How does the mind arise from the brain? Novel idea

_{Denyse O'Leary

January 25, 2015

Intelligent Design, Mind, Neuroscience, News}

Share: Facebook; Twitter; LinkedIn; Flipboard; Print; Email

From hplus Magazine:

Abstract: Human behaviour is controlled not only by instincts but also by the mind. However, the relation of the mind to the brain has not been fully explained. In conventional interpretations, the mind is not believed to be located at any one spot in the brain, which, if true, suggests that we will remain forever unable to explain the mind completely, regardless of our understanding of the brain’s local functions. Brain development resembles the branching process of the cherry tree, in which the trunk branches off into limbs and limbs into twigs. As a novel method of understanding the mind, we compared the patterns of neural stem cell activity with the growth patterns of meristematic cells in the cherry tree. Studying plants in the natural world enables us to keep an open mind.

It’s okay, except for one thing: Ask the cherry tree for a comment and see what you get. Get back to us with the answer. World awaits with interest.

See also: Why naturalizing the mind will never work

and

What great physicists have said about immateriality and consciousness

Hat tip: Stephanie West Allen at Brains on Purpose

Follow UD News at Twitter!

Comments

Dionisio @ 129
Me_Think: My earlier comment said my Arduino is not conscious. GP claimed awareness and consciousness were the same term. I claim sensory awareness derived from sensors is not consciousness. (AFAIK no one in Arduino community claims his Arduino is conscious!)
You have agreed - again !
Consciousness is before matter and apart from it.
So everybody's consciousness was floating around before they were created ? If it is apart from body/ matter now, where is it floating? Assuming it is floating right above your head and it's diameter is greater than your body width, won't consciousness of your friend mix up with yours when he comes near you? Is consciousness energy or a field ? I don't understand how it is apart from matter and was created before matter but was paired with right body after body was created. Can you explain ?
That’s all, buddy. Enjoy working on your super sensitive Arduino.
What do you mean by 'super sensitive' ?Me_Think_{February 6, 2015
February
02
Feb
6
06
2015
09:05 AM
9
09
05
AM
PDT}

Me_Think I see you did not understand my comment #126. Bottom line: all the daydreaming about 'strong' AI emotional sensitive robots is just hogwash on steroids. That's all, buddy. Enjoy working on your super sensitive Arduino. Consciousness is before matter and apart from it. Emotional human-like robots are figments in the prolific imagination of the 'strong' AI folks. pie pie in the sky. :)Dionisio_{February 6, 2015
February
02
Feb
6
06
2015
08:06 AM
8
08
06
AM
PDT}

Me_Think Maybe these folks at UC Berkeley could use some help from your sensitive Arduino stuff? http://www.rdmag.com/news/2015/02/human-insights-inspire-solutions-household-robots?et_cid=4400703&et_rid=653535995&type=headline :)Dionisio_{February 6, 2015
February
02
Feb
6
06
2015
07:57 AM
7
07
57
AM
PDT}

Dionisio @ 126
BTW, your Arduino is not alone. No AI is or will be capable of conscious decisions and voluntary reactions to the surrounding events
:-) My earlier comment said my Arduino is not conscious. GP claimed awareness and consciousness were the same term. I claim sensory awareness derived from sensors is not consciousness. (AFAIK no one in Arduino community claims his Arduino is conscious!) You have agreed. Edit:
If awareness derived from sensors is equivalent to consciousness, then my Arduino is conscious!!.
May be above sentence confused you. Can you explain what you understand from the above sentence?Me_Think_{February 4, 2015
February
02
Feb
4
04
2015
09:10 AM
9
09
10
AM
PDT}

#125 Me_Think
If awareness derived from sensors is equivalent to consciousness, then my Arduino is conscious!!. If just the coolness of ice against my skin is defined as consciousness, then the skin is conscious. Skin is the ‘I’!
Are you sure about what you wrote? Please, take more time to think. Don't hasten your comments. As far as I understand it, the 'coolness' (or relative temp diff) of ice is detected by your skin, but the actual sensation of "coolness" is produced by your CNS after processing the information received from the remote sensors. As far as I'm aware of, the sensors detect external signals in the form of light, heat, color, smell, etc. Then they convert the information into electric impulses that can be transmitted -according to a previously established communication protocol- to the CNS for processing, interpretation, and generation of corresponding involuntary reactions, or for your consciousness to indicate the desired voluntary reactions for each case. Perhaps we could debate the programming of involuntary reactions to some surrounding events within certain levels of AI, but how would you argue the voluntary reactions, associated with consciousness, which your Arduino lacks and will always lack? BTW, your Arduino is not alone. No AI is or will be capable of conscious decisions and voluntary reactions to the surrounding events detected by any number and kinds of sensors.Dionisio_{February 4, 2015
February
02
Feb
4
04
2015
08:57 AM
8
08
57
AM
PDT}

