4 ms·

Makes logical sense to me. A baby has nothing but its own genetically inherited model worldview to map its sensor input to. A model worldview that is primaril

Makes logical sense to me. A baby has nothing but its own genetically inherited model worldview to map its sensor input to. A model worldview that is primarily concerned with faces, treats, hunger and feelings. I takes many years to map these phenomena to a fuller model of the objective world. The brain and therefore the human consciousness cannot see the world as it is; the brain gets its information through sensory input. For the input to make sense it needs to be fitted to a model worldview (a table is only viewable as a table once the mess of colors coming from the eyes can be mapped to the representation of a table)

s-shellfish 8y ago
I just feel like comparing a baby's experience to someone on lsd would likely mean language/models don't exist, therefore self doesn't exist, logic doesn't exist therefore cause and effect don't exist, or at least everything our natural vocabulary/modeling structures allows us to connect with, like you are saying. Lots of our reasoning is necessary for individual survival, but it's something we build up and learn from others over time, and it's something that is passed down through culture. I would just imagine that being a baby or being on lsd is similar to no ways of chopping the world up, and no deep rooted ideas of the true nature of our experiences. I don't think you need drugs to get there or need to have/be a baby. I don't think it's much different than the purpose of attaining enlightenment, from the Buddhist perspective.
- callesgg 8y ago
  I would assume that cause and effect is one of the few things that a baby does understand. One one level: It might be that the baby does not understand cause and effect, but it certainly acts in relation to it. "I cry cause i know that will cause me to feel better." The baby don't understand the sub components of why one thing causes the other. (On a deep level neither do we, but as adults we do have a richer collections of models that explain things, like crying causes other people to give me attention)
  - s-shellfish 8y ago
    What I'm talking about for humans starts on the very high levels of abstraction we tend to do it. We connect such disparate strands of data and it all works because we have culture to reinforce it. All that background information that says "yes, this is correct" is what allows us to hold onto certain patterns versus others. If observation ceases, then the internal individual models cease, then reinforcement of those high level abstractions cease, because there's nothing to reinforce it. So honestly, I'm really not sure if a baby reasons that way. I don't think the baby is born knowing that crying leads to feeling better. I think the baby just does it, the same way a cat meows when it's hungry. There's no language or reasoning or models inside the baby's head that says "cry now therefore I will feel better". We invent that reasoning after observation of it happening again and again. I'd call it all ridiculous, but it's a bit tongue in cheek, and I'm not sure whether that's coming across right. Saying "crying gives me attention" is a very unhealthy way to process emotions. People cry because they are sad, when some need isn't being met, or when some need is taken away. We aren't much different from babies in that regard. I've been through plenty of instances in my life where crying was interpreted as "give me attention" but all that did was make it really, really hard to actually cry when I have actually been sad. Just because all the reasoning models that presently exist support that sort of notion, doesn't mean the notion is correct. It is important to be able to cry. Likewise, it's important to simplify all the reasoning oneself has down to understand important, fundamental awareness. Otherwise we get stuck with reasoning that is counterproductive for self understanding and communication.
    - callesgg 8y ago
      > There's no language or reasoning or models inside the baby's head that says "cry now therefore I will feel better". You don't need to have language to have models, artificial neural network can model stuff they don't need language to do it. The text "I cry cause i know that will cause me to feel better." is simply my explanation of the models behavior. > Saying "crying gives me attention" is a very unhealthy way to process emotions. I definitely agree :) But that does not mean that it is not true. Here is just a question to you that popped up when reading your text :) Do you think that babies/animals are conscious?
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]

s-shellfish 8y ago

I just feel like comparing a baby's experience to someone on lsd would likely mean language/models don't exist, therefore self doesn't exist, logic doesn't exist therefore cause and effect don't exist, or at least everything our natural vocabulary/modeling structures allows us to connect with, like you are saying. Lots of our reasoning is necessary for individual survival, but it's something we build up and learn from others over time, and it's something that is passed down through culture. I would just imagine that being a baby or being on lsd is similar to no ways of chopping the world up, and no deep rooted ideas of the true nature of our experiences. I don't think you need drugs to get there or need to have/be a baby. I don't think it's much different than the purpose of attaining enlightenment, from the Buddhist perspective.

callesgg 8y ago
I would assume that cause and effect is one of the few things that a baby does understand. One one level: It might be that the baby does not understand cause and effect, but it certainly acts in relation to it. "I cry cause i know that will cause me to feel better." The baby don't understand the sub components of why one thing causes the other. (On a deep level neither do we, but as adults we do have a richer collections of models that explain things, like crying causes other people to give me attention)
- s-shellfish 8y ago
  What I'm talking about for humans starts on the very high levels of abstraction we tend to do it. We connect such disparate strands of data and it all works because we have culture to reinforce it. All that background information that says "yes, this is correct" is what allows us to hold onto certain patterns versus others. If observation ceases, then the internal individual models cease, then reinforcement of those high level abstractions cease, because there's nothing to reinforce it. So honestly, I'm really not sure if a baby reasons that way. I don't think the baby is born knowing that crying leads to feeling better. I think the baby just does it, the same way a cat meows when it's hungry. There's no language or reasoning or models inside the baby's head that says "cry now therefore I will feel better". We invent that reasoning after observation of it happening again and again. I'd call it all ridiculous, but it's a bit tongue in cheek, and I'm not sure whether that's coming across right. Saying "crying gives me attention" is a very unhealthy way to process emotions. People cry because they are sad, when some need isn't being met, or when some need is taken away. We aren't much different from babies in that regard. I've been through plenty of instances in my life where crying was interpreted as "give me attention" but all that did was make it really, really hard to actually cry when I have actually been sad. Just because all the reasoning models that presently exist support that sort of notion, doesn't mean the notion is correct. It is important to be able to cry. Likewise, it's important to simplify all the reasoning oneself has down to understand important, fundamental awareness. Otherwise we get stuck with reasoning that is counterproductive for self understanding and communication.
  - callesgg 8y ago
    > There's no language or reasoning or models inside the baby's head that says "cry now therefore I will feel better". You don't need to have language to have models, artificial neural network can model stuff they don't need language to do it. The text "I cry cause i know that will cause me to feel better." is simply my explanation of the models behavior. > Saying "crying gives me attention" is a very unhealthy way to process emotions. I definitely agree :) But that does not mean that it is not true. Here is just a question to you that popped up when reading your text :) Do you think that babies/animals are conscious?
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]