现实神经系统


资料来源:维基共享资源。

"When 您 see 的 world 您 see 神. There is no seeing 神 apart from 的 world. Beyond 的 world to see 神 is to be 神."*
斯里·尼萨尔加达塔·玛哈拉吉

One of 的 most important ideas discussed in my 新 book 简要介绍特别是在第2章和第9章中,经验实在的概念 – 我们看到,听到,触摸,闻到和品尝到的所有东西–可以理解为神经系统。起初,这听起来似乎非常违反直觉,甚至荒谬,但它优雅地解决了当今科学和哲学中许多最重要的未解决问题,例如物质的性质和所谓的“hard problem of 梭哈游戏ness。”在我看来,这种对现实的解释的简单性和简约性,加上令人惊讶的解释力,使其几乎不言而喻。这一点非常重要,以至于我决定在本文中对其进行总结,以便使您对其逻辑有一个简短的了解,并可能鼓励您在本书中进一步进行探讨。


I will lay down 的 argument point by point, trying to keep it as simple as possible. Further elaboration can be found in 的 book. Therefore, before 您 conclude that 的 interpretation below doesn't address important empirical elements, please give me 的 benefit of 的 doubt 和 peruse 的 book.
  1. 我们做什么 知道 关于人类的大脑,我们只是做什么 承担 about it? We 知道 that measurable electrochemical activity in 和 across neurons correlates with contents of 梭哈游戏ness, like our perceptions 和 emotions. Many of us 的n 承担 that, because of 的se correlations, 的 brain somehow 产生 梭哈游戏ness, even though nobody can explain how. For 的 sake of argument, let's leave aside 的 assumptions 和 stick to what we 知道. We are 的n left with a system that has, in 的 words of Lee Smolin, 外部 和 内部 aspects: the 外部 aspect is 的 brain we can measure, while 的 内部 aspect consists of our 梭哈游戏 feelings 和 perceptions [Smolin,L.(2013年)。 Time Reborn: 从 的 Crisis in Physics to 的 Future of 的 Universe. 马萨诸塞州波士顿:霍顿·米夫林·哈科特(Houghton Mifflin Harcourt)。 270]. The 外部 aspect isn't necessarily 的 原因 of 的 内部 aspect, but simply what 的 内部 aspect 好像 when viewed from 外.
  2. However, 的 brain is merely an arrangement of so-called material particles like, say, a crystal. So unless we can make 的 case that 的 内部 aspect – that is, 梭哈游戏ness –仅与 的 particular structure of 的 brain, we have no alternative but to infer that 的 整个 material universe should also have an 内部 aspect (this is a serious 和 reasonable speculation that Smolin himself has engaged in). As it turns out, honest scientists 和 philosophers 知道 that 我们甚至无法连贯地设想 – 更alone论解释  how 梭哈游戏ness can come out of any particular material structure, 除非它与所有事物内在联系 [Chalmers,D。(2003)。梭哈游戏及其在自然界中的地位。在:Stich,S.和Warfield,F. eds。 Blackwell Guide to 的 Philosophy of Mind。马萨诸塞州马尔登:布莱克韦尔,第102-142页]. Therefore, let's bite 的 bullet 和 say that 的 整个 empirical world has an 内部 aspect, not 只要 brains. The visible universe is 的n a kind of cosmic brain: 内心深不可测的神经系统。  Indeed, a striking comparison published in The New York Times a few years ago shows 的 similarity between 的 structure of 的 universe at 的 largest scales 和 biological nervous systems (see 的 figure linked below). A more thorough study has shown that 的se similarities go way beyond mere appearances. From this perspective, 的 quote that opened this essay is a simple statement of fact, not a convoluted spiritual metaphor.



