So what are your views on these?
edit* ok, i screwed up, there are only 4....
edit* ok, i screwed up, there are only 4....
Last edited by destruktion_6143 (2008-11-20 16:14:18)
- Index »
- Community »
- Debate and Serious Talk »
- 5 Philisophical Questions that make your brain hurt
There's only 4 of them...
Or is there...TheAussieReaper wrote:
There's only 4 of them...
My state was founded by Batman. Your opinion is invalid.
whoa guys, this thread is getting too philosophical for me....
I'll answer the first one, in that your ability to chose changes.
Your hand is forced to kill in the scenario of the criminal and the runaway tram.
You are given a clear choice with the first option of not killing Bill, because his life does not directly result in the death of 5 other people.
Your hand is forced to kill in the scenario of the criminal and the runaway tram.
You are given a clear choice with the first option of not killing Bill, because his life does not directly result in the death of 5 other people.
Too tired. Will read in morning.
wow you messed my mind up.
thanks
now i wonder how ill study for physics
thanks
now i wonder how ill study for physics
1. No. As Aussie says - it all comes down to your ability to choose.
2. No. Just as I'm now not the same person that just typed "No".
3. Yes. In as much sense as anything is what it is.
4. Yes, but at the same time, No.
Easy.
Next!
2. No. Just as I'm now not the same person that just typed "No".
3. Yes. In as much sense as anything is what it is.
4. Yes, but at the same time, No.
Easy.
Next!
Last edited by Scorpion0x17 (2008-11-20 16:55:09)
1. Should we kill a perfectly healthy person so that 5 others might have a chance at living, after having surgery, recovering, very possibly still being sick, etc.? No, because you don't know you are saving those people. It is only a chance. The only thing you are sure of is depriving one person of a healthy life. In the analogy given you're dealing with a criminal - how can he be trusted? Pull the trigger yourself in hopes that the criminal will keep his word?
2. You are not your body, you are a personality living vicariously through your flesh. As the article brought up before bringing the insight to a stupid conclusion, you are not your arm, or your leg, or your brain. You are not all of them, you are not any one of them, you are completely separate from it. If the personalities of two people can be described exactly the same, then they are the same person.
3. Irrelevant. The only important part is that you believe the spoon is in front of you, spoon or no spoon.
4. I hate the "determinism, therefore no free will" argument. Just because you don't randomly make decisions does not mean you lack free will to make either decision. You are always going to make the choice that suits you, but free will is deciding what suits you the best. Being the person that makes you make the same decisions that "Fred" knows you will make only means you make choices with purpose, and confirms that you are a discrete personality.
2. You are not your body, you are a personality living vicariously through your flesh. As the article brought up before bringing the insight to a stupid conclusion, you are not your arm, or your leg, or your brain. You are not all of them, you are not any one of them, you are completely separate from it. If the personalities of two people can be described exactly the same, then they are the same person.
3. Irrelevant. The only important part is that you believe the spoon is in front of you, spoon or no spoon.
4. I hate the "determinism, therefore no free will" argument. Just because you don't randomly make decisions does not mean you lack free will to make either decision. You are always going to make the choice that suits you, but free will is deciding what suits you the best. Being the person that makes you make the same decisions that "Fred" knows you will make only means you make choices with purpose, and confirms that you are a discrete personality.
i liked those especially the human brain and fred
I'd say "You are not your Body, nor your Mind, but rather the integrated combination of Mind And Body".Flaming_Maniac wrote:
2. You are not your body, you are a personality living vicariously through your flesh. As the article brought up before bringing the insight to a stupid conclusion, you are not your arm, or your leg, or your brain. You are not all of them, you are not any one of them, you are completely separate from it. If the personalities of two people can be described exactly the same, then they are the same person.
Both of which are changing constantly.
I disagree entirely. People are an idea, not an object.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
I'd say "You are not your Body, nor your Mind, but rather the integrated combination of Mind And Body".Flaming_Maniac wrote:
2. You are not your body, you are a personality living vicariously through your flesh. As the article brought up before bringing the insight to a stupid conclusion, you are not your arm, or your leg, or your brain. You are not all of them, you are not any one of them, you are completely separate from it. If the personalities of two people can be described exactly the same, then they are the same person.
