what you mean by mind. If the mind is seen as brain function then, it becomes difficult to attribute a material quality like volume to function. Think of it - the lips and tongue take up space but in what sense could we say that speaking/talking has a spatial attribute. — TheMadFool

Exactly. From what I have read, most people think that it is just the bio-chemical functions of the body. I tend to agree with that.

I think that it would be difficult to assert that the mind occupies a space because there is no way to define a space that it could occupy.

An idea would depend on the spatial organization and composition of the molecules at the moment when such idea comes to mind.

To ask what makes the idea come to mind would be the same as to ask what makes the spatial organization and the composition of the molecules be the one which allows the existence of, or represents, such idea.

Each idea has associated to it a particular molecular spatial organization and composition, which changes in time, just like the idea. — Daniel

If this is true then the mind, the YOU, is nothing more than a bunch of biological/chemical reactions.

How do we control the chemical reactions?

:rofl: :cool:

Energy occupies space. Something does not have to have mass to occupy space. Just because a photon is massless doesnt mean it doesnt have a velocity, a location, a distance to travel- all of which denote location or "space". — Benj96

Everything you say is true.
Golf balls are always in a place, commonly know as a physical/spacial location.
If I say I have an idea, it would only make sense to deduce that it is located in my mind. What sort of location would it be then?

If the mind is in a space, how would we define that space?

If you burned all the papers, deleted all the hard drives, and killed (or lobotomized) all the people with knowledge of the mortgage, how would there still be a mortgage? Yet if the mortgage doesn't take up any physical space, then how have I destroyed it entirely just by destroying physical things? — Isaac

By the same method I can delete all humans from the earth, and there will be no minds. But that does not answer the question that was posed in the OP. Does the mind occupy a space. If it does, then the kind of space needs to be defined.

You don't have physical/digital documents that describe the conditions of your mortgage? When you forget the conditions of the mortgage, where do you look to find it? — Harry Hindu

The piece of paper is not the mortgage, only the physical representation of it. Think of a mortgage as a promise, is that physical?

Space is the medium that separate minds and the more complex some pattern is within some amount of space, the more information within that space. — Harry Hindu

Paper might fit the definition here.

Yes. We IT experts use the term, "space" to talk about how much is taken up by data and how much is free on your computer's hard drive. You have a finite amount of space on your drive to store data.

Well, I tried to get on with that by asking you this, but you seemed to want to ignore the question. — Harry Hindu

And this is why I said that before the question can be answered we need a definition of what "a space" actually is.

Space for IT people is not the same as it is for a NASA person, and neither use the word in the same way that a writer would.

We are using space in different ways and therefore we will never resolve anything.

If we take space to mean something that can be occupied by material objects the arguments would be different to those where space is used to mean the re-arrangement of existing material to accommodate non material OBJECTS.

Does anyone want to provide a fixed definition of space?

The mind doesnt have to be more than data because data can react to data. Analysis, computation and processing of data requires "software" ie. Data. All information reacts with information to transform it into new or derivative information.

Just as a mathematical function is information with input (data) and an output (data). — Benj96

So if emotions are similar to mathematical operacions, math like data would also have space that it occupies? That does not make much sense.

No, in my viewpoint things like Qualia do not have locations but they exist as properties of things that have locations. — Francis

But if they do not have a location, their mere existence does not mean that they occupy space. as Banno pointed out his mortgage is real, but it does not occupy any space at all.

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.