Is this for me Chris? I don't recall asking for any further studies? Can you refer me back to a post in which I did? Secondly I haven't posted in a day or two so I may have lost some continuity in the thread, and for this I apologize. I did notice your post but I must say that I did comment in a post on March 3rd @ 9:51pm........"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."...........This, I thought, was a clear indication that "experiments" on thought were not my main focus. Essentially the Nature of the Star is Irrelevant to my point that the light emanating from it exists, though the star does not, which coincides with my contention that "Thought" emanating from the human mind exists beyond death. If you will rehash as I have you will see that your laughter is unfounded. Mainly because your links are simply referencing "Imaging" and not really identifying thought. I can look at a person's face that is turning red to realize there is an embarrassment element in the thought process. The links do not offer any "real" evidence as to the nature of thought and are no more or less than what was presented in my Noggin News thread. Hope all is well with you my friend in sunshine land! Peace!
On Mar 5, 8:01 pm, Chris Jenkins <[email protected]> wrote: > *laughing* > > You asked for further studies, and yet this answer was ignored. No > further thoughts on the matter? I'll hook the MRI up and see for > myself... > > On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 9:08 PM, Chris Jenkins > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > I would suggest, Slip, that the "nature of thought" questions you are > > asking are philosophical. The science of thought seems to be clipping > > along at quite a pace. Aside from the infrared study you posted, here > > are several others by which the biomechanics of thought are fairly > > well articulated via extrapolation and projection: > > > What picture am I seeing in my head? > > >http://weirdnewsfiles.com/weird-news/weird-science-news/scientists-ex... > > > What object am I thinking about? > > >http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/01/080102222813.htm > > > The second link is particularly good. The MRI work has been > > pioneering, and the new eMRI advancements will be to neuropathic > > mapping what digital genomic mapping was to genetics. The fact is, > > "thought" is the passage of electrochemistry through a predictable > > track in the brain, and the specific map of what track to what > > thoughts, much like the human genome, is becoming clearer every day. > > I've long argued on this list that the "mind" has been romanticized > > into an idyll well above its place as a verbal construct to represent > > the sum total of our perceptual and intellectual experiences, and once > > the human "thought map" is complete, there will be no more arguing > > that point either. > > > This is not to discourage those who wish to explore the philosophical. > > It is simply to clarify the conversation. Science is science. > > Philosophy is philosophy. > > > On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 5:56 AM, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> I simply presented an open door into which one can explore. It is > >> obvious that there is nonexistent conclusive evidence in any > >> direction. You are just presenting the other side of the door and > >> also have not articulated any gleaning value to indicate any contrary > >> evidence. However, the original poster ,Jodie, asserts all thought > >> and consciousness dies with the death of the physical mind linking > >> that assertion to that of a physical entity. Thought, as I see it, is > >> not physical or tangible though it is the subject of multiple > >> scientific experiments. As it stands I don't think there is any > >> "real" evidence as to the nature of thought. > > >> On Mar 2, 10:28 pm, Michael Berkovits <[email protected]> wrote: > >> - Show quoted text - > >>> 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. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
