On 29 May 2014, at 08:58, [email protected] wrote:
On Wednesday, May 28, 2014 7:43:13 PM UTC+1, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Nice post!
Interesting, and indeed very reasonable with comp, in its expectable
natural realizations. I agree on points on salvia too, except that
salvia's reports witness extreme asymmetrical phenomena, which
suggests some disconnection between the left brain and the right
brain. Of course it is a very complex matter, but there are tools
(some a bit toxic though, some other not).
Salvia action is believed to be very specific, and what makes salvia
attractive for such studies is that when smoked, the experience last
for 4m to 8m in the average, on sober people. You feel quite well
after (unless the goal was taking a superdose for making a funny
video for youtube in company of light and noisy sitters, that is
using it contradicting the user guide, or common sense when you know
what the plant is capable of).
No doubt we will come back on this. I have *many* theories on salvia
in the comp realm. Including possible different report predictions
for different people.
Nice paper, but it still miss Everett's and comp's ways of
differentiation of consciousness.
well....they are interested in the hypothesis consciousness is
generated by the bits between the ears.
But this way of talking assumes the aristotelian identity thesis at
the start, and is very ambiguous in the platonist setting.
I would say that if "consciousness is generated by the bits between
tears" is in direct contradiction with the idea that a brain is a
machine. Indeed your consciousness is related to the infinitely many
instantiation of your brain (at the right level) which exists in
elementary (sigma_1) arithmetic. The bit between the ears are in your
head (to sum up with a pun).
The question from me to you would be, given the typical effects of
salvia are so close to key parts of your comp extension theories,
how did you manage to control for the null-hypothesis?
?
I usually explain that the salvia experience content looks quite
unlikely with comp, from the first person point of view. I have never
asserted that it confirms computationalism. The only thing which goes
well with comp is the fact that a mechanical perturbation of the brain
entails a change in consciousness, but that very specific change is
hard to believe when under salvia.
people frequently experience the feeling that if they are living that
experience, it has nothing to do with the intake of salvia: you feel
like awakening from a dream, and the salvia plant is part of that dream.
That being, salvia affects the brain like a drug, with very specific
effects statistically speaking, which if you go into looking for
computational, arithmetic or whatever truth, will give you 'answers'
that involve the archetypal effect of the drug PLUS whatever you are
imagining laid over the top?
I don't know.
Comp is not just testable, it is improvable, but to play fair the
game, and keep the comp qualia/quanta distinction, the improvement
should not just be based with the experimental facts, but with the
arithmetical formulation of the measure problem.
Consciousness is not located in the brain.
Oh really? Did you forget your logician hat this morning then?
?
It is the point of UDA: logic makes it impossible to locate
consciousness in the brain or to attach consciousness to the working
of a brain. Eventually, the working of a brain is explained by number
relations, and the brain is not responsible for consciousness. Yet
comp explains the role of the brain, which is no more to create
consciousness, but to makes it possible for it to manifest itself with
respect to other universal machines. A brain is more like a fllter of
(universal) consciousness/meaning than a "maker" of consciousness.
You do this a lot but when I mentioned that you did the other day,
you said you didn't believe me. Do you believe me now?
Not at all. You seem just not having read the UDA, which explains
precisely why consciousness is *not* a production of the brain, once
we agree that we are digitalizable machine.
It is a subtle and largely ignored point, because we are too much
influenced by the "naturalist religion" of Aristotle. It is important
to grasp the way comp solves the mind-body problem.
I think you told us that you reject it? I am not sure. If you reject
Everett it is normal that you reject comp.
Yes I definitely don't accept MWI.
OK. I knew but prefer to be sure. This explains why you dislike
computationalism.
I've explained why in the past. there are massive unrealized
assumptions involved in construction of MwI.
OK. Maybe you could provide a link. I disagree of course. There are
less assumption in Everett than in Copenhagen, and still less in comp.
I've listed some key ones...no one has addressed them...MWI is
unreliable knowledge while they are in place.
But elementary arithmetic contains (emulates) all computations. That
is a theorem, similar to the existence of infinitely many primes. That
is very reliable knowledge that no-one seriously doubt.
For the MWI, it sounds big, but only because we reify "material
universe", but this assume primitive matter which nobody can even show
how to test. That is an assumption not done in comp, which at the
start is agnaostic on this, and then it refutes it or show how much it
is not plausible (UDA step 7 and 8).
Likewise, the SWE implies the many universes (defined by set of events
close for interaction). You need to assume a mechanism disobeying the
SWE to filter one universe from all. See Richard recent
acknowledgement of this.
So your problem is not so much comp per se, but the entire
"everything" or "nothing physical" idea, which we discuss in this
group. I guess you do assume a form of physicalism. Then bu UDA,
indeed, you have to reject comp. It looks you should love UDA for
this, but then you can hate AUDA, for showing the limit of using UDA
against comp.
Bruno
(Note that Crick use comp in the paper, and indeed it is common in
that field, even Hameroff use comp (only Penrose suggested a non-
comp theory, where indeed gravitation collapse the wave in a way non
predictible by QM).
Bruno
On 28 May 2014, at 17:23, [email protected] wrote:
they were more likely to believe they were in an environment
completely different from the physical space they were actually in
-----> sounds familiar
they often believed to be interacting with "beings" such as
hallucinated dead people, aliens, fairies or mythical creatures
------> machines
the often reported "ego dissolution", a variety of experiences in
which the self ceased to exist in the user's subjective experience.
------> 3p?