Both of which are changing constantly.
How so?Flaming_Maniac wrote:
I disagree entirely. People are an idea, not an object.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
I'd say "You are not your Body, nor your Mind, but rather the integrated combination of Mind And Body".Flaming_Maniac wrote:
2. You are not your body, you are a personality living vicariously through your flesh. As the article brought up before bringing the insight to a stupid conclusion, you are not your arm, or your leg, or your brain. You are not all of them, you are not any one of them, you are completely separate from it. If the personalities of two people can be described exactly the same, then they are the same person.
Both of which are changing constantly.
We can not point at a collection of neurons and say 'that' is your personality.
But, if I remove your brain, 'you' no longer exist. Therefore 'you' are part of your brain.
Similarly, if I remove just a small part of your brain, your personality will change.
Now, here's the interesting bit - if I cut the join between the two halves of your brain, you will end up with two personalities.
If I remove all your sense organs, what then?
Do you simply become a 'personality' trapped in some blank void?
No. You still have your memories of having senses. You still 'sense' your existence in 'this world' on some level.
So, 'you' are part of your brain. But you are not just your brain - you are your memories too.
I could go on, but in short, research shows that the 'person' we consider to be 'ourself' is not separate from, but is also not limited to, our bodily selves.
Last edited by Scorpion0x17 (2008-11-20 17:16:10)
What if their respective personal experiences were different in coming to the point where their personalities could be described as "exactly the same" Ultimately 'you' are the manifestation of your physical being (itself a reaction to differing pressures applied by differing substances) plus all collective experiences plus all collective mental thoughts up to the point you are defining 'you'.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
If the personalities of two people can be described exactly the same, then they are the same person.
If their life experiences are different then they are not exactly the same.KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
What if their respective personal experiences were different in coming to the point where their personalities could be described as "exactly the same" Ultimately 'you' are the manifestation of your physical being (itself a reaction to differing pressures applied by differing substances) plus all collective experiences plus all collective mental thoughts up to the point you are defining 'you'.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
If the personalities of two people can be described exactly the same, then they are the same person.
Though, of course, that's impossible to prove either way.
(not to mention that what FM describes would be impossible to achieve)
Last edited by Scorpion0x17 (2008-11-20 17:24:27)
I must say I actually have spent quite a bit of time in previous years pondering question 2. I came to the conclusion that we're all Gaould possessing bodies.
We most certainly do. Our personality, once formed, is enduring. The only difference is once we are no longer able to manifest our personality through our body we cannot actively influence the world any more, and when our personality is forgotten we can no longer influence it passively either. Scorpion0x17 dies when people don't remember who he was or what he believed, not when the cells in your body happen to stop functioning.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
But, if I remove your brain, 'you' no longer exist.
At that point you are as dead as dead can be. Anything less than a fully-functioning brain is more akin to a robot or animal than person.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
Similarly, if I remove just a small part of your brain, your personality will change.
/flamesuit
No you don't.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
Now, here's the interesting bit - if I cut the join between the two halves of your brain, you will end up with two personalities.
Crippling the body has no direct effect on your personality. This furthers my point, it does not mean that your personality must reside in your brain.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
If I remove all your sense organs, what then?
Do you simply become a 'personality' trapped in some blank void?
No. You still have your memories of having senses. You still 'sense' your existence in 'this world' on some level.
So, 'you' are part of your brain.
Research? lol. Conclusions you have drawn from research, without the research backing you up maybe.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
But you are not just your brain - you are your memories too.
I could go on, but in short, research shows that the 'person' we consider to be 'ourself' is not separate from, but is also not limited to, our bodily selves.
