4 ms·

here's something that looks like a solution: http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/ramachandran07/ramachandran07_index.html http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/ramachandr

by ippisl 16y ago

here's something that looks like a solution: http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/ramachandran07/ramachandran07_index.html http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/ramachandran07/ramachandran0...

Tichy 16y ago
balderdash
- ippisl 16y ago
  What's was so bad in this explanation?
  - Tichy 16y ago
    For one thing, I am skeptic about the notion of "mirror neurons". Or maybe the name is badly chosen. I think what happens is that certain neurons (or regions of the brain) associate with certain abstract concepts. It is not surprising that the same neurons light up no matter if I kick a stone with my foot myself, or see somebody else kick a stone with their foot. Both times "abstraction neurons" for things like stones, feet, kicking, etc. would light up (and by that I don't mean there is a genetically encoded brain region to encode "stones", I don't think there is). Why not? As an engineer, the concept of introducing specific "mirror neurons" seems unnecessary and too wasteful to make sense. I am not a specialist for his mirror neurons theory, so maybe I am doing him an injustice. As I said, the name could be badly chosen. And what I could imagine is that the brain is prone to make certain abstractions - just as it is prone to learn a language (it seems likely to me that parts of the brain are structured to facilitate learning languages, or recognizing faces - a bit like there being general purpose CPUs and specialized digitial signal processors in electronics). So in that sense they could be on to something, although I think their way of describing it would be rather misleading. The main thing is, though, that the question "what is consciousness" does not make sense, therefore if he gives an answer to that, it has to be nonsense. Now I only skimmed the article, and it might be that he is not actually pretending to give an answer. Rather, he is redefining the problem in terms of his mirror neurons theory. So it would only be marketing (it sure makes for good marketing to pretend to answer the "hard question"), which would be a bit more forgivable, but ultimately still be rubbish.
    - ippisl 16y ago
      why asking questions like "what is consciousness"/"why does consciousness exist" doesn't make sense ? it seem like many questions being asked in evolutionary biology/biology/neurology.
      - Tichy 16y ago
        Because nobody can say what they mean by "consciousness". "Why does consciousness exist" implies that "it" (what?) exists, which likely isn't the case.

by ippisl 16y ago

here's something that looks like a solution: http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/ramachandran07/ramachandran07_index.html http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/ramachandran07/ramachandran0...

Tichy 16y ago

balderdash

ippisl 16y ago
What's was so bad in this explanation?
- Tichy 16y ago
  For one thing, I am skeptic about the notion of "mirror neurons". Or maybe the name is badly chosen. I think what happens is that certain neurons (or regions of the brain) associate with certain abstract concepts. It is not surprising that the same neurons light up no matter if I kick a stone with my foot myself, or see somebody else kick a stone with their foot. Both times "abstraction neurons" for things like stones, feet, kicking, etc. would light up (and by that I don't mean there is a genetically encoded brain region to encode "stones", I don't think there is). Why not? As an engineer, the concept of introducing specific "mirror neurons" seems unnecessary and too wasteful to make sense. I am not a specialist for his mirror neurons theory, so maybe I am doing him an injustice. As I said, the name could be badly chosen. And what I could imagine is that the brain is prone to make certain abstractions - just as it is prone to learn a language (it seems likely to me that parts of the brain are structured to facilitate learning languages, or recognizing faces - a bit like there being general purpose CPUs and specialized digitial signal processors in electronics). So in that sense they could be on to something, although I think their way of describing it would be rather misleading. The main thing is, though, that the question "what is consciousness" does not make sense, therefore if he gives an answer to that, it has to be nonsense. Now I only skimmed the article, and it might be that he is not actually pretending to give an answer. Rather, he is redefining the problem in terms of his mirror neurons theory. So it would only be marketing (it sure makes for good marketing to pretend to answer the "hard question"), which would be a bit more forgivable, but ultimately still be rubbish.
  - ippisl 16y ago
    why asking questions like "what is consciousness"/"why does consciousness exist" doesn't make sense ? it seem like many questions being asked in evolutionary biology/biology/neurology.
    - Tichy 16y ago
      Because nobody can say what they mean by "consciousness". "Why does consciousness exist" implies that "it" (what?) exists, which likely isn't the case.