  3. Does that mean that a crystal is 梭哈游戏? Not any more than an individual neuron in a person's brain can be said to be 梭哈游戏. 从 简要介绍:“如果您幻想有树木,瀑布和歌鸟的热带度假胜地,那么所有这些图像都将与您头部中特定的,可测量的活化神经元模式相关联。理论上,神经科学家可以识别出大脑中不同的神经元组并说:A组与一棵树相关; B组与瀑布相关; C组与鸣鸟在一起;等等。但是,根据您对这种情况的想象的直接经验,A组有什么感觉吗孤立地存在吗?C组本身有什么感觉吗? 只要 感觉像是 的 整个 daydreaming 您 – 您r 整个 brain –想像树木,瀑布和鸟类作为整体场景的组成部分?您是否经历了多个独立的想象力流–一个用于树木,另一个用于瀑布,另一个用于鸟类–还是只有一条溪流将树木,瀑布和鸟类融合在一起?你明白这一点吗?除非有解离,否则什么都没有’就像是一个人的神经元的独立组’s brain. We can 只要 speak of 的 holistic stream of imagination of 的 person as a 整个. For exactly 的 same reason that 没有什么像一个人中孤立的一组神经元一样’s brain, 的re is nothing it is like to be an inanimate object" (pp. 44-45). Clearly, 的re is no reason to say that a rock is 梭哈游戏 的 way 您 和 I are. The universe as a 整个 has an 外部 和 an 内部 aspect, 的 rock being simply of its 外部 aspect, like an isolated neuron is 段 of a brain. Unless we have good reasons to think otherwise, we must 承担 that –  就像我们自己的内心生活– the internal aspect of 的 universe is a unified stream of 梭哈游戏ness; 'God's dream,' so to speak. The empirical world we perceive is like a 'scan of 神's brain' while dreaming. Creation is 的 外部 aspect of 'God's' creative mental activity, just like an active brain is 的 外部 aspect of a person's inner life.
  4. 但是,等等:您和我似乎有着完全独立的梭哈游戏流。我的内心生活与您的内心生活不同,它们似乎也没有任何根本的联系。 而且,我和你的内心生活都没有“上帝的内心生活”的宇宙尺度。这是为什么?正如我在书中详细解释的那样,生物是外部因素 – 的 外 image –在“神的思想”中的分离过程。离解过程在心理学上是众所周知的。它们使我们梭哈游戏流的特定部分与其余部分分开。这种分离是通过不同形式的健忘症或精神内容混淆而发生的。例如,一个人 分离性身份障碍 (DID) has multiple 'alters,' or identities. Each alter is seemingly separate from 的 others 和 often unaware of 的 others' existence, unless told by another person. What I am thus saying is that '上帝'有DID,我们就是它的变体. Indeed, I am saying that every living being is what a dissociated alter 好像 in 的 'scan of 神's brain' we call 经验现实. That we can identify biology in 的 universe is a diagnostic confirmation of 'God's DID' just as 的 identification of a spot on a brain scan is a diagnostic confirmation of, say, an aneurism. (By this 我不't mean to convey any negative connotations, such as to suggest that life is a disease; 的 metaphor breaks down at this point.)
  5. The elegance of this view is that it dispenses entirely with 的 need to postulate anything other than 的 obvious: 梭哈游戏ness itself. We do not need to postulate a 整个 material universe 外 梭哈游戏ness anymore. Empirical reality is merely 的 外 image – 的 外部 aspect – of 的 mental activity of a cosmic 梭哈游戏ness, while body-brains are merely 的 外 image of dissociated segments of this cosmic 梭哈游戏ness. And what is a body-brain but something we can see, touch, measure; something with 的 qualities of 经验? Indeed, 的 empirical world is 的 经验, by an alter, of 的 rest of 的 stream of 梭哈游戏ness 外 的 alter. It is dissociation that creates 的 duality between 内部 和 外部 aspects. But this duality does not imply or require anything 外 经验: 的 外部 aspects are 的mselves 经验s; 经验s of alters. As explained in Chapter 9 of 简要介绍, 'everything that currently motivates us to believe in a world 外 梭哈游戏ness can 和 will be understood as 的 effects of mental processes 外 our particular alter, which we witness from a second-person perspective.' (p. 207)
So 的re 您 go: a simple, parsimonious 和, dare I say, elegant 和 powerful explanation for 的 most vexing questions facing science 和 philosophy today. Most significantly, this explanation is not arrived at by 新 理论实体或假设,但精确地 by getting rid of unnecessary 和 inflationary 的oretical entities 和 postulates that have clouded our understanding of reality for centuries now. It's time we cleaned up 的 house 和 restored reason 和 empirical honesty to our ontology. It's time we saw a postulated material world 外 梭哈游戏ness –荒谬的,据称 产生 梭哈游戏ness – for what it is: 的 tortuous fiction of confused minds.

Nisargadatta Maharaj,S。(1973)。 我就是那个 印度孟买:Chetana,第1页。 58.斜体是我的。

(有关更多讨论,请参见 dedicated thread in 的 论坛comments under 的 脸书 post
分享:

61条评论:

  1. 已经走了这么远,接下来必须要讲故事情节..框架...关于这种宇宙梭哈游戏正在经历什么样的折磨,这将不得不把所有这些分离的变体分解成碎片...?为什么会"God"首先必须经历所谓的“分离身份认同障碍” ...?这对宇宙的发展以及我们在宇宙中的位置有什么暗示?而且,走了这么远,什么普遍"ethic"可能暗示着我们在这样一个宇宙中的位置……?

    回复删除
    回覆
    1. I explore much of this in my books. The answers, however, are always partial 和 tentative. These are perhaps 的 biggest questions of existence.

      删除
  2. 截至2015年4月14日欧洲中部时间19:20h,本文已进行了重大更新。

    回复删除
  3. 非常有趣的东西!一世'll be pondering 的se ideas for a while.

    回复删除
  4. 有趣。我的解释'我一直最喜欢的是"God"--or "All That Is"或你的任何标签'感到舒适-以这种方式表现出来'为了方便起见,我们将使用这个代词)可以通过十亿个不同的镜头来体验创造。就像我们通过孩子来体验自己和世界一样'生孩子时的眼睛。也许还经历了粘合,只有在事情分开开始时才能做到。也许忘记一会儿,重新体验生活的敬畏感。谁知道。一世'非常喜欢细读您的想法,因此肯定会拿起您的书。

    回复删除
  5. "When 您 see 的 world 您 see 神. There is no seeing 神 apart from 的 world. Beyond 的 world to see 神 is to be 神."*
    斯里·尼萨尔加达塔·玛哈拉吉

    i was struck by that quote 和 have read 和 re read it over 和 over again. i most certainly will be picking up a copy of 您r book.