gpuccio @ 123, Dionisio @ 124 If awareness derived from sensors is equivalent to consciousness, then my Arduino is conscious!!. If just the coolness of ice against my skin is defined as consciousness, then the skin is conscious. Skin is the 'I'!Me_Think_{February 1, 2015
February
02
Feb
1
01
2015
07:42 PM
7
07
42
PM
PDT}

#123 gpuccio That was a very funny way to illustrate it. You have a very effective sense of humor. Too bad some of your interlocutors don't want to appreciate it. Their problem, not ours. :)Dionisio_{February 1, 2015
February
02
Feb
1
01
2015
07:30 PM
7
07
30
PM
PDT}

Dionisio: Just a comment on a common procedure used by our interlocutors to defend what is not defensible: redefining words, and profiting of the new ambiguity generated by that redefinition. Please note how Me_Think states, in post #110: "Pretty much every sensor in my Arduino makes the board aware of it’s surrounding." And then in post #115: "If my Arduino board was conscious, I would be world famous, not famous just among my friends." So, we have here a double meaning of two related words, "aware" and "conscious". Now, just to start somewhere, the site dictionary.com this the following as a definition of "aware". 1) having knowledge; conscious; cognizant: "aware of danger". As you can see, "aware" can certainly be used in the sense of "conscious". That is the most common meaning of "aware", and certainly the natural meaning of the word in a discussion about AI and consciousness. Unfortunately, if we use "aware" in that sense, the two statements made by our "friend" become obviously self-contradictory. So, what is Me_Think trying to do? It's simple. He is trying to redefine "aware", so that it means something different from "conscious". That's fine with me. Let's try. WE can say that something is "aware" of its surroundings when it receives some information from those surroundings. But, in that sense, everything would be "aware". An apple certainly receives information from its surroundings, in the form of light rays, for example. OK, maybe that is too generic. So, let's say that something is "aware" when it not only receives information, but in some way registers or measures it, possibly in some symbolic form. OK, that's better. So, let's say, a scale is certainly "aware" of the things it weighs. Which, I believe, are part of its surroundings. Is that what Me_Think means by the word "sensors"? No, no, that is too gross, certainly. A scale? "Aware"? But... let's say a photocell connected to a door opener? That is certainly aware of its surroundings, I would say. It not only receives information from things and transforms that information into other forms, it also "reacts" to that information. We certainly have the whole thing here: input, elaboration, output. No consciousness probably, but who cares? We have redefined "aware", after all. And we have created an "aware" system with much less than Me_Think's Arduino board. A good result, indeed. Maybe I can become "famous among my friends", too! But I dare not hope so much.gpuccio_{February 1, 2015
February
02
Feb
1
01
2015
12:37 PM
12
12
37
PM
PDT}

Post #79 seems very appropriate to be repeated at this point too. :) Looking back, perhaps there was some time squandered starting at my post #106 (or maybe even earlier)? However, someone in this site has suggested that it's good that the comments get written and remain recorded here for the onlookers/lurkers to read. Thus they should have enough information to arrive at their own educated conclusions. :)Dionisio_{February 1, 2015
February
02
Feb
1
01
2015
03:37 AM
3
03
37
AM
PDT}

#117 kairosfocus Exactly. I will highly appreciate your comments on the discussion that has followed my comment posted @84. I didn't expect that comment, which was about a reflection on a very personal situation, would trigger such a relatively long follow-up discussion (almost 1/3 of the entire thread so far?). Basically Me_Think reacted to my comment 84, and the exchange that followed is recorded here in this thread.Dionisio_{January 31, 2015
January
01
Jan
31
31
2015
07:19 AM
7
07
19
AM
PDT}

