Re: optogenetics? — 180 Proof

I suppose this is a naturally occurring optogenetic phenomenon explored on the level of biochemical phenotype rather than genes. Researchers filled a solution with fragments of microtubules and found that energy is shared in response to light as a kind of coherence phenomenon. Apparently this process is mediated by tryptophan and more. Cool science.

I cannot hope to understand what this proposition describes. My question is simple though. Electricity is used in electrical circuits and enables things such as lightbulbs, televisions, transistors and computers. At the classical scale, is there any need to refer to quantum properties to explain how electricity makes such things work? If not, why is it necessary to do so for the operation of brains?

Ways of proving nonohysicalism (mind is not physical)

1. Demonstrate the mind travels faster than light, the cosmic speed limit.

2. Prove that mind isn't matter (0 mass, 0 volume) and isn't energy (0 calories).

3. Craft a reductio ad absurdum using "mind is physical" as the assumption (negated on pain of a contradiction).

Proving that mind is physical is simple: We have to show mind is matter (is the brain the mind?) or energy (can we do work with it? Can we convert it to some other form of energy?).

Life consists of molecules and can be adequately described with them. The quantum level is not necessary for this. Imagine you drive your car into a tree. What was the cause of this, such as quantum fluctuations? Of course not. You drove too fast. Quantum processes are the result of this macroscopic event. Reversing the chain of causality makes no sense.

:up:

Are you looking at all options?

Here is my list:

• Mind is physical matter
• Mind is non-physical
• Mind is physical matter containing non-physicals

I can't think of any others, but of course only option 3 can be correct.

This was an old post. I've actually forgotten that I ever wrote it. Thanks for the reminder. A long, long time ago in my universe buddy.

I would say that the matter is far from settled, but that's not its unique/special feature; so yeah!

Mind affects the physical brain (and vice versa); ergo mind is physical. (Also: classical, not quantum.)

Mind affects the physical brain (and vice versa); ergo mind is physical. (Also: classical, not quantum.) — 180 Proof

I'm a physicalist 180 Proof. What do you make of Chalmer's so-called hard problem of consciousness?

What do you make of Chalmer's so-called hard problem of consciousness? — Agent Smith

https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/511358

... "subjective experiences" are not objective; to require that subjectivity be described objectively is a category mistake ... — 180 Proof

thus, Chalmer's "Hard Problem" is a psrudo-problem.

Very Dennettian. I like Daniel Dennett. I hope he doesn't take offense but he reminds me of Santa Claus. :grin:

Anyway, it's undeniable that if something happens to the brain, something happens to the mind.

What about your other belief - I haven't searched for it but I recall you saying it - that the mind is downloadable/uploadable? Clearly that's a view that is not entirely physical in re mind.

Sorry, memory issues, you said quite the opposite $\downarrow$

So what to think of the conjecture about mind uploading?
— Haglund
It's a non-starter because it assumes 'substance dualism' which is inconsistent with both the 'principle of causal closure' and 'conservation laws'. I think a more plausible conjecture is a brain transplant into a synthetic body or machine-system. — 180 Proof

Since information is uploadable and downloadable, does that mean, 180 Proof, information is nonphysical? What follows?

Harry Nyquist (/ˈnaɪkwɪst/, Swedish: [ˈnŷːkvɪst]; February 7, 1889 – April 4, 1976) was a Swedish-American physicist and electronic engineer who made important contributions to communication theory. — Wikipedia

Yer namesake Mark $\uparrow$

As for the classical or quantum problem, it's a switches and relays problem. What size are the switches and relays? Neurons and nerves seem to be the correct scale.

And, 180, the fact that you can post shows that you are adept at manipulating the non-physical. Think of your hand grasping a tennis ball. Your brain is like that only it has the ability to grasp a wide range of non-physicals.

Uncle Harry, yes, lots of stories. The ship ride over, Sunday visits, the boxes of files...

What about your other belief - I haven't searched for it but I recall you saying it - that the mind is downloadable / uploadable? — Agent Smith

Your "recall" is mistaken as your quote of me shows. As I've speculated on a number of threads, in principle(?) the mind-substrate can be extended – transfered – from the organic to a synthetic physical system :point: :nerd:

No.

Neurons and nerves seem to be the correct scale. — Mark Nyquist

"Correct scale" for what?

The procedure you describe (brain surgery) sounds like a primitive way to download the mind. Why not get right to the point - its the software (apps + files), not the hardware we're interested in.

:roll: :yawn:

:grin: In the neurosurgical procedure you described, what exactly is your self that's being transferred from organic substrate (brain) to inorganic subatrate?

Read what I wrote, Smith. Slowly. Carefuully. And the other links in that post too. Consider the contexts of those thread discussions. I'll answer any questions of my positions which are clearly informed by what I've actually written. Just do me that courtesy, amigo.

Read what I wrote, Smith. Slowly. Carefuully. And the other links in that post too. Consider the contexts of those thread discussions. I'll answer any questions of my positions which are clearly informed by what I've actually written. Just do me that courtesy, amigo. — 180 Proof

Please don't think I didn't read your post carefully. Sometimes, it seems, someone with not so a high IQ like myself can come off as rude & arrogant.

The way I see it, you're sympathetic to a staged surgical procedure, step 1 being removing one hemisphere, step 2 being installing a synthetic brain, step 3 being letting the two (one original hemisphere & the new synthetic hemisphere) talk to each other as part of the integration process, step 4 repeat the same thing with the other original hemispher. At the end of the procedure, we have a synthetic brain.

LO = Left original hemisphere
RO= Right original hemisphere

LS = Left synthetic hemisphere
RS = Right synthetic hemisphere

LO-RO $\to$ LS-RO $\to$ LS-RS

:groan:

edit after sleeping:

left organic hemisphere (LOH)
right organic hemisphere (ROH)

left synthetic hemiphere (LSH)

remove (LOH) and replace with (LSH)

when (ROH) dies or is euthanized, functioning (LSH) remains ...

intact brain - (LOH)¹ + corpus callosum
connected (LSH)² - (ROH)³ = fully functioning (LSH)

The point is (if, like me, functionalism-enactivism is your jam) psychological self-continuity, which is encoded in the physical (neurological) substrate, or the brain, is not systemically interrupted as even the most accurately scanned copy of "mind" (or connectome) would be and therefore not the same self (just like a "cloned person" would not be the same psychological self/subject as the original person). Only one functioning hemisphere of the human brain suffices for (regaining via neuroplasticity) complete brain functioning. A speculative, and I think plausible, extrapolation from the current state of cognitive neuroscience. IMO, "mind uploading/scanning" is old-fashioned 'spiritualist' science fantasy.

Deleted.