The gathering place for Mental Health and
Applied Behavior Science Professionals. Become a charter member of Behavior OnLine. |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Somatic Behavior Choice Hypothesis
Quote:
But where, Margaret, have I ever said that we are “free†from “our neurons, our neurotransmitters and our hormones?†Nowhere—and that is yet another example of your lack of rigor and honesty. OTOH, perhaps you’re merely making the archetypal category mistake (discussed further at Wiki)—e.g., say I show you a university by showing you the various campuses, buildings, libraries, etc., but then you say: "That's all interesting Fred, but where is the university?—show us if you can." You see Margaret, you’d erroneously be equating the existence of the university with that of buildings and campuses, while in fact the being of the university exists above such a categorical level, as an encompassing whole or essence of such things. Or would you insist that the university is an illusion, a ghost in the machine? BTW, did you ever find where it is that I supposedly said that, “exposing atheists as immoral is my reason for being here?†. . . no, I didn’t think so . . . see that Margaret, more dishonesty. Bad girl. Last edited by Fred H.; May 1st, 2006 at 11:23 AM.. |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Somatic Behavior Choice Hypothesis
LeDoux simply says that downward causation is the process whereby a thought can cause an action. My theory acknowledges that - as long as the thought provides the emotional strength to compete with any other opposing emotional signals that may be present. He later says that downward causation can be hard work - because the intellect is a new part of the brain. I made a similar assertion when I said that the neo-cortex is the most recently evolved region of the brain and can't produce as strong emotions as our instincts and older regions. We therfore, often do things which we know to be illogical - like buy lottery tickets or pray for a sick child rather than take them to a doctor.
LeDoux is starting from synapses and inducing higher level processes. I am starting from an evolutionary view of decision-making in animals and deducing back down to the decision process - based on my reading of his and others at the lower level. That's why his downward causation does not contradict my hypothesis. When people say read this and read that - and can't make a cause and effect statement on their own it usually means they don't know what they are talking about. In your case you will interpret every thing you read in a way that will somehow affirm your notion of free will. That's your mission. You are apparently incapable of, as well as uninterested in, any other topic here. I have no further interest in following you off into free-will land, no matter what the discussion is about - so this is my last post on this. But, I will soon describe more fully why the emotions of strong identity beliefs causes obsessions like this. You're back on ignore. Margaret |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Somatic Behavior Choice Hypothesis
Quote:
I didn't so much like your: Quote:
Regardless, I am interested in your views: Quote:
|
#34
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Somatic Behavior Choice Hypothesis
Quote:
Sure, I suppose you may be able to show us the specific neurons and biochemicals of the subsystem from which you’ll claim love emanates, but then I’ll say: "That's all interesting Margaret, but where is the love?—show us if you can." At which point, alas, you will have to conclude that emotions too are illusions, ghosts in the machines . . . and ultimately even the “machines†are illusions, ghosts . . . which reminds me of Max Planck’s maxim: Quote:
|
#35
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Somatic Behavior Choice Hypothesis
Quote:
Do you believe in emergence? Is it something real, is it a construct, is it both? What and where exactly is it? Where do neurons and chemicals come from?—Matter? Where does matter come from? What is matter?—particles, quarks, waves, energy? But if, as you say, mass murderers are not morally responsible, then of course none of this matters, and you’d not be responsible for your pettiness. |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Somatic Behavior Choice Hypothesis
Quote:
|
#37
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Somatic Behavior Choice Hypothesis
Quote:
|
#38
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Somatic Behavior Choice Hypothesis
Quote:
If you accept that 'free will' comes from some 'spooky action at a distance' then you ought to admit it. There is no meaningful "personal/moral choice or responsibility" without some source for it that's truly free. |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Somatic Behavior Choice Hypothesis
Quote:
But I do wonder if you yourself will ever be able to control your propensity for making such thoughtless assertion like you’ve just done here again? Perhaps you could just choose to not post? Or choose to actually consider the implications of whatever you’re asserting b/f you post? Nah, probably not. |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Somatic Behavior Choice Hypothesis
While I deplore admonitions to read one's favorite author in order to better understand the correctness of one's argument - as lazy, intellectually, and also cowardly - I'd highly recommend Chapter 10, from Pinker's Blank Slate (The Fear of Determinism) as one of the best thought-out discussions of Free-Will and determinism I have read - for those who are so intensely interested in such things.
Margaret |
|
|