They wouldn't be exactly the same. Realistically it's impossible. For the sake of theoretical argument however, they are the same.KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
What if their respective personal experiences were different in coming to the point where their personalities could be described as "exactly the same" Ultimately 'you' are the manifestation of your physical being (itself a reaction to differing pressures applied by differing substances) plus all collective experiences plus all collective mental thoughts up to the point you are defining 'you'.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
If the personalities of two people can be described exactly the same, then they are the same person.
No, you CAN remove a part of the human brain to change personality and they are not brain dead. Still fully-functioning.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
At that point you are as dead as dead can be. Anything less than a fully-functioning brain is more akin to a robot or animal than person.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
Similarly, if I remove just a small part of your brain, your personality will change.
/flamesuit
Didn't you know that?
If you kill a part of the brain by definition it is not fully functioning.TheAussieReaper wrote:
No, you CAN remove a part of the human brain to change personality and they are not brain dead. Still fully-functioning.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
At that point you are as dead as dead can be. Anything less than a fully-functioning brain is more akin to a robot or animal than person.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
Similarly, if I remove just a small part of your brain, your personality will change.
/flamesuit
Didn't you know that?
Fully functioning? Don't change your definition. The brain is still fully functioning with large pieces removed. Why?Flaming_Maniac wrote:
If you kill a part of the brain by definition it is not fully functioning.
Because we don't use our whole brain. Ever. There are vast amount of our brain matter that does nothing.
@FM: Sorry dude, but you're wrong.
In a scientific sense, that is.
If you're religious, and believe in a 'soul' (which is implied in what you've said) then I'm not going any further.
If not, read on...
If I, and everyone else in the world, decides one day that you are a paedophile, then that very same day, you die.
Does that make you a paedophile?
(assuming you're not)
This is actually easy to see with cases of 'personality transplant', rather than in cases where someone has lost a part of them (because we generally come to terms with that fairly quickly and any personality changes become masked). But, in what I'm referring to as 'personality transplant', there have been documented cases of personality change in the recipients of things like a hand, heart or other organ transplant. The real spooky thing is that some seem to become more like the donor than they were before the transplant.
In a scientific sense, that is.
If you're religious, and believe in a 'soul' (which is implied in what you've said) then I'm not going any further.
If not, read on...
No, I am in no way the 'memories' that other people have of me. Those memories are part of them, not part of me.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
We most certainly do. Our personality, once formed, is enduring. The only difference is once we are no longer able to manifest our personality through our body we cannot actively influence the world any more, and when our personality is forgotten we can no longer influence it passively either. Scorpion0x17 dies when people don't remember who he was or what he believed, not when the cells in your body happen to stop functioning.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
But, if I remove your brain, 'you' no longer exist.
If I, and everyone else in the world, decides one day that you are a paedophile, then that very same day, you die.
Does that make you a paedophile?
(assuming you're not)
Oh, yes it does.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
No you don't.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
Now, here's the interesting bit - if I cut the join between the two halves of your brain, you will end up with two personalities.Crippling the body has no direct effect on your personality. This furthers my point, it does not mean that your personality must reside in your brain.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
If I remove all your sense organs, what then?
Do you simply become a 'personality' trapped in some blank void?
No. You still have your memories of having senses. You still 'sense' your existence in 'this world' on some level.
So, 'you' are part of your brain.
This is actually easy to see with cases of 'personality transplant', rather than in cases where someone has lost a part of them (because we generally come to terms with that fairly quickly and any personality changes become masked). But, in what I'm referring to as 'personality transplant', there have been documented cases of personality change in the recipients of things like a hand, heart or other organ transplant. The real spooky thing is that some seem to become more like the donor than they were before the transplant.
No, conclusions reached by those that did the research (who I assume know far more than I about the subject) and reported in various sources that I've read.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Research? lol. Conclusions you have drawn from research, without the research backing you up maybe.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
But you are not just your brain - you are your memories too.
I could go on, but in short, research shows that the 'person' we consider to be 'ourself' is not separate from, but is also not limited to, our bodily selves.
