All Answers (48)
-
Would mind exist or develop on an island without any human contact?
Ideas combination of previous cultures as well as modifications. -
This is a tricky one ...I think language, is necessary for ideas to fully develop - certainly complex ideas anyway. Well we usually think in our native tongue don't we? If you were on an island without any human contact then could we assume that you have a language? Shipwrecked maybe? Or were you raised by wolves or monkeys? They say that necessity is the mother of invention - perhaps in the quest for survival then ideas would develop - just as tools were developed by the cave man. -
My hypothetical human would not have had any exposure to other humans, therefore no language nor cultural stimuli.
-
I don't know how realistic could be this experiment since human beings are the most dependent on the parents during a longer time just after the birth. So most probably a human being without any contact with other human being since his/her birth would just die.
If we think about some kind of Tarzan being grown up by some kind of ape, I would say that s/he would learn what the environment offers to him/her.
The question about the existence of "mind" in this case, I would say depends on the definition of "mind". Since culture and language and many of the most simples ideas are things that are learnt this person would lack them, but maybe s/he would have "ideas" that their hypothetical ape society maybe wouldn't have because of the brain differences. This leads to the question of what information is "hard-wired" in our brain and I don't think that this is a easy question (although I'm not the best informed person about this :) ). -
I have an impression of a group of Greek philosophers sitting around and discussing concepts or ideas or under the tutelage of a teacher or guide. Was the concept of "mind" developed in isolation without any previous even nebulous ideas?
Could someone explain the concept of "hard wiring" and how this this is transmitted or are the receptors transmitted? -
This is a really difficult discussion to have unless the concept of 'ideas' is agreed upon (and even then!). I mean the idea of a grinding stone is far superior to that of a complex computer motherboard if the community requires flour for bread. Oh, seems that suddenly the desert island is a community requiring bruschetta? Well an island sounds nice and tropical?
Can't help you Anthonie with the hard-wiring Q...
-
I've a notion the roots of consciousness can be traced back to the simplest life forms.
In bacterial communities, for instance, there is the observation of a *quorum sensing*. Individual cells, in response to the chemistry of their media, will *know* if there are enough of them to invade new territory. Acting in concert certainly has advantages to singular tropisms.
If we agree that ideas are units of consciousness, it seems likely we could stumble across many of the same concepts Darwin encountered in The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals (1872). -
we have two minds carnal mind or rational (left brain) and the spiritual mind (right hemisphere). that is in the bible ...Romans 8:5
For those who are according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who are according to the Spirit, the things of the Spirit. Romans 8:7 because the mind set on the flesh is hostile toward God; for it does not subject itself to the law of God, for it is not even able to do so, and those who are in the flesh cannot please God. -
@Rocio
Oh! yes! the bible is known for its deep scientific grounds :D
For other nice phrases with deep knowledge from the bible you can check the site http://www.evilbible.com/ -
Sir, can you please define mind. Rather, your notion about it. -
"Top of Scientists Approve Holy Quran as main Sources of Sciences, and Technology too …."
Fortunately, it is a long time that scientists don't look at any "holy book" as a source of knowledge for doing science or produce technology. -
Idea may come on the formation of id emancipates anything, that get lost man - anticipate and deny things, sometime it exposes by unreasonable object. But who know the exist of id came from where ? -
What is science according to you?
-
Science is a word that it's come along computer then means informatics.
It takes a long time that an idea may be science, but not if only "informs" . -
I agree that science is knowledge. But before I continue my discussion, would like to thank Eisa Ali and ปรกฤต รินทรานุรักษ์ for replying. Ma'am and sir, what do you according to you what are the parameters, to which science can be extended?
-
I relate something such as the parameters of idea are ID + emancipation + anticipation.
The parameters of science are facts or data collected by one who may be scientist + researches + organized to inform systematic narrative by the way to be knowledge but sometime not. -
Thanks to Himanshu Halve Eisa Ali and others for ideas.
-
I think mind is nothing with thoughts. And, these thoughts reflect that we humans have a mind where we can process these ideas and thus communicate. Of course language is a very important part of it. -
I'm really sorry for the mistake I did in the comment.
It's 'I think mind is nothing without thoughts'. -
Mr. ปรกฤต รินทรานุรักษ์, may I know what is your name? I mean what must I call you in English?
Getting on with the discussion. Firstly, how do you define facts? Secondly, can you please explain me what do you mean by your last line- "inform......not"?
Ms. Eisa, it is sure that science is humans efforts to understand everything which is there. But (although I don't feel so), then, what about the science which invents something, isn't it science?
