This is because of the difficulty in explaining how mental activities, such as thoughts and emotions, can be implemented by physical structures such as neurons and synapses, — Manuel

What's the difficulty?

I think I have... I mistook triangulation for trinity.

Anyone who wants to bet about the outcome?

However, when dealing with questions of ultimate reality, especially with questions of "pure science", the "universe" should be given primacy of place. — Michael Zwingli

As a particle physicist I should agree wholeheartedly...But... isnt the particle picture, quantum fields of particles and their gauge field mediated interactions (fluctuating gauge fields taking care, in popular, virtual particle exchange) a mind's picture? I dont say this mental picture isnt pointing to the stuff in the outer physical world, but the appearance of that physical world is mind-dependent.

A latter day Archimedes, I shout, "eureka!" — Michael Zwingli

Sapristi! :grin:

ah, I see. That seems to mean I cannot do it on my phone. — Michael Zwingli

Like this. When you keep your finger on the text you can select.

Im on phone too. My laptop needs lapup. ☺

Wasnt it the US supplying the Mudjahedin with shoulder worn rocket emitters including a dose of rockets? Laying the seeds of the 9/11 attacks?

Will someone please tell me how to quote a post in replying here? — Michael Zwingli

Select what you wanna quote. Then press "quote".

Can anyone explain the crucial difference between panpsychism and neutral monism? — SolarWind

Panpsychisms says all is psyche, soul. Neutral monism says creation and creation are the same, being neutral about mind and matter.

But cant there be philosophy without metaohysics?

Who then are the undertakers — Prishon

Ah! I get it! Philosophy, the very fact that it continues to use meta, buries the LP's. Yes. Its clear now! Thanks! ☺

The question has a type error — khaled

I wont call that a typo. Its a coneptual error.

Neural network systems are RUN on computers. AI are programs, not devices. This is like asking “What makes it so difficult for an ordinary phone to text when a texting app does it so much easier”
2mReply — khaled

Are thers no actual virtual neurons involved?

Thanks. Goodday!

Beyond my ken I'm afraid. Good day.
11mReplyOptions — TheMadFool

Its not that difficult to understand! Everyone says"oöhhh... Quantum field theory..." but actually its very easy.

Those that have attempted to bury philosophy by proclaiming it's death or irrelevance (particularly with regard to metaphysics), have been proven wrong by the fact that philosophy has continued to be practiced. — emancipate

Who then are the undertakers? The ones who shout: "Philosophy is dead!", or philosophers of the non-metaphysical (is physical?) view?

I want mandatory vaccinations and passports for Republicans/Trumpsters and those who don't want them. Voluntary for everyone else. — James Riley

:grin:

Altough... This would mean all survive. But they cant transmit.


"those who don't want them"

Who are those?

Pattern recognition is a sense of repetition — Josh Alfred

What do you mean by this? Can you give an example?

That's why the ETs are observing us, to see if we can do it. Hence all the wild UFO sensor readings on US military aircraft. — Count Timothy von Icarus

:grin:

yes, and the subjective "world" produced by the brain is dependent and a function largely of the body. — Michael Zwingli

:grin:

Yes. All three, the body, the brain, and the outer world are interdependent. If you consider the body to be you then the question of who thinks becomes obsolete.

I mean, I have read the book "We are our Brains", by a Dutch writer, but cant you just as well say that we are our body?

think your statement true, so long as the brain is remembered to be an integral part of "our bodies, the true us". — Michael Zwingli

Cant we see the inner world as being on equal level with the outer physical world?

Philosophy buries its undertakers’ ~ — Wayfarer

Please... Enlighten me! Im thinking about it but it doesnt click. :smile:

I believe in the trinity theory of consciousness.

it can only be said that the person, rather than the brain, is thinking, because our thoughts are highly dependent upon the state of our bodies and are continuously effected by neurally transmitted information from our bodies — Michael Zwingli

That being the case its the brain that thinks and our bodies (the true us) seeing it.

No
Against
Against

To balance the predictability. And because its the true me.

How predictable this poll. Before seeing I knew the outcome already!

Can both be had together? The intuitive understanding seems to be that the shorter (space) the faster (time) but Fermat's principle shows that a shorter time may actually require a longer distance.
3h — TheMadFool

The shorter the faster has a relation to the uncertainty principle. The shorter the distance the greater the uncertainty in momentum (and thus velocity. Now velocity in relativity is velocity through spacetime. All particles move with the speed of light through spcetime. A particle standing still (which is impossible in QM) is moving with c through time. Time hasnt got a fixed pace in GR. If space is curved, then time is too (the space expansion metric, the FLMR metric, has constant time, already hinting at it being wrong wrong). In flat space time runs the fastest while in curve space it flows slower. Efficient time. You can use space efficiently but how to use time efficiently?

Of all possible paths between two spacetime points the most probable will probably be realized. If there are two particles starting from two fixed points (alwaya in spacetime or energy-momentum space) then they will arrive at their final points in phasespace by means of all intermediate interactions with the virtual field that takes care of the interactions. And there are infinite many. Each of these paths is comprised in Feynman diagrams, representing the path integrals of the Lagrangians. There is a zeroth order diagram. This one takes all non-interacting part of the parts into conseideratio. The first order diagram that of all paths of the two particles while interacting once. This is the popular view of, say, two electrons interacting by means of exchanging one photon. Etc.

So, what even means efficiency of space, let alone of time?

Only in the sense that any information we receive is incomplete — Possibility

Now why is that?

Re "triangular ideas", etc.: Can you give a practical example? — Alkis Piskas

Is this addressed to me?

Prishon Philosophy is all about flow — Olivier5

Especially those headtailslets (or tailheadslets) flowing...

Philosophy is all about flow — Olivier5

Philosophy will never be the same again! :grin: :starstruck:

...when you go with the flow. Hasnt the singer stopped voluntary to go with flow?

If the brain can't think then what does? I'm inclined to answer this with a not so appropiate joke. So I won't answer like this (a bit of fun can get too much if it's more than a bit).

I don't understand why you say that the brain can't think. Why do you write this?. My answer is a long one. It's all about a three-unity. Physical world. You=body, inner magical world. Once they were one.

The first answer that came up in my head btw, was "my d××k..."

One needs to losen up once in a while. — Olivier5

Let it all flow!!!

Now, tim wood claims that patterns are mental (all in the head), we could even say it's projected onto the world (look up pareidolia) by our minds - I guess tim wood means to say we see what our minds want to see. — TheMadFool

If patterns are mental than @timwood must be a pattern..

Possibility Don't go Jordan Peterson on me — TheMadFool

:lol:

Excuse me?

Metaphysics will never die. — Corvus

:100:

Metaphysics was dismissed as non-sense — Corvus

Then why is this a topic so "heavily" discussed in philosophy? When does physics stop to make sense and the meta show up? I like your new image, btw!