Hello, A short while ago I was at one of those brain scans (AMC and VU Amsterdam). I have also participated in the letter test. Yes it is true when you think of one letter a particular place in the brain gets active. And you may suggest that when then that part in the brain gets active you think of that letter. Now there is a big problem with this test. We tested about 15 people over a few days. And every one of the 15, was activating a different part in the brain while seeing the same letter, repeatingly. So to know what is going on in the brains we had to modify the program 15 times, only to know when someone was thinking of one letter. There was even a more disturbing fact to the research, because when people were put to stress same parts in the brain got active while thinking of a different letter. Our research conclusion was that it was impossible to create a general mindmap and that personal mindmaps are very unreliable. Also a conclusion was that there were very much side effects in different studies. What made brain science not just science but a sum of a lot of different studies.
I am aware that I cannot put a conclusion to research without knowing the whole deal. Because there is always a flipside to a story. For example. With magnetic waves we were stimulating a specific part behind the ear. What happend was that the people exposed to the test got spiritual feelings. Now a christian would say: You see God created our mind and put it there. An Atheist would say you see God is an creation of the mind. It is our personal point of view that makes the conclusions. So I will take none at all. I tell you this because it is the working of the brain, people put conclusions to infinity. It is my point of view that we should not seek in the brain but in the thinking that it produces to infinity. Matthijs On 4 mrt, 05:44, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > There is science on what thought might be, and speculations by > scientists on what the role and 'mechanics' of thought in science > might be. It varies from quite precise experiments that demonstrate > most decisions are made before we are consciously aware of them to a > metaphysics of creativity. > > On 4 Mar, 03:51, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Slip, can you clarify what you mean by saying "Thought, as I see it, is > > > not physical or tangible<<<<<MB > > > Simply for me thought is not something that you can put in a box and > > ship out or place in a zip lock bag for storage. I feel thought and > > imagination are homologous but not identical in that thought itself > > may be considered more of a process, which imagination uses to create > > ideas, concepts, theories etc. > > > though it is the subject of multiple scientific experiments." ?<<<MB > > > I may have hastened to use the expression scientific experiments, no > > intended reference to "thought experiments", but more so leaning > > towards the nature of thought, it's use as in telekinesis, telepathy, > > clairvoyance, the overall power of thinking, and the law of > > attraction, much of which admittedly, is speculative and/or > > hypothetical. > > Discovering the physical nature of thought is aside from what I am > > projecting because once thought takes place it becomes independent of > > it's originating source as does the light emanating from a dead star. > > > > As I understand you, you posed that perspective in opposition to the > > > contention that "all thought > > > and consciousness dies with the death of the physical mind." Are you > > > arguing that when a person is alive, his thoughts are extra-physical, > > > or are you also arguing that consciousness / soul survives death?<<<MB > > > I'm not arguing as much as I am suggesting that thoughts are not > > confined to our physical being. As I posted early on, we do see light > > from stars that are physically non existent. I believe thoughts, > > imaginations and subconscious manifestations do continue to exist > > beyond the physical demise. I feel very strongly that the soul > > survives physical death and also retains life experiences. I believe > > that some people have lived past lives but not all, as some people are > > Old Souls, ie: child prodigies, brilliant scientists etc., while > > others are New Souls ie: idiots without a clue who are easily > > identifiable. I would not consider reincarnation in the sense that > > our soul returns in the form of a different species but contend the > > soul returns as another human being. A human soul does not return as > > a cow in my opinion. I think we retain life experiences within our > > soul and believe that life might be occurring simultaneously within a > > parallel universe and further that there is a level at which time is > > of no consequence. > > Belief in certain aspects of death may give credence to what some know > > as Heaven and the Immortality of the soul. For atheists, pantheists, > > materialists and rationalists there would be no question and > > conversation of such idea would be moot. So what meaning does death > > have to us as we are living? Perhaps it is a reminder that life is > > temporary and that we should pay heed to what lies ahead without > > paying as much attention to amassing materialistic treasures over > > spiritual values. Is death just a marker between lives? Possibly > > and for me most likely, no one has ever come back to tell us anything > > about it. Is there a Karma that carries from one life to the next? I > > would think that if the soul retains it's accumulated properties then > > it might also retain the aspects