Aalya didi, you said mind is nothing without thoughts. And these thoughts enable us to communicate. I feel these thoughts are the things which make us do anything. So, in other words mind is the thing which controls our deeds by one of the most complex processes in nature. Here I ask a question to all of you:
IS IT POSSIBLE FOR ANY ORGANISM IN THIS UNIVERSE TO DEVICE SUCH A COMPLEX MECHANISM? -
I'm not sure that 'facts' are the objective. In science, as I understand it, a tested hypothesis stands in place of fact and remains in place only so long as it passes every test against it. Thus Newton's understanding (or hypothesis) of the nature of the universe remains in place until Albert Einstein. Even then the Apollo moon landings owed nothing to Einstein but were conducted using Newtonian physics. Humanity may find facts but until then we work with these hypotheses and try to disprove them in the hope that by doing so we may - eventually - find a fact, or two.
These exercises, or tests of hypotheses, are conducted by seekers after knowledge or 'scientists', while current hypotheses may be used by engineers to make "...jugs necessary serve useful necessary purposes...." -
Himanshu, What if you don't have any thoughts? Then, what will this mind control?
-
Himanshu, I think that, evolution can make this happen. I'm not saying that I'm absolutely right but, it's merely an assumption.
We don't know if aliens exist or not. But, if they do exist, then, who knows they might be the ones who have more complex mechanisms which is beyond the understanding of humans. -
Thank you Mr. Hamish for joining this discussion. What you have said, sir, is correct. So, we can say that facts are nothing but widely accepted opinions or repeatedly proven hypothesis'. Actually the reason I asked such question was that if all the people who turn a hypothesis into a fact (the researchers) are wrong or; to be more precise, are intentionally doing it; then should that fact be accepted?
Aalya didi, that is exactly what I want to question. Why do humans consider something beyond their comprehensibility, a miracle or supreme? Do we think we will never achieve it? -
Himanshu, nobody can tell the future. We still don't know the extent of human's capability. They may achieve it or may not.
-
Clearly the mind exists. But what is mind? The active mind is the animal thinking. The passive mind is the animal's potential for thought. -
สวัสดี ทุกๆ คน means "Good day cap in hand to everyone ".
reply to Himanshu, you can call me PRAGat or Paragrit (ปรกฤต) .
I define "facts" as " Faults are continuing to somebody" but it's not a joke that every time we talk about facts there are always some difference occurs to be "that is not the facts* ".
The last line "inform ... not" is functioned 'of 3 sentences : first; To inform systematic narrative (by someone), second; the way (that is something) to be knowledge, third; sometime not.
That means its formation to insight of science will probably be knowledge or explanation of facts** only.
Though my answers are not truth it may be only data that's OK to me. -
Mr. Paragrit I understood the second part of your comment- the meaning to that line. But I am certainly unable to understand your conception about 'a fact'. I have deduced a vague impression of what you want to say but I guess it will be clearer if you explain it with an example's aid. Please, help me by doing that.
-
Idea is Id that go along emancipation ending at anticipation not participation.
Mind generated idea before come to be knowledge by science or any of searchers.
Fact in my concept is something only percept not to serious otherwise you are in a war.
Truth by philosophy is not to determine as we intentionally transform realities.
Thank you Himanshu for the idea. -
"Mind" may be constructed by id first and others for second that forms ego and super-ego on synthesization of characters when id appears. Then the mind generates an idea and more. The more explanations induce more a vague uneasiness. Such as an example ; a "shadow" exists when you see it,catch it with your perception, but when you move then the exist shadow of previous disappear and new shadow is not the same figure to you.
-
I agree with you Mr. Paragrit. Tell me, is it that mind cannot generate knowledge, and just ideas?
-
After idea generated, it had developed to be knowledge by researchs and passes some ledge to know .
-
Okay. Please comment on my recently added question about spirits.
-
Himanshu, I've found many questions about spirit in researchgate and fallen in a vague content commented by someone, those are separated from here that I search no comment on yours. Pls, introduce on my poor knowledge.
-
"'Mind' may be constructed by id first and others for second that forms ego and super-ego on synthesization of characters when id appears."
I really don't understand this. The letters, ID may be taken to mean 'identification' or as the Freudian 'id,' the sum of primitive urges. I take it to mean the latter, since you mention ego and superego.
Few people now days take Freud too seriously. He is an important figure in the early history of psychology, but is rarely thought of now days.
So I am confused as to what you mean. Are you just repeating Freud in supposing the mind to be id, ego and superego, or is there some further meaning in this?
"Such as an example ; a 'shadow' exists when you see it,catch it with your perception, but when you move then the exist shadow of previous disappear and new shadow is not the same figure to you."
The shadow is not a substance, but merely a sort of affection. The phantasm it generates can change for a variety of reasons. I find no connection between this idea and Freud's analysis. Please explain.