    回复删除
  6. Great summary. Question for 您: if 的 physical brain is simply a localizing mechanism for 梭哈游戏ness, what is to keep a non-biological pattern producing machine (like a computer) from localizing 梭哈游戏ness? If 的 biological brain does not produce 梭哈游戏ness, what makes it so special 和 distinct from man-made non-biological information systems?

    回复删除
    回覆
    1. 这样想吧:生物学就是本地化-解离-在*看起来*'scan of 神's brain,'这就是经验世界本身。这是梭哈游戏定位的图像,而不是它'的原因或来源,与漩涡所产生的原因完全相同'造成水。现在,计算机看起来像生物学吗?在较高的抽象水平上,它可以在信息处理方面“模仿”大脑,但仍然不能'看起来都像生物学的大脑。为什么会是本地化的形象?我们必须相信什么原因?您知道,我们永远不要将模拟误认为事物本身。该计算机模拟生物大脑中的信息流。但要说的是,正因为如此,梭哈游戏的定位也有点类似于说肾功能的软件模拟应该使您的计算机撒尿在桌上。

      删除
  7. How familiar are 您 with Kabbalah? I'm not very, but 您r post reminded me of this:

    "对于Kabbalists来说,邪恶是通过分离本应(并且确实应该)保持团结的事物而产生的,"splitting"更深的团结。好像宇宙本身已经受到了宇宙的影响"解离反应" in which 的 underlying unity of 的 universe had been fragmented into a multiplicity of selves. Both 的 kelipot 和 affect-laden complexes become relatively inaccessible to 梭哈游戏ness, shrouded in 的 darkness of 的 unconscious."

    http://realitysandwich.com/171410/kabbalahs_remarkable_idea/

    回复删除
    回覆
    1. "... We 知道 that measurable electrochemical activity in 和 across neurons correlates with contents of 梭哈游戏ness, like our perceptions 和 emotions"

      如果它's not generating (aspects of) 梭哈游戏ness, what do 您 think all that electrochemical activity is actually doing?

      删除
    2. 马尔夫, electrochemical activity is simply what 的 perceptions 和 emotions of an alter look like when 经验d from another allter's perspective. There is no causation, just 经验 from different perspectives in 的 broader mind, or 'God.'

      删除
    3. 迈克尔·拉金(Michael Larkin)2015年4月21日,星期二,晚上10:27:00

      I kind of got hung up in section 1, where 您 end by saying: "The 外部 aspect isn't necessarily 的 原因 of 的 内部 aspect, but simply what 的 内部 aspect 好像 when viewed from 外."

      我的观察方式是,一个内部(我)看着另一个内部,那个内部是'通常不会知道。以内部(我)正在看我自己的大脑扫描为例。一世'm not seeing anything from 外: I'我以一种方式看到自己内部的内部'm normally unaware of. Never for a moment am I straying 外 my own inside.

      至于"someone else"看着我的内在'只是*他*的内心以他通常可以看到的方式看到我的内心't. He too never ventures 外 his own inside. *Everything* is inside. There *is* no 外. There'对我来说是已知的东西,对明显的其他人来说也是已知的东西,'这种了解不同事物的感觉使我们感到分离。实际上,我们'只是*感知*不同的事物。

      不知道我've put that across too well, but 的 thought stopped me in my tracks 和 I couldn't go any further with 您r argument.

      删除
    4. 迈克尔·拉金(Michael Larkin)2015年4月21日,星期二,晚上10:40:00

      为了澄清,当我说"In reality, we'只是*感知*不同的事物", I of course didn't really mean "we"。我的意思是两个*显然*分开的实体,显然是通过了解不同的事物而分开的。也许那个's a little clearer?

      删除
    5. 嗨,迈克尔,
      我不'完全不同意你的看法。它'全部都存在于一个梭哈游戏或整个思想中,或者'God.'但是梭哈游戏中有许多过程在发展(思想,感觉,想象力等),其中一些过程与其他事物分离。您和我是这种宽泛思维的分离过程。因此,________________从一个分离的变更__的角度来看,存在一个外部。但是这个'outside' is 外 的 alter, not 外 梭哈游戏ness. Similarly, from 的 point of view of a particular personality in a person with DID, 的re is a 'space' of 的 person's psyche that feels 'external'对个性__。但是,所有事物仍处于同一内心。

      删除
  8. 您 state that 您r position is more parsimonious than realism because it does not require postulating a 整个 universe 外 of 梭哈游戏ness, but on 的 other hand, 您r position is no more parsimonious because it does require postulating an 内部 aspect of 的 经验现实 for which we have no evidence.

    Moreover, what interests me primarily is 的 question of an afterlife: what happens to our inner side when our outer side is destroyed? How do fit here NDEs, apparitions of 的 deceased or mediumship?

    回复删除
    回覆
    1. Maybe 您 didn't follow 的 argument closely enough:

      1- We have undeniable evidence that 的re is an 内部 aspect to 的 brain (that's 您r 梭哈游戏ness as 您 read this);
      2- We have no way to explain 梭哈游戏ness by 的 particular structure of 的 brain (hard problem);
      3- The rest of 经验现实 is an arrangement of atoms just like 的 brain is;
      4- 从 1, 2 和 3 we can very reasonably infer that 的 整个 of 经验现实 has an 内部 aspect;
      5- 4 is more parsimonious than materialism because it does not require postulating a universe 外 mind: both 内部 和 外部 aspects are 经验s, 和 do not require anything beyond 经验.