#116 Me_Think
Emotion is an electrical impulse triggered by your senses.
That seems "a little" inaccurate, to put it nicely. The external signals your senses detect are converted into electrical impulses that serve as the source information that is processed by your brain. The emotional state you might be in is much more complex than what you have described. The condition of your consciousness, which communicates with this world through your brain, may determine your emotional reactions to what you sense from your surroundings. See the WWII example in my post #113. At the end of the day, it's all about love. We are to love God with all our strength, and to love other people as we love ourselves. Without love anything we say or do is senseless. Any deviation from that path is simply evil.Dionisio_{January 31, 2015
January
01
Jan
31
31
2015
06:58 AM
6
06
58
AM
PDT}

#115 Me_Think
If my Arduino board was conscious, I would be world famous, not famous just among my friends.
You don't have to create consciousness in order to be world famous. Some people are world famous without even knowing what consciousness really is. Just look around in the media, which is flooded with so much 'world famous' trash. Welcome to this world.Dionisio_{January 31, 2015
January
01
Jan
31
31
2015
05:01 AM
5
05
01
AM
PDT}

#115 Me_Think
Which part of my repeated reply : “(and I even answered a related question you asked @ 97) that feelings could not be wholly or faithfully experienced by an AI, even with a sensing robotic body, beyond mere implanted simulation.” didn’t you understand?!
Your comments only address the physicochemical part of the emotional state, i.e. the material effects that whatever causes the emotional state may have on our bodies physiological functioning. But the emotional states have their most important component in the nonmaterial realm. When Mozart, Beethoven, Bach, Handel, Hayden, composed their classic masterpieces, it was not the result of physicochemical processes in their brains. They got inspired through mysterious processes we don't understand, hence can't reproduce in robots. Strong AI is deceiving hogwash. But you don't see it that way. That's why we can't even have a meaningful discussion, because your vision field is limited by your narrow materialistic worldview. Obviously you can't or don't want to (which is worse) see beyond your materialistic boundaries. I pray that your spiritual eyes get wide open and you can think outside the box. Only then you'll start to discover the true wonders beyond your current boundaries, and will enjoy the unending revelation of the ultimate reality. Have a good weekend.Dionisio_{January 31, 2015
January
01
Jan
31
31
2015
04:47 AM
4
04
47
AM
PDT}

We are back to what it is like to be a bat, or to be appeared to redly . . .kairosfocus_{January 31, 2015
January
01
Jan
31
31
2015
04:26 AM
4
04
26
AM
PDT}

Dionisio @ 144,
Is there a difference between emotions and their visible physicochemical effects?
Emotion is an electrical impulse triggered by your senses. physicochemical effects are what the brain dictates by releasing hormones when it processes the impulse.Me_Think_{January 30, 2015
January
01
Jan
30
30
2015
11:14 PM
11
11
14
PM
PDT}

Dionisio @ 113
Can your Arduino experience deep sadness for the loss of loved being? How does that work? Being aware of the surrounding does not guarantee loving.
No. It doesn't. Of course.
Your Arduino doesn’t possess any consciousness. You created your Arduino without consciousness,
If my Arduino board was conscious, I would be world famous, not famous just among my friends.
The emotional robots are hogwash, wishful thinking, pie pie in the sky, Alice in wonderland, daydreaming, whatever you may want to call it, but they are not emotional in the human sense of the term. Gpuccio is correct in his post 101. Is that why you have avoided to answer my easy questions right away?
Which part of my repeated reply : "(and I even answered a related question you asked @ 97) that feelings could not be wholly or faithfully experienced by an AI, even with a sensing robotic body, beyond mere implanted simulation." didn't you understand?!Me_Think_{January 30, 2015
January
01
Jan
30
30
2015
11:10 PM
11
11
10
PM
PDT}

#112 Me_Think Is there a difference between emotions and their visible physicochemical effects?Dionisio_{January 30, 2015
January
01
Jan
30
30
2015
08:32 PM
8
08
32
PM
PDT}