Last edited by Scorpion0x17 (2008-11-20 18:15:36)
...TheAussieReaper wrote:
Fully functioning? Don't change your definition. The brain is still fully functioning with large pieces removed. Why?Flaming_Maniac wrote:
If you kill a part of the brain by definition it is not fully functioning.
Because we don't use our whole brain. Ever. There are vast amount of our brain matter that does nothing.
I didn't change shit. The brain is not fully functional with pieces removed.
If those pieces aren't doing anything (and by that I mean actually not doing anything, not just that we suspect they aren't doing anything) they aren't really pieces of the brain then are they? Is it really brain tissue if it doesn't work.
Haha. Read the thread title again. Is philosophy science? What was that? No you say?Scorpion0x17 wrote:
@FM: Sorry dude, but you're wrong.
In a scientific sense, that is.
If you're religious, and believe in a 'soul' (which is implied in what you've said) then I'm not going any further.
If not, read on...
Your reply there reminded me of this. Racing back to the warm embrace of science when science really has nothing to do with the matter.
On the contrary, you exist only as you are perceived by other people. The bowl of goldfish in itself means nothing, it's just some lumps of matter. To me however they represent a means of fulfilling physical and psychological needs. That is where the goldfish really exists.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
No, I am in no way the 'memories' that other people have of me. Those memories are part of them, not part of me.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
We most certainly do. Our personality, once formed, is enduring. The only difference is once we are no longer able to manifest our personality through our body we cannot actively influence the world any more, and when our personality is forgotten we can no longer influence it passively either. Scorpion0x17 dies when people don't remember who he was or what he believed, not when the cells in your body happen to stop functioning.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
But, if I remove your brain, 'you' no longer exist.
Forget dying, you are whatever everyone else decides to label you as. Assuming you are a member of society, you don't get to define words. You give up that right to society, to the whole. If they decide to label you a fish, you are a fish, as preposterous as that may seem to you.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
If I, and everyone else in the world, decides one day that you are a paedophile, then that very same day, you die.
Does that make you a paedophile?
(assuming you're not)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corpus_callosumScorpion0x17 wrote:
Oh, yes it does.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
No you don't.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
Now, here's the interesting bit - if I cut the join between the two halves of your brain, you will end up with two personalities.Crippling the body has no direct effect on your personality. This furthers my point, it does not mean that your personality must reside in your brain.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
If I remove all your sense organs, what then?
Do you simply become a 'personality' trapped in some blank void?
No. You still have your memories of having senses. You still 'sense' your existence in 'this world' on some level.
So, 'you' are part of your brain.
You cut that sucker and you get a split brain, not a split personality. I don't know what else to tell you. It doesn't give you multiple personalities.
Just as there are cases where personality changes drastically due to any sort of severe trauma. It doesn't prove your personality is connected to your body, only that your personality changes in trying to cope with a change in its only lifeline with the real world.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
This is actually easy to see with cases of 'personality transplant', rather than in cases where someone has lost a part of them (because we generally come to terms with that fairly quickly and any personality changes become masked). But, in what I'm referring to as 'personality transplant', there have been documented cases of personality change in the recipients of things like a hand, heart or other organ transplant. The real spooky thing is that some seem to become more like the donor than they were before the transplant.
k, source.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
No, conclusions reached by those that did the research (who I assume know far more than I about the subject) and reported in various sources that I've read.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Research? lol. Conclusions you have drawn from research, without the research backing you up maybe.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
But you are not just your brain - you are your memories too.
I could go on, but in short, research shows that the 'person' we consider to be 'ourself' is not separate from, but is also not limited to, our bodily selves.
Erm. Science IS philosophy. Natural philosophy.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Haha. Read the thread title again. Is philosophy science? What was that? No you say?Scorpion0x17 wrote:
@FM: Sorry dude, but you're wrong.
In a scientific sense, that is.
If you're religious, and believe in a 'soul' (which is implied in what you've said) then I'm not going any further.
If not, read on...
Your reply there reminded me of this. Racing back to the warm embrace of science when science really has nothing to do with the matter.