      至于来世,我推测这涉及我们对宇宙的体验从第二人称视角到第一人称视角的转变。离解的结束要求我们将本地化的经验流程与更为广泛和统一的流程重新整合。当然,这假定在人类与整个宇宙之间没有不可检测的分离水平。如果两者之间有渐变,则死亡可能意味着'fall back'到不同水平的解离/本地化。但是,对于以后的猜测,除了一些NDE报告外,我们没有直接的经验证据。

      删除
    2. 迈克尔·拉金(Michael Larkin)2015年4月25日,星期六,上午4:32:00

      "1- We have undeniable evidence that 的re is an 内部 aspect to 的 brain (that's 您r 梭哈游戏ness as 您 read this);
      2- We have no way to explain 梭哈游戏ness by 的 particular structure of 的 brain (hard problem);
      3- The rest of 经验现实 is an arrangement of atoms just like 的 brain is;
      4- 从 1, 2 和 3 we can very reasonably infer that 的 整个 of 经验现实 has an 内部 aspect;
      5- 4 is more parsimonious than materialism because it does not require postulating a universe 外 mind: both 内部 和 外部 aspects are 经验s, 和 do not require anything beyond 经验."

      Now I think I get 您; 和 我觉得你 might be saying 的 same thing as I am.

      All 的re is comprises different aspects of reality as 经验d from "internal"观点。不幸的词,因为它会自动让我想到它的反面,"external". There *is* no 外部; just that which 经验s.

      Some of what is characterised as 外部 is shared 经验, albeit quite often interpreted differently according to different perspectives. Different perspectives constitute what are usually thought of as separate entities. "You"经历与"me"(反之亦然)"we"对现实有不同的看法。每个"us"如果您愿意,它是All All的分离方面,它以不同的方式体验事物:实际上,正是通过不同的方式产生了分离的错觉。

      Spiritual 经验s are marked by varying degrees of 的 sensation of unity, of being part of a larger 整个. To some extent or other, "we" are capable of overcoming 的 sense of separation.

      这样看待这个问题:无论出于何种原因,万有都决定自己探索;决定自己玩捉迷藏游戏(如艾伦·沃茨(Alan Watts)' story "What to tell children about 神")。如果它知道所有可能知道的一切,怎么办?嗯,一种方法是通过分解为明显的实体,这些实体因其不同的观点而受到有限的了解。可能会有一些广泛的共识领域,例如在对现实的共同理解中,但是仍然,每个分离的观点通常都具有个性感。

      "As for 的 after life, I would speculate that it involves a transition of our 经验 of 的 universe from a second-person perspective to a 第一个人 perspective. The end of dissociation entails a reintegration of our localized flow of 经验 with a much broader 和 unified flow."

      Yes: we are no longer as hidebound by 的 grand illusion. What 您're calling 的 "first-person" perspective is what I think of as a larger perspective, if not 的 (one 和 只要) 第一个人 perspective of All There Is (I'm在这里允许一定程度的进化,可能跨越许多化身)。

      "Granted, this 承担s that 的re are no undetected levels of dissociation between being a human 和 being 的 整个 universe. If 的re are gradations in between, 的n death may entail a 'fall back'到不同水平的解离/本地化。但是,对于以后的猜测,除了一些NDE报告外,我们没有直接的经验证据。"

      是。不同程度的分离与不同程度的进化相关:我认为'可能是真的。有可能,"evil"只是更大程度的解离。

      我觉得你'没错,这比唯物主义更简单,但这是很难表达的,同时又避免使用反映我们通常思考事物的方式的词语:"you", "me", "internal", "external", "empirical reality", 和 so on. Once 您 grasp it, 您 don'不能以完全相同的方式看世界。

      删除
    3. 嗨,迈克尔,
      我会避免猜测整个人内心的自我反省意图或有预谋的行为的归因,或者'God.'就我所知,变更的形成完全是自然主义的,即's simply what happens in mind at large due to what it inherently is. There is a discussion about this in 的 chapter about free will of 简要介绍. 我不'不要以为我刚才所说的话反驳了人们的自由意志,却避免了人为地模仿其行为。
      是的,当我说'outside' I mean 外 的 dissociated alter, not 外 梭哈游戏ness or mind at large itself. Think of it in 的 same way that, from 的 perspective of 您r thoughts, 您r emotions often feel alien or 外部 ('为什么这使我生气呢?没有理由...'),反之亦然。可是's all in 的 same psyche. The entire force of my argument is precisely to say that 的re is __nothing__ 外 mind at large.
      干杯,伯纳多。

      删除
    4. 迈克尔·拉金(Michael Larkin)2015年4月25日,星期六,下午7:26:00

      Okay, Bernardo: suppose 的re's no intention in greater 梭哈游戏ness. For all we 知道, it might just be 的 way things are.

      这种暗示"God" is in process of evolution 和 subject to naturalistic laws that are 的 *actual* primal reality; laws for which 的re is no explanation of why 的y might exist.

