On 24 Feb 2012, at 21:51, Terren Suydam wrote:
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 3:30 PM, Terren Suydam <terren.suy...@gmail.com
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 2:27 PM, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net>
On 2/24/2012 10:26 AM, Terren Suydam wrote:
I certainly will. In the meantime, do you have an example from
(or any other source) that could shed light on the pain/pleasure
I think emotions represent something above and beyond the more
fundamental feelings of pleasure and pain. Fear, for example, is
explainable using Damasio's framework as such, and I can translate it
to the way I am asking the question as above:
Question: What kind of organization arose during the evolutionary
process that led directly to the subjective experience of fear?
Answer: A cognitive architecture in which internal body states are
modeled and integrated using the same representational apparatus that
models the external world, so that one's adaptive responses
(fight/flight/freeze) to threatening stimuli become integrated into
the organism's cognitive state of affairs. In short, fear is what it
feels like to have a fear response (as manifest in the body by
hormonal responses) to some real or imagined stimuli.
You can substitute any emotion for fear, so long as you can identify
the way that emotion manifests in the body/brain in terms of hormonal
or other mechanisms. But when it comes to pain and pleasure, I don't
think that it is necessary to have such an advanced cognitive
architecture, I think. So on a more fundamental level, the question
What kind of organization arose during the evolutionary process that
led directly to the subjective experience of pain and pleasure?
Or put another way, what kind of mechanism feels pleasurable or
painful from the inside?
Presumably the answer to this question occurred earlier in the
evolutionary process than the emergence of fear, surprise, hunger,
To go a little further with this, take sexual orgasm. What is
happening during orgasm that makes it so pleasurable?
Presumably there are special circuits in the brain that get activated,
which correlate to the flush of orgasmic pleasure. But what is special
about those circuits? From a 3p perspective, how is one brain circuit
differentiated from another? It can't be as simple as the
neurotransmitters involved; what would make one neurotransmitter be
causative of pain and another of pleasure? It's shape? That seems
It seems that the consequence of that neural circuit firing would have
to achieve some kind of systemic effect that is characterized... how?
Pain is just as mysterious. It's not as simple as "what it feels like
for a system to become damaged". Phantom limbs, for example, are often
excruciatingly painful. Pain is clearly in the mind. What cognitive
mechanism could you characterize as feeling painful from the inside?
Failure to account for this in mechanistic terms, for me, is a direct
threat to the legitimacy of mechanism.
Failure to account for this in *any* 3p sense would be a direct threat
to the legitimacy of science.
I am not sure only mechanism is in difficulty here, unless you have a
reason to believe that "infinities" could explain the pain quale.
On the contrary mechanism explains that there is an unavoidable clash
between the 1p view and the 3p view. The 1p view (Bp & p, say) is the
same as the 3p view (Bp), but this is only "known" by the divine
intellect (G*). It cannot be known by the correct machine itself. So
mechanism (or weaker) *can* explain why the 1p seems non mechanical,
and in some sense is not 1p-mechanical, which explains why we feel
something like a dualism. This dualism really exist epistemologically,
even if the divine intellect (G*) knows that is an illusion. It is a
real self-referentially correct "illusion".
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at