#110 Me_Think
I certainly don’t agree that robots can not be ‘aware’ of their environment. Pretty much every sensor in my Arduino makes the board aware of it’s surrounding.
Can your Arduino experience deep sadness for the loss of loved being? How does that work? Being aware of the surrounding does not guarantee loving. The Nazi personnel that oversaw the prisoners going to the gas chambers in the concentration camps during WWII, most probably were very aware of the surrounding, but since they did not love their neighbors as themselves, they could not experience any sadness for the horrible fate of those poor people. They were pretty much like biological robots, because they just followed directions, but did not love their victims, therefore could not experience the deep sadness that I feel when I read about the horrendous things that took place in those evil places, which make me ashamed of my human condition. Their consciousness led them in the wrong direction, because they willingly surrendered to the evil one. Your Arduino doesn't possess any consciousness. You created your Arduino without consciousness, because you don't know how to create consciousness and never will. Actually, you're not alone, because nobody knows it and never will. The emotional robots are hogwash, wishful thinking, pie pie in the sky, Alice in wonderland, daydreaming, whatever you may want to call it, but they are not emotional in the human sense of the term. Gpuccio is correct in his post 101. Is that why you have avoided to answer my easy questions right away?Dionisio_{January 30, 2015
January
01
Jan
30
30
2015
08:02 PM
8
08
02
PM
PDT}

Dionisio @ 111
read it carefully and see if you can understand it....
Please read my comment # 105 carefully and see if you understand it:
It has been clearly stated in the article (and I even answered a related question you asked @ 97) that feelings could not be wholly or faithfully experienced by an AI, even with a sensing robotic body, beyond mere implanted simulation.
Me_Think_{January 30, 2015
January
01
Jan
30
30
2015
07:17 PM
7
07
17
PM
PDT}

#105 Me_Think
What do you mean by ‘deep loss without loving’ and all other questions ?
Sorry, the question was written incorrectly. Instead of 'loss' it should say 'sadness'. Deep sadness. Ok, here is the correction to what I wrote in 100, read it carefully and see if you can understand it: When someone mourns the loss of a loved being, the sadness is caused by the awareness of that loss and the reaction to it. The physiological processes you listed seem to be just the consequences or the visible reflection of the emotional state. 1. But how can a robot experience deep sadness without loving? 2. How can a robot love someone? 3. Is there a technical description of love? I’m talking unconditional love, which implies voluntary commitment. 4. How would a robot make a voluntary commitment to love someone? Why? 5. What if this is loving an ‘unlovable’ (in worldly terms) being? I have some friends who plan to adopt a child with a heart problem, that will have to be treated. They have their own ‘biological’ children. 6. Could a robot make a decision like that? Why?Dionisio_{January 30, 2015
January
01
Jan
30
30
2015
07:00 PM
7
07
00
PM
PDT}

Dionisio @ 108
Do you agree with gpuccio on his comments posted @101?
No. He has said a lot of other things which we are not discussing at all. I agree only to the extent that feelings in a robot can't be beyond mere implanted simulation. I don't agree that consciousness can't be an emergent property of our brain,and I certainly don't agree that robots can not be 'aware' of their environment. Pretty much every sensor in my Arduino makes the board aware of it's surrounding.Me_Think_{January 30, 2015
January
01
Jan
30
30
2015
06:46 PM
6
06
46
PM
PDT}

Dionisio @ 107
-No one has bothered to do that as there has to some point in replicating those in a robot ! -Didn’t understand the reason why it hasn’t been done. Can you say it differently?
No point means - What objective would that achieve in a robot ? Who is going to fund the study which has no relevance beyond simulation? It can't even be claimed to be basic science research.Me_Think_{January 30, 2015
January
01
Jan
30
30
2015
06:38 PM
6
06
38
PM
PDT}

#105 Me_Think
Yes, of course they are physiological effects- that’s the reason you can’t hope to simulate those in non-biological robots. What do you mean by ‘deep loss without loving’ and all other questions ? It has been clearly stated in the article (and I even answered a related question you asked @ 97) that feelings could not be wholly or faithfully experienced by an AI, even with a sensing robotic body, beyond mere implanted simulation.
Do you agree with gpuccio on his comments posted @101?
robots cannot be aware of anything, least of all feel. Configurations of matter cannot generate consciousness. Cognition and feeling are the primordial experiences of consciousness. Therefore, configurations of matter can generate neither cognition nor feeling of any kind. Very simply, machines are aware of nothing.
Dionisio_{January 30, 2015
January
01
Jan
30
30
2015
06:35 PM
6
06
35
PM
PDT}