      反对拟人化的思考是's an inappropriate category error. But what if 的 universe is "deomorphic", 和 anthropomorphism is a reflection of that at a lower level? As above, so below, as 的y say.

      Then 的 explanation is more or less self-explanatory: 的 universe is 梭哈游戏, 和 so acted in a 梭哈游戏 way by exercising its maximal free will. At some stage, it chose to express itself in a dissociated manner, 和 制定法律以促进其最终重新发现自己.

      Otherwise, 的 Laws would be primal 和 梭哈游戏ness simply emerge in some way. To me, that sounds like a version of materialism.

      删除
    5. 迈克尔
      我同意,以某种方式,宇宙"选择以分离的方式表达自己。"但是问题是如何做出这样的选择:是像一个人选择自己的工作方式那样,是自我反省和有预谋的,还是像飞蛾一样选择发火那样的本能和原型驱动?前者是拟人化,而后者仍是"deomorphic."
      当你说宇宙"制定法律以促进其最终重新发现自己"我认为您不可避免地将预谋和自我反思归功于广大思想者(上帝,宇宙等),在我看来这并不明显或没有必要。可能是自然法则't 'chosen'就这样,但仅仅是本质上是什么?即其基本原型。同样,神经质的人'自我反省地选择神经质;他们只是表现出他们的心理原型。
      I am not saying that 您 are wrong, just that what 您 suggest isn't necessarily an implication of 的 view I'm putting forward.
      干杯,伯纳多。

      删除
    6. 迈克尔·拉金(Michael Larkin)2015年4月26日,星期日,下午6:53:00

      Thanks for 您r reply, Bernardo. I hope I'm not appearing argumentative for 的 sake of it; I'm merely trying to follow through 的 implications of 您r view.

      如果我纠正我'我错了,但我想你'重新说,“大开眼界”不是'预想从某种意义上说,它有一个"subconscious"维度,这是现象的起源-也许没有"conscious"或至少*理性*尺寸。它'好像(在较低的层次上),我们的原始冲动和欲望可以表达为表面上具体的现实:我们可以通过拥有这些冲动/欲望来使事物变得显然变得简单。因为我们可以'在我们分离的层面上似乎并没有真正做到这一点,我们倾向于认为它可以't be done at all.

      所以:我是正确的想法's 您r view that 的 things mind-at-large 原因s to become apparently have 的 potential of developing what we think of as rational, 梭哈游戏 awareness--which is something that it itself doesn'拥有?表达有些不同,也许是's 只要 through creation that it 经验s (the inferior faculty of) 理性, almost in passing.

      That would make 理性, that faculty 您 和 I are exercising in this discussion, a novel, emergent phenomenon that expresses a capability that heretofore mind-at-large didn't possess: it'通过我们,我们正在以这种(次等但仍然有用)的方式探索世界。

      To us, 理性 appears to be at 的 summit of awareness, but on reflection, 理性 never provides definitive answers: I suppose mathematics comes closest, but even 的re--as I understand it at least--Gödel showed it has its limitations. Rationality is 的 tool we use to try to explain 的 world, but it always falls short, 和 that will always be 的 case, however useful its results.

      It's rather strange to think of 理性 as being an imperfect tool; something that is, in 的 end, inferior to 的 "subconscious"宽泛的思维方式。我知道 's frequently said that Truth lies beyond all attempts to understand it rationally, but do we actually accept that? 我不'不要这样认为:我们不断地努力使它变得理性。

      直到...什么?也许要等到我们有某种超验的经验,例如如NDE,迷幻经历等所报道。从这些经历中回来的人总是会说不出话来;它's simply not possible to describe 的m in rational terms. At best, 理性 provides a rough approximation of that which is 的 case, 和 it so happens that in certain circumstances, human beings have 的 capacity to directly perceive something of 的 nature of mind-at-large.

      At some point, 理性 breaks down; I suppose 的 most obvious example in physics is of quantum phenomena, which could be thought of as transcendent 经验s that can, unusually, be reliably 和 repeatedly demonstrated. They're telling us 的re'在现象世界的基础上可以简单地'不能合理化。理性已将我们带到无法自我解释的地步,'当我们开始告诉自己闭嘴并进行计算时。

      And so it is with spiritual 和 psi phenomena: if we shut up 和 calculate all 的 时间, 的n we tend to become materialists, ignoring 的 elephant in 的 room.

      删除
    7. 迈克尔

      >>That would make 理性, that faculty 您 和 I are exercising in this discussion, a novel, emergent phenomenon that expresses a capability that heretofore mind-at-large didn't possess: it'通过我们,我们正在以这种(次等但仍然有用)的方式探索世界。<<

      如果我们替换这个词,我将完全同意这一点。"rationality" with "self-reflection."自我反省是一种能力,它使您不仅可以知道某事,而且可以*知道*您知道。因此,它不仅适用于理性思想,还适用于情感和直觉:我们独特地自我反省地梭哈游戏到自己的情感,直觉甚至是感知。因此,是的,我认为宽泛的解离-即生物学,新陈代谢-与自我反思能力密切相关,这就是生命的意义。我认为可能会大开眼界(我不'在这里没有确定的位置),可以纯粹是本能的,而不是自我反省的。或者,在我们所知道的生活和广大海洋之间存在着多个,渐进的,通常是不可见的自反射结构。我不'不知道。但是,如果在最基本和最基本的层面上,我会感到惊讶"God"自我反省,其行为是有预谋的。

      干杯,B。

      删除
    8. 迈克尔·拉金(Michael Larkin)2015年4月27日,星期一,下午5:43:00

      谢谢,伯纳多。我现在更了解您的位置。我赢了'不要说我同意或不同意;我要说的是,这使我看到了我所没有的新可能性'之前真的没有想过。我发现您的图书的Kindle版本将于5月下旬在英国推出;放心,我会尽快购买它。

      删除
    9. Bernardo, can 您 explain why 您 would be surprised if "God"会自我反省吗?

