The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > In the kingdom of the mind > Comments

In the kingdom of the mind : Comments

By Tanveer Ahmed, published 18/2/2011

Our brains evolved in small, homogenous communities but are now faced with extraordinary diversity in a fast-changing, globalised knowledge economy.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. Page 4
  6. All
P.S.
I think you give Peter Hume far too much credit, OUG.
Posted by Squeers, Sunday, 20 February 2011 3:10:22 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
science says we only use 9/10 th our brains
[meaning thats all they can detect us using]

this isnt to say we are all using the detectable 10 percent
or that 90 percent is unused

that being said i dont have much to correct you about
except your presumption re god

god does the so called autonimous actions of life
[he sustains all life]...he is the unseen/unrecognised 'cause'

he dosnt judge ..nor nudge
dont grudge nor budge

that input influx inflow inspiration ..you accord to god
is only that symbiotic inflow ..in sympathy with
that we focus our attentions on ..in real time

and dosnt 'come from god'..but the beings
in the higher and lower realms

we and they are all sustained our being ..by god

mind is not a secondary phenomina..[a by product of the brain]
its both reactive and interactive ..with far more than mere mental aberation and physical sensual mental or phycological input's..
[as previously expanded upon]

its more akin to harmoncs convergance
in discord and in simultude its more like a sending recieving radio with emotive capacity and residual accord..[symbiological sympatico
via seen and unseen physical or spiritual emotive or even mundane..

moderated by empathy ..will and desires]
[able to be limited or expanded upon ..by more than emotive classification ..or drug induced moderation/mediation or medication..;even elation and depresive repressive retardation]

its far more complicated
than mere words could sum up in a few lines
yet far more easilly to grasp by action and interaction
than by speculative or conjective or even subjective convective

its funny how the big words can still say so little

a picture really needs 1000 words..and still not reveal the full visioning of the picture attempting to be conveyed from one seeing to the other [hopefully]..recieving
Posted by one under god, Sunday, 20 February 2011 5:41:49 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Here's the problem, OUG.
I can talk about this topic and ask rhetorical questions, and speculate about the mind-brain discrepency--though many scientists will have none of this mind talk (that's just the operating system, they'd say). At the end of the day it remains a conundrum to those who don't want to give it up.. "There has to be more to me than that!"

You on the other hand "say" how it is.. as if you knew..
Based on what?

You have to show us some evidence we can evaluate..
It's not enough to just say how it is without evidence.
You're using our language, however much you play around with it, ergo you use our concepts. You think with them so you ought to respect them..
Your ideas are structured from our collective concepts.

It's your privilege, of course, to make no sense to the rest of us. But there's no point trying to communicate with us if you won't play by the rules.
The rules are that the position has to be defensible.
You can't just say stuff.
Like:
<mind is not a secondary phenomina..[a by product of the brain]
its both reactive and interactive ..with far more than mere mental aberation and physical sensual mental or phycological input's..
[as previously expanded upon]>

It's not enough to expand your beliefs.
You have to "defend" your reasoning..

Evidence... logic...persuasion...?
Posted by Squeers, Sunday, 20 February 2011 7:40:11 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Experiences, strong intuition, faith, facts realised after events.
Posted by weareunique, Sunday, 20 February 2011 11:30:16 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
its no use asking the same questions
expecting a different answer.. i have done much reading and study by life experience.. failing that i rely on what appears most logical

take your quote..''Your "mind" is the product of data input.""

thats rather loose
we have sensual input..but its not all 'data'
even then much you term data is opinion or simply questions
or confusions and out and out lies or distortions opinions and 'feeling'

""All your thoughts derive from the culture""
asgain an over simplification ..close to a buzzword...culture(of ideas)...include much that isnt factual..even though the experiences underlying them might have validity or relivance..[or not]

you again fall into the same cliches by adding to idea cultures..''the interpellated you)..developed from pure ontology''

ontology is a taughtoligy..[buzzword]
concerned only with the 'nature' of our being
even then you add the slippery.."" (if that exists)''

it either egsists and is relivant
or it dont and becomes thus irrelivant
wether it applies to either all of individually to specifics
your following has this become as if of never mind

ie"" to identity, expression and representation.""
all pretty much divergent in application and relivance

"Mind is epiphenomenal"
no mind is an internal thing
its not even a phenomina...aND IF ITS NOT EVEN CL;AIMED TO BE LINKED..REVEALS ITSELF AS IRRELIVANT..[to wit big buzzzz words that hide behind ignorance]...

""The interesting question is .."the remainder".

yes the unkown knowns that phycoligists have no idea about
thus ask others to write their presies for them...

give sources
i have to write some publish or perish spin...to keep my position

the kingdom of the mind is a jungle
we each lay our own paths through it

each mind is unique..
we cant all be labled under the same tag

we each really are unique
Posted by one under god, Monday, 21 February 2011 4:32:57 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. Page 4
  6. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy