As one of the fundamental dimensions of the universe, time doubtless has a regular flow. But people stuck behind a flock of Canada geese crossing a road don’t experience time in the same way as people rushing to complete a report in time for the Big Board Meeting in two hours.
Mind
Researchers: The human brain and the universe are remarkably similar
Even though the universe is 27 orders of magnitude bigger than a singe human brain, remarkable similarities emerged.
Is Jerry Coyne undercutting his own argument against free will?
Michael Egnor: “Except for action of any quantum events”? I challenge Coyne: What in nature isn’t the action of quantum events? Certainly, every event in the brain is quantum in nature—every brain state, every action potential, every secretion of a neurotransmitter, every bit of protein synthesis or ion flow—is the consequence of quantum events.
A debate at Scientific American: Can a pill change your mind about basic issues in life?
Readers who remain skeptical that hallucinogens can change our values may wonder how religious and political values— so often rooted in decades of history, family history, and personal experience—could really be overturned by a mere trip.
A return of purpose to biology?
He turns out to be looking for a “bottom up” theory of agency—that is, a materialist one. And he admits that there is no such theory but he offers “a sketch of what a solution might look like.” One suspects that materialists will be offering such sketches centuries from now.
Researchers: We think we know why humans are smarter than animals
Yet, despite doing completely different things, the human brain uses the same equipment as the chimpanzee brain. Not a good time to be a shallow naturalist. Maybe a deep naturalist; not a shallow one.
The philosopher and the biologist offer a “fantasy” of how Darwinism can create minds
The problem isn’t with their believing that cells feature lots of intelligence but with their effort to equate human and cellular intelligence. Human intelligence is something quite different.
Cells discovered in the human brain keep track of time
Jon Hamilton: The cells are called time cells, and they place a sort of time stamp on memories as they are being formed. That allows us to recall sequences of events or experiences in the right order.
Why, as a neurosurgeon, Michael Egnor believes in free will
Egnor: “An intellectual seizure would be a seizure that caused abstract thought, such as logic, or reasoning, or mathematics. People never have, for example, mathematics seizures—seizures in which they involuntarily do calculus or arithmetic. This observation, which is as true today as it was in Penfield’s time nearly a century ago, begs for explanation.” He offers an argument for the immaterial powers of the mind.
How can humans be prewired to recognize words? Yet, say researchers, we are…
Contrary to what psychologists had supposed, the ability to seek meaning is built in, not taught.
Michael Egnor addresses an objection to free will raised here at Uncommon Descent
Egnor: [fMRI isn’t decisive.] But fMRI is worthless in the neuroscience of free will. To understand why, note that fMRI has very poor temporal resolution. fMRI measures changes in blood flow in the brain in response to activity of neurons, and these changes lag neuronal activity by at least several seconds.
Silicon Valley tried to produce a mind but couldn’t. Why?
Quantum computers will not solve Silicon Valley’s problem. Quantum computers play by the same rules as digital ones: Meaningful information still requires an interpreter (observer) to relate the map to the territory.
Free will makes more sense of our world than determinism—and science certainly allows for it
Scientists weigh in on both sides but accepting free will allows us to avoid some serious problems around logic and personal freedom.
Neuroscientist rejects reductionism
Keeps his job, we hope.
Mike Egnor on why Coyne and Hossenfelder are wrong to deny free will
Egnor: Now let’s get to the neuroscience. Neuroscience has a lot to contribute to the debate over free will and all of it supports the reality of free will. There isn’t a shred of neuroscientific evidence that contradicts the reality of free will.