Is the key to consciousness in the claustrum?
by Klaus M. Stiefel, The Conversation
The location of the claustrum (blue) and the cingulate cortex
(green), another brain region likely to act as a global integrator.
The person whose brain is shown is looking to the right (see the
inset in the top right corner). Credit: Brain ...more
Consciousness is one of the most fascinating and elusive phenomena
we humans face. Every single one of us experiences it but it
remains surprisingly poorly understood.
That said, psychology, neuroscience and philosophy are currently
making interesting progress in the comprehension of this phenomenon.
The main player in this story is something called the claustrum.
The word originally described an enclosed space in medieval
European monasteries but in the mammalian brain it refers to a
small sheet of neurons just below the cortex, and possibly derived
from it in brain development.
The cortex is the massive folded layer on top of the brain mainly
responsible for many higher brain functions such as language, long-
term planning and our advanced sensory functions.
Interestingly, the claustrum is strongly reciprocally connected to
many cortical areas. The visual cortex (the region involved in
seeing) sends axons (the connecting "wires" of the nervous system)
to the claustrum, and also receives axons from the claustrum.
The same is true for the auditory cortex (involved in hearing) and
a number of other cortex areas. A wealth of information converges
in the claustrum and leaves it to re-enter the cortex.
The connection
Francis Crick - who together with James Watson gave us the
structure of DNA - was interested in a connection between the
claustrum and consciousness.
In a recent paper, published in Frontiers in Integrative
Neuroscience, we have built on the ideas he described in his very
last scientific publication.
Crick and co-author Christoph Koch argued that the claustrum could
be a coordinator of cortical function and hence a "conductor of
consciousness".
Such percepts as colour, form, sound, body position and social
relations are all represented in different parts of the cortex. How
are they bound to a unified experience of consciousness? Wouldn't a
region exerting a (even limited) central control over all these
cortical areas be highly useful?
This is what Crick and Koch suggested when they hypothesised the
claustrum to be a "conductor of consciousness". But how could this
hypothesis about the claustrum's role be tested?
Plant power alters the mind
Salvia divinorum (Herba de Maria). Credit: Wikipedia, CC BY
Enter the plant Salvia divinorum, a type of mint native to Mexico.
The Mazatecs civilisation's priests would chew its leaves to get in
touch with the gods.
It's a powerful psychedelic, but not of the usual type. Substances
such as LSD andpsylocibin (the active compound in "magic"
mushrooms) mainly act by binding to the serotonin neuromodulator
receptor proteins.
It is not completely understood how these receptors bring about
altered states of consciousness, but a reduction of the inhibitory
(negative feedback) communication between neurons in the cortex
likely plays a role.
In contrast, Salvia divinorum acts on the kappa-opiate receptors.
These are structurally related, but their activation has quite
different effects than the mu-opiate receptorswhich bind substances
such as morphine or heroin.
In contrast to the mu-opiate receptors, which are involved in the
processing of pain, the role of the kappa-opiate receptors is
somewhat poorly understood.
Where are these kappa-opiate receptors located in the brain? You
might have guessed it, they are most densely concentrated in the
claustrum (and present at lower densities in a number of other
brain regions such as the frontal cortex and the amygdala).
So, the activity of Salvia likely inhibits the claustrum via its
activation of the kappa-opiate receptors. Consuming Salvia might
just cause the inactivation of the claustrum necessary to test
Crick and Koch's hypothesis.
Any volunteers?
Did we administer this psychedelic to a group of volunteers to then
record their hallucinations and altered perceptions? Well, no. To
get ethics approval for such an experiment with a substance
outlawed in Australia would be near impossible.
While Salvia is not known to be toxic or addictive, the current
societal climate is not very sympathetic towards psychoactive
substances other than alcohol.
But fortunately we had an alternative. The website Erowid.org hosts
a database of many thousand trip reports, submitted by psychedelic
enthusiasts, describing often in considerable detail what went on
in their minds when consuming a wide selection of substances.
We analysed trip reports from this website written by folks who had
consumed Salvia divinorum and, for comparison, LSD.
We found that subjects consuming Salvia were more likely to
experience a few select psychological effects:
they were more likely to believe they were in an environment
completely different from the physical space they were actually in
they often believed to be interacting with "beings" such as
hallucinated dead people, aliens, fairies or mythical creatures
the often reported "ego dissolution", a variety of experiences in
which the self ceased to exist in the user's subjective experience.
... and this means?
Altered surroundings, other beings and ego dissolution - this
surely hints at a disturbance of the "conductor of consciousness",
as expected if the conductor claustrum is perturbed by Salvia
divinorum.
If a region central to the integration of consciously represented
information is disturbed in its function, we would expect
fundamental disturbances in the conscious experience. The core of a
person's consciousness seems to be altered by Salvia divinorum,
rather than merely some distortions of vision or audition.
We believe that the psychological effects of Salvia divinorum,
together with the massive concentration of the kappa-opiate
receptors (the target molecules of Salvia divinorum) in the
claustrum support its role as a central coordinator of consciousness.
It's worth noting that our results were not black-and-white. The
users of LSD also experienced (albeit to a lesser degree)
translation into altered environments, fairies and ego dissolution.
This, together with a review of the literature convinced us that
the claustrum is one of the conductors of consciousness, with brain
areas cingulate cortex and pulvinar likely being the other ones.
Still, the claustrum appears to be special in the brain's
connectivity and we think thatSalvia can inactivate it. We hope
that the experimental neuroscience community will take advantage of
the window into the mind which this unique substance provides.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
send an email to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
send an email to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