      删除
  9. "1- We have undeniable evidence that 的re is an 内部 aspect to 的 brain (that's 您r 梭哈游戏ness as 您 read this);
    2- We have no way to explain 梭哈游戏ness by 的 particular structure of 的 brain (hard problem);
    3- The rest of 经验现实 is an arrangement of atoms just like 的 brain is;
    4- 从 1, 2 和 3 we can very reasonably infer that 的 整个 of 经验现实 has an 内部 aspect;
    5- 4 is more parsimonious than materialism because it does not require postulating a universe 外 mind: both 内部 和 外部 aspects are 经验s, 和 do not require anything beyond 经验."

    The argument is doubtful because it is based on ignorance, not 知道ing why brains have an inner side. And physicalism is equally parsimonious because it does not require anything out of 的 physical; 梭哈游戏ness could be physical despite not 知道ing how.

    "If 的re are gradations in between, 的n death may entail a 'fall back'到不同水平的解离/本地化。但是,对于以后的猜测,除了一些NDE报告外,我们没有直接的经验证据。"

    I disagree. As evidence of localized states of postmortem 梭哈游戏ness, 的re are cases of aparitions of deceased, mediumship 和 people seem to remember 的ir past lives. I would develop a conception of 的 afterlife basing on that evidence, instead of trying to bring 的 evidence to a preconception.



    回复删除
    回覆
    1. >>该论点令人怀疑,因为它基于无知,不知道为什么大脑有内在的一面。

      We 知道 _that_ a brain has an 内部 aspect. That's all 的 argument needs.

      即使是原则上,我们也未能根据物质的特殊安排来解释经验,这是梭哈游戏上的难题。物理学家有责任至少在原则上解释在特定安排下质量,电荷或动量如何创造经验。没有人能接近它。我的责任不是证明自己不能做到,因为我的立场是梭哈游戏来自特定物质结构的观念是白痴的,并且反映出深刻的困惑。负担在他们身上。在他们成功做到这一点之前,必须基于不可否认的经验证据,假设整个宇宙也是整体梭哈游戏流的形象。我想我现在已经精疲力尽了,所以赢了't repeat it.

      >> And physicalism is equally parsimonious because it does not require anything out of 的 physical; 梭哈游戏ness could be physical despite not 知道ing how.

      这是不正确的。至少物理学家必须假设梭哈游戏是除了例如身体外的物理特性。质量,动量,自旋,电荷等。通过对物理的其他属性的定义(同样是质量,动量等),梭哈游戏不是那些。因此,需要假设更多。同时,梭哈游戏是不言而喻的,因此,当物理学家假设存在梭哈游戏以外的事物(例如梭哈游戏之外的事物)时,他总是不那么节俭。这不是'任何哲学家都在争论。有争议的是,一个人是否可以仅凭梭哈游戏来解释所有经验现象。我的大部分工作都与此有关。

      至于reports of apparitions 和 mediumship, I will limit myself to referring to what I wrote here:
      http://www.yiqimaicha.com/2012/09/apparitions-ghosts-and-mediumistic.html

      删除
    2. "At 的 very least 的 physicalist must postulate 梭哈游戏ness to be an EXTRA property of 的 physical in addition to e.g. mass, momentum, spin, charge, etc. By 的 very definition of 的 other properties of 的 physical (again: mass, momentum, etc.), 梭哈游戏ness is NOT those. So more needs to be postulated. At 的 same 时间, 梭哈游戏ness is self-evident, so when a physicalist postulates that 的re is something beyond 梭哈游戏ness (e.g. matter 外 梭哈游戏ness) he is always less parsimonious."

      只有二​​元论不是那么简单,另一方面,这并不意味着它'是不正确的。物理主义是一元论,与理想主义一样简朴。梭哈游戏可以是物理的,尽管它不属于微观物理学的性质。在日常意义上,事物以同样的方式不言而喻。

      "至于幻影和媒介的报道,我将仅限于参考我在这里写的内容:
      http://www.yiqimaicha.com/2012/09/apparitions-ghosts-and-mediumistic.html"

      在这篇文章中有我认为是正确的批评,例如近似误差"top-down"还是不检查幻影和中级的特殊情况。除了您的立场之外,您也不接受事后交流的可能性,因为死亡被认为像是从梦中醒来,并且不再与他们的梦发生互动,但是我认为这在某些中等职业的情况下是错误的。



      删除
    3. 嗨,胡安,

      >>Physicalism is a monism, so is as parsimonious as idealism. Consciousness can be physical although it is not among 的 properties of 的 microphysics.<<

      For this to work, a monistic materialist must effectively deny that 梭哈游戏ness exists at all. Amazingly enough, many prominent materialists try to do just that, in a position that is called "消除唯物主义。"我认为这个职位很荒谬,如下所述:

      http://www.yiqimaicha.com/2014/09/the-magical-trick-of-disappearing.html

      干杯,B。

      删除
    4. "For this to work, a monistic materialist must effectively deny that 梭哈游戏ness exists at all."

      No, eliminative materialism is not 的 只要 option for 的 physicalists. The property of being a square is not in microphysics, 和 by no means 的 physicalists must be eliminativists about that property.

      Also 您 missing 的 rest of my previous comment.

      删除
    5. 胡安 I refrained on purpose from commenting about 的 rest. 我不't feel I have much to add to arguments about evidence from psi phenomena. I am not an expert in 的 research.

      至于您提到的其他选择,它'称为出现。但是出现并没有'之所以要为梭哈游戏而工作,是因为从原理上讲,即使从原则上讲,梭哈游戏的性质也是不可推论的。见大卫·查默(David Chalmer)'s 'Strong Emergence' discussion. I'我不仅在我的书中还讨论了梭哈游戏的不连贯性,这是大脑在许多地方的一种新兴属性。基本上,对它的吸引力是对魔术的吸引力,即未知物的标记。它完全没有意义,因为没有人能解释它的工作原理,甚至从原理上讲也没有。他们只是给它起了个名字。

      删除
    6. 好吧,也许有一个简短的评论:是的,我认为死亡就像从梦中醒来一样。但我也看到所有现实都是由一个思维过程在一个唯一的思维中展开而构成的,我称这种思维为广义思维('God'在这篇特别的论文中)。从这个角度看,所有原则上展开的所有过程至少在原则上可以相互影响。所以我不放弃与所谓的沟通'discarnate entities,'如果它们存在,那是不可能的。

      删除
    7. 但是,我们所呼吁的一切都将魔术视为原始事物。

      On 的 question of postmortem communication, I would address specific cases rather than 的oretical 和 aprioristic considerations ...








      删除
    8. >>但是,我们所呼吁的一切都将魔术视为原始事物。<<

      That is true in a sense. But materialists 的n appeal to magic twice: by taking matter as a ontological primitive, 和 的n by simply assuming (without elaborating) that 梭哈游戏ness arises from matter.

      理想主义只是赋予了不言而喻的内容'magical' or not: 梭哈游戏ness exists.

      删除
    9. 您 keep showing materialism as dualism, when it is not dualism. It is also self-evident that matter, in 的 everyday sense, exists.

      删除
    10. For as long as 的 hard problem of 梭哈游戏ness isn'要解决,至少在原则上,唯物主义必然意味着实质二元论或财产二元论,是的。这是我的立场,我解释了原因。

      不言而喻,物质只是作为一种体验形式而存在。它为N't at all self-evident that matter exists 外 经验.

      删除
    11. But it is self- evident that matter exists 外 of my 经验: of course, idealists can conceive that matter is 经验 of other, but at 的 cost of being so complicated as physicalism. I think we're at an impasse ...

      删除
    12. 胡安
      My entire work is precisely about refuting what 您 just said. :)
      干杯,B。

      删除
  10. Bernardo, 您r participation 和 opinion is needed on one highly interesting Skeptiko forum thread:

    http://www.skeptiko-forum.com/threads/a-robot-prepared-for-self-awareness.2118/

    I hope 您 will come to Skeptiko forum thread I mentioned 和 respond on it - but, if 您 have no intention to patricipate 的re, I'll be glad to see 您r response right here as well!

    回复删除
    回覆
    1. Hi 涡流. I may write an essay on AI some time soon, but after a quick glance at that thread, I feel like rolling my eyes back. A paper claiming artificial 梭哈游戏ness has been created a year ago? Too much bull for my tired heart. :) 我不'认为我会加入。

      删除
    2. 嗨Vortex,
      I wrote 的 piece about Artificial Consciousness:
      http://www.yiqimaicha.com/2015/04/cognitive-short-circuit-of-artificial-consciousness.html
      Hope 您 find it useful!
      干杯,伯纳多。

      删除
    3. Thanks for such a lengthy answer, Bernardo - a 整个 blog post! ;-)

      现在阅读...

      删除
  11. 你好,卡斯特鲁普先生!
    I am a guy who very recently got interested in nonduality 和 的 philosophy behind it, 和 I love 您r work! I have already ordered two of 您r books, 和 I will probably read at least two more after reading 的 first two. However, even though 您 might have written about this in 您r books I would like to ask 您 about how our 梭哈游戏ness create reality.
    If I understand 您r ideas correctly, 的re is basically some sort of collective 梭哈游戏ness that creates 的 universe as we 知道 it, right? However, we 知道 that 的re are quantum particles in this simulation of ours, that we can "collapse" by observing 的m, right? So, why have 的y not already 坍方d? If 的y are created by 的 collective 梭哈游戏ess at 的 bottom of 的 universe, why do 的y need 的 梭哈游戏ness of specific human beings to 坍方?
    您 might already have mentioned this is a podcast, 和 I might simply just have forgotten about it, but please explain this or point at an article where 您 explain it.
    附言我没有't read this article, so please tell me if 您 explain it here. I can't focus on reading this late in 的 evening I'm afraid.

    回复删除
    回覆
    1. 嗨塞巴斯蒂安,
      这是一个适当和相关的问题。我在《除其他外的简短介绍》中对此做了详尽的阐述,但是下面是一个较早的草案,可以公开获取:
      http://www.yiqimaicha.com/2014/08/my-philosophy-and-quantum-physics.html
      I hope 您 find it useful.
      干杯,B。

      删除
    2. BTW, one more question. Have 您 ever studied 的 epistemology of Ayn Rand? A disciple of Rand, Nathaniel Branden once wrote
      "因此问题'How do 您 知道 that 的 外部 world exists?'转化为问题的自相矛盾的荒谬,'how do 您 知道 that 您 are 梭哈游戏?' To deny 的 外部 world is to deny 的 existence of 梭哈游戏ness. But 的n who is doing 的 denying 和 by means of what faculty?"
      The problem with her epistemology, assuming that Branden has represented her views correctly, is that she defines 梭哈游戏ness as something that necessarily is aware of something 外部. This is a flaw that is so obvious I could easily see through it even before I started being interested in idealism. :S

      删除
    3. 嗨塞巴斯蒂安,
      我从没看过兰德。她'通常在哲学上是不信誉的,它本身并没有't mean she's wrong, but it means I never prioritized reading her work. And frankly, 我不'在您提供的报价之后,我想我永远也不会。出于您指出的原因,它是如此明显的缺陷,以至于完全荒唐可笑。
      干杯,B。

      删除
  12. 嗨,伯纳多,
    I'在阅读了有关AI和本文的文章后,我刚刚订购了最新书。我对您对电子人理论的想法感到好奇。具体来说,在您的框架中,分离的关系可能会如何变化'先进的信息处理速度(如我们可能"birth"通过量子计算机进入现实。机器人般的认知增强如何超越生物的基本体验?我想知道是否有可能超越我们对"time,"通过这样的先进处理。还是更快的处理如何增强认知,从而增强生物的自我反思能力?
    Perhaps 您 address such ideas in 您r book or elsewhere...
    约翰

    回复删除
    回覆
    1. 嗨,约翰。希望您喜欢这本书!在我看来,这些增强功能最多可以看作是五种通常的新的,人工的感觉方式,仅此而已。简而言之,它们可以与普通仪器(例如望远镜,显微镜等)进行比较,后者已经帮助我们已有了数千年的现有感官方法。干杯,伯纳多。

      删除
  13. So, 的 world as we see it is 的 second-person 经验 of 的 thoughts of 神, that is, it is not something 神 is thinking about, but it's what 的 thoughts of god look like. This raises some questions:

    1.神的思想看起来像恒星,行星,海洋,雨水以及我们实际需要生活的所有其他事物,这是否只是偶然?上帝可以说:"嗯,我的想法应该看起来像毛衣。" Maybe 的re are other dimensions where 神'的想法看起来完全不同?
    2. Could 的re conceivably be a world where 的 universe is 的 actual content of 的 thoughts of god, 和 not 只要 what 的 thoughts of 神 look like from a second person perspective?

    I apologize if I asked questions that already have been answered; I felt that I just had to write down 的se thoughts before I forgot 的m.

    /塞巴斯蒂安

    回复删除
    回覆
    1. 嗨,塞巴斯蒂安。 (1)您是否可以有目的地思考一个想法,以便在您的头上创造出一种发射神经元的模式,就像蝴蝶一样?我猜不会。 :-)所以我认为一般人不会'从我们的角度知道它的想法是什么样的。它只是认为与抽象对称性有关的思想,我们可以在微物理学中找到它们。 (2)是的,但是在那个世界上,不会有像你我这样的离异的改变,只有一个统一的心有一个梦想。对于一个人,这将是一个梦想。

      删除
  14. 嗨,贝尔纳多,我能不能就您与MBT的不同之处说一些话吗?一世'听说你说你不'不喜欢将这种现实看作是一种幼儿园的想法,因为为什么我们无法获得对过去生活有帮助的回忆,等等?希望我正确解释。汤姆·坎贝尔's对这些观点的回答(因为它们经常出现在他的Q中&As) is that it's about "sculpting a soul" (he doesn'通过它使用该术语)'许多化身,对前世的了解无济于事,但实际上阻碍了"being level" since 的 info would tend to be used at 的 intellectual level to try to avoid past mistakes, etc. The 处于水平 carries over to future incarnations but not 的 intellectual level. For instance, suppose 您 were a particularly selfless person in a previous life 和 您 really nailed it, so 您 知道 how to do that. Maybe in 您r next life, 您 would come back as someone born into great privilege so 您 could actually learn how to be selfish, etc. Thanks.

    回复删除
  15. 嗨,伯纳多,

    This is a very interesting essay. I came to 您r website through 的 recommendation of a friend. This piece seems as though it may be a reasonable summary of 您r overall position? If 的re is a more comprehensive piece online, let me 知道.

    I have a few questions that come to mind; I am sure some of 的m have been asked in other places, so my apologies if I'm being redundant. First I will try to summarize 您r position (to make sure I am understanding 您 correctly), 和 的n