Odd that the brain could function on its own, without acquainting him with its purposes, its reasons. But the brain was an organ, like the spleen, heart, kidneys. And they went about their private activities. So why not the brain.
-Philip K. Dick (The Man Who Japed)
Really, when you think about it.
11 comments:
Yup, brain is an interesting organ :). Not only does this bunch of neurons and other cells regulates quite a lot of what we do and feel, it also cooks up pretty intersting stuff in the subconscious. "brain doesn't even know about itself completely" ;). unlike other organs, brain is layered.....one of the layers is called the mind :). and it would really interesting to study the evolution of mind.....also because its so complex, it is extra-sensitive and hence shields itself physically and biochemically (blood-brain barrier).
To think of it, this is the most awe-inspring thing! anyway, would like to share something here. i recently (actually not that recently) started reading a book on DMT (Dimethyl Tryptamine), a psychedelic substance, authored by Rick Strassman. This book talks about how this molecule produced endogenously by the Pineal might be contributing to soul/spirit.....its a fun read IMO, can't vouch for the accuracy of the science here though.
On a related note, i came across this post today:
http://writtens-jen.blogspot.com/
2007/02/transformations.html
what do you say?
I had a feeling u'd have something to contribute here ;) .
"This book talks about how this molecule produced endogenously by the Pineal might be contributing to soul/spirit"
Contributing so soul/spirit? I am not sure what that means. You mean, might survive death?
He he, more contribution ;).
What he means is that this molecule produces the feeling or being of spirit or spiritual processes.....The question he asked is why the hell does the body produce such a potent psychedelic substance! The production of DMT begins at around 21 days after conception.DMT is produced by pineal and is released under several experiences like birth of a child, psychedelic stress etc and is actively imported by the brain and rapidly degraded (crossing the blood-brain barrier-its one of very few entities to do so).read this for a preview.
http://www.rickstrassman.com/pages/
dmt/
and
http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/
content/full/159/8/1448
Thanks. That was extremely interesting. Though I guess this takes away the mystique from a lot of human experience. There's a lot of debate in the A.I. community whether robots could actually have emotions, etc, but if it is only a matter of chemicals, that changes a lot. I guess as usual we are overestimating our uniqueness :) .
Thank you too, sbkt-i am glad you enjoyed reading it.
"Though I guess this takes away the mystique from a lot of human experience."
Not really.....AI is a different game altogether. You might create some superficial, linear/ un-layered intelligence, but i am not sure throwing in some chemicals would really end up doing the complex things that the brain does. e.g. can you imagine a robot dreaming ;). and also, its not just about a few chemicals-its about the right set of them, triggered at the right moment, in a highly regulated form.
There is a big difference between whats alive and whats not-thats where the mystique of living and life comes from. The evolution and development of subconscious adds a lot to the human experience. it would be fun to study how much subconscious layer do the lower vertebrates have.
musical, i have a huge deadline looming this wednesday, but i'll definitely come back to this.
sure.....
best,
musical.
"AI is a different game altogether. You might create some superficial, linear/ un-layered intelligence, but i am not sure throwing in some chemicals would really end up doing the complex things that the brain does."
One fundamental argument in AI is whether the human mind is just a computer running on a different kind of hardware. If thats the case, it should be possible,in principle, to simulate the human mind in a robot. Throwing in chemicals won't help with programs/robots of course, because the hardware is different. But one could simulate the same effects in a different way, eg, an electrical signal at a certain frequency the robot is programmed to recognize.
Mystical experiences are often treat as a way to a different understanding of the reality of the world. But if these experiences are just effects of a certain chemical, then this gives strong support to a reductionist view of life. Also it suggests that people who hunger for spiritual experiences are essentially only addicted to this chemical, and their experiences are essentially meaningless.
"The evolution and development of subconscious adds a lot to the human experience."
Yes, that is very true. That is probably what is keeping us from being completely predictable.
"Mystical experiences ":
So, there can be (strictly IMO) two or more different kinds of spiritual or mystical experiences: one, the ecstatic ones (which may be through such chemicals) and the other kinds where the person tries to relinquish most of the conscious thoughts, kinda' state of perpetual meditation. But i won't label them meaningless-ofcourse they are of much meaning to the one who's into it :). just like food is of much meaning to me ;).
"Throwing in chemicals":
May be possible, if the intent is to design chemical sensors, which would then relay electrical signals-like an artificial neuron.
But, i am not sure if a robot would feel all that a human feels!
"We are not completely predictable".....well, some people are-just look around-you'll find many ;). i mean, some people do get into predictable behaviour-but then thats a totally different discussion on another aspect of how mind functions. i agree with what you say.
"But, i am not sure if a robot would feel all that a human feels!"
It certainly seems like that but there few arguments in favor of such a view except a feeling that we are special in some way. And suppose a robot claims that it does feel emotions, would you refuse to take its word?
"we are special in some way".
Human ego-thats the word :). Yes, there are fewer arguements than that. "Some way" is the key-we have to define it more precisely.
"And suppose a robot claims that it does feel emotions, would you refuse to take its word?"
Awww, thats so sweet-i will invite the robot over for a chai and discuss Hindi movies with her/him ;).
http://www.infoblink.org/?p=5
This link provides some food for thought.
Anyway, this is a never ending quest-you'll get the answers only when it happens.....Have a great weekend.
Post a Comment