Me_Think You commented on my post 99 but did not answer my last question in it: Didn’t understand the reason why it hasn’t been done. Can you say it differently? Would you mind to answer? Thank you.Dionisio_{January 30, 2015
January
01
Jan
30
30
2015
06:23 PM
6
06
23
PM
PDT}

Me_Think You commented on my post 99 but did not answer my first question in it: If they claim that it could be done, then has anyone, anywhere, indicated how it could be done, as far as you’re aware of? Would you mind to answer it? Thank you.Dionisio_{January 30, 2015
January
01
Jan
30
30
2015
06:19 PM
6
06
19
PM
PDT}

Dionisio @ 99
I could claim that I could fly to Jupiter this summer. The problem is if someone asks me to describe in technical details how I plan to do it.
You could, but people wouldn't believe you because the time frame is very short and you are not an intergalactic travel expert! Dionisio @ 100
Aren’t those physiological effects of emotions? When someone mourns the loss of a loved being, the sadness is caused by the awareness of that loss and the reaction to it. The physiological processes you listed seem to be just the consequences or the visible reflection of the emotional state. 1. But how can a robot experience that deep loss without loving?....
Yes,of course they are physiological effects- that's the reason you can't hope to simulate those in non-biological robots. What do you mean by 'deep loss without loving' and all other questions ? It has been clearly stated in the article (and I even answered a related question you asked @ 97) that feelings could not be wholly or faithfully experienced by an AI, even with a sensing robotic body, beyond mere implanted simulation.Me_Think_{January 30, 2015
January
01
Jan
30
30
2015
06:08 PM
6
06
08
PM
PDT}

DATCG Thank you for your comments and for sharing all that interesting information.Dionisio_{January 30, 2015
January
01
Jan
30
30
2015
04:36 PM
4
04
36
PM
PDT}

gpuccio Yes, as usual, you've stated it very simply and clearly. Can't add anything to it. Thank you.Dionisio_{January 30, 2015
January
01
Jan
30
30
2015
04:29 PM
4
04
29
PM
PDT}

Dionisio, just read your MIT link...
To do that, his team uses algorithms they have developed themselves or adapted from network analysis strategies used to analyze the Internet. "Ideally, just a few such nodes would light up, but this is usually not the case, Fraenkel says. Instead, you end up with a wiring diagram with color all over the place." “We lovingly call those things ‘hairballs,’” he says. “You get these giant hairball diagrams which really haven’t made the problem any easier — in fact, they’ve made it harder. So our algorithms go into that hairball and try to figure out which piece of it is most relevant to the disease, by weighing the probability of different kinds of events being disease-relevant.” Those algorithms filter out the irrelevant information, or noise, and zoom in on the pieces of the network that seem to be the most likely to be related to the disease in question. Then, the researchers do experiments in living cells or animals to test the models generated by the algorithms. Using this approach, Fraenkel has developed model networks for Huntington’s disease and glioblastoma. Such studies have revealed interactions that might never have been otherwise identified: For example, blocking estrogen can help prevent the growth of glioblastoma cells. “The fundamental thing we’re trying to do is take an unbiased view of the biology,” Fraenkel says. “We’re going to look everywhere. We’ll let the data tell us which processes are important and which ones are not.”
thanks for link, reminds me how Microsoft and Bill Gates began researching disease with emphasis on treating viruses as biological programs and information. This goes back to Systems Biology from an engineering and design paradigm. The heuristic is more rewarding as discovery I think if thought from a Design perspective. also, thought you might enjoy this if you had not seen it... A comparative approach for the investigation of biological information processing: An examination of the structure and function of computer hard drives and DNA Yes, it's a reach, but the thought exercise is good from a systems overview perspective, especially epigenetics.DATCG_{January 30, 2015
January
01
Jan
30
30
2015
01:46 PM
1
01
46
PM
PDT}

Dionisio: just my simple idea: robots cannot be aware of anything, least of all feel. Configurations of matter cannot generate consciousness. Cognition and feeling are the primordial experiences of consciousness. Therefore, configurations of matter can generate neither cognition nor feeling of any kind. Very simply, machines are aware of nothing.gpuccio_{January 30, 2015
January
01
Jan
30
30
2015
11:40 AM
11
11
40
AM
PDT}

1 2 3 … 5 Next

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Leave a Reply