of retribution. Upon new life in the > > new physical frame is there a clean slate with which to develop? I > > often wonder why some people are born into extreme poverty and pain > > while others live wonderful lives. While both will have to commit to > > death the interim of life seems to have significance in the fact that > > maybe there is for them a lesson to be learned. I would also have to > > examine why it is that a person is born and dies within hours of > > living if there is any significance to life between birth and death. > > Some believe that what we do in this life influences our lives to > > come, so I have to wonder what has that person done within it's few > > hours of life to influence it's future life. Can we lay down a > > prospective for person's future life based on general observation of > > the person's current life. IF so then where might be Hitler, Dahmer, > > Saddam and what are they doing in their future life? Have they > > returned already and are they living among us as we speak? The > > question begets more questions which beget even more as the question > > surrounding the most mysterious aspects of human life remains > > enigmatic; what of death? > > > > As for the Noggin article, it's an interested experiment, to be sure, > > > but did you have a particular perspective on it? To me, it isn't > > > particularly surprising that different parts of the brain light up > > > based on your preferences. Presumably, imaging equipment will > > > eventually be able to see which pictures send more dopamine through > > > your brain and hence are the ones you like. Did you have a different > > > perspective? > > > > On Mar 3, 7:35 pm, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > You are indeed the arbitrator, wood. > > > > We had some discussion on thought not long ago. I started a thread > > > > titled "Noggin News or Nonsense" in which I presented a study. > > > > I'd be interested in your "thought" on it. > > > > >http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,490606,00.html > > > > > On Mar 3, 12:01 am, wood <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > WoW! WoW! Slip & Michael > > > > > Putting the rotten cheese aside, you gentlemen are not worlds apart in > > > > > your frame of thinking. What I’m seeing here, are two smart guys who > > > > > clearly have a lot ideas and theories to be told, and I think it will > > > > > make an interesting discussion. Somewhere along the line, in turn we > > > > > all can benefit from > > > > > each other’s intellect. Maybe afterward we can all have some cheese > > > > > and crackers. > > > > > > On Mar 2, 8:28 pm, Michael Berkovits <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > Response to Slip: > > > > > > > "There is no evidence that thought itself does not exist > > > > > > within a subconscious realm beyond that of the cognitive self." > > > > > > > There is also no evidence that thought is not made of green cheese. > > > > > > The absence of evidence against something isn't nearly as compelling > > > > > > as the presence of evidence for something. Moreover, the absence of > > > > > > evidence against something counts for nothing unless we have strong > > > > > > extrinsic reasons for believing that thing. There may be strong, > > > > > > extrinsic reasons for believing in thought that exists withing a > > > > > > subconscious realm, but you haven't articulated them; at least not > > > > > > that I can glean. > > > > > > > On Feb 22, 11:27 am, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Welcome Jodie, We see light from stars that are physically non > > > > > > > existent. There is no evidence that thought itself does not exist > > > > > > > within a subconscious realm beyond that of the cognitive self. > > > > > > > As in > > > > > > > dream consciousness, perhaps within a parallel universe, death > > > > > > > may be > > > > > > > a threshold through which the mind continues on, transitioning to > > > > > > > another level. You are here because you perceive yourself to be > > > > > > > here > > > > > > > and so as it is, sometimes, in the dream world you perceive > > > > > > > yourself > > > > > > > to be somewhere else. Returning to the conscious mind upon waking > > > > > > > does not negate the possibility that the dream consciousness you > > > > > > > experienced is still there, you simply are not in touch with it > > > > > > > because you woke up. Your thoughts are not exclusively a product > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > self origination, as it is sometimes said, "the thought just > > > > > > > entered > > > > > > > my mind". Think about it! > > > > > > > > On Feb 21, 11:27 pm, jodie <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > the long time question are we immortal will always be on > > > > > > > > everyones > > > > > > > > mind, truth of the matter is no where not. the mind is a > > > > > > > > wonderful > > > > > > > > thing and can take us so far in the universal world that we > > > > > > > > live in > > > > > > > > but once we die, so does the cerebrillium which is basically the > > > > > > > > central nervous system to the mind, bit like a cable to a > > > > > > > > computer, > > > > > > > > once that cable is disconnected so is the computer, with no > > > > > > > > blood or > > > > > > > > cells running through the cerebrillium the mind dies so does all > > > > > > > > thought and conciousness.- Tekst uit oorspronkelijk bericht > > > > > > > > niet weergeven - > > - Tekst uit oorspronkelijk bericht weergeven - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