Right. In that case I declare you to be a fish. Drowned (which is what fish do out of water) yet?Flaming_Maniac wrote:
On the contrary, you exist only as you are perceived by other people. The bowl of goldfish in itself means nothing, it's just some lumps of matter. To me however they represent a means of fulfilling physical and psychological needs. That is where the goldfish really exists.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
No, I am in no way the 'memories' that other people have of me. Those memories are part of them, not part of me.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
We most certainly do. Our personality, once formed, is enduring. The only difference is once we are no longer able to manifest our personality through our body we cannot actively influence the world any more, and when our personality is forgotten we can no longer influence it passively either. Scorpion0x17 dies when people don't remember who he was or what he believed, not when the cells in your body happen to stop functioning.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
But, if I remove your brain, 'you' no longer exist.Forget dying, you are whatever everyone else decides to label you as. Assuming you are a member of society, you don't get to define words. You give up that right to society, to the whole. If they decide to label you a fish, you are a fish, as preposterous as that may seem to you.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
If I, and everyone else in the world, decides one day that you are a paedophile, then that very same day, you die.
Does that make you a paedophile?
(assuming you're not)
No.
Because you ARE NOT A FISH!
Well, I admit, the 'multiple personalities' bit is still debated - some say it does, and there's evidence to back them up - some say it doesn't, and there's evidence to back them up too.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corpus_callosumScorpion0x17 wrote:
Oh, yes it does.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
No you don't.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
Now, here's the interesting bit - if I cut the join between the two halves of your brain, you will end up with two personalities.Crippling the body has no direct effect on your personality. This furthers my point, it does not mean that your personality must reside in your brain.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
If I remove all your sense organs, what then?
Do you simply become a 'personality' trapped in some blank void?
No. You still have your memories of having senses. You still 'sense' your existence in 'this world' on some level.
So, 'you' are part of your brain.
You cut that sucker and you get a split brain, not a split personality. I don't know what else to tell you. It doesn't give you multiple personalities.
The spooky effect of a recipient becoming more like the donor than they were before, is highly suggestive that some degree of personality does reside within the Body.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Just as there are cases where personality changes drastically due to any sort of severe trauma. It doesn't prove your personality is connected to your body, only that your personality changes in trying to cope with a change in its only lifeline with the real world.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
This is actually easy to see with cases of 'personality transplant', rather than in cases where someone has lost a part of them (because we generally come to terms with that fairly quickly and any personality changes become masked). But, in what I'm referring to as 'personality transplant', there have been documented cases of personality change in the recipients of things like a hand, heart or other organ transplant. The real spooky thing is that some seem to become more like the donor than they were before the transplant.
www.amazon.com - various science books written by various scientist - try reading some.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
k, source.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
No, conclusions reached by those that did the research (who I assume know far more than I about the subject) and reported in various sources that I've read.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Research? lol. Conclusions you have drawn from research, without the research backing you up maybe.
No, you are 'you'. You are the culmination of what I described before - physical manifestations of pressure, accumulated experience, and accumulated mental thought. No one changes your reality except yourself. People can have an impact, but ultimately the decision lies within you (conciously or subconsiously) to become that reality that other's inflict upon you. I do not become something simply because other people say I am - there is a difference between collective reality and personal reality (your reality does not equal my reality).Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Forget dying, you are whatever everyone else decides to label you as. Assuming you are a member of society, you don't get to define words. You give up that right to society, to the whole. If they decide to label you a fish, you are a fish, as preposterous as that may seem to you.
If everyone labeled me a fish, I wouldn't be a fish. If the definition of 'fish' changed to a universally agreed upon definition that fit the definition of 'me', then I would be a fish. Simply ascribing me a label as a 'fish' does not make me, in reality, a fish.
Last edited by KEN-JENNINGS (2008-11-20 18:49:03)
@FM: what have you been smoking?
If people call you a 'fish' you're a fish.
this is so funny it's unreal.
If people call you a 'fish' you're a fish.
this is so funny it's unreal.
- Index »
- Community »
- Debate and Serious Talk »
- 5 Philisophical Questions that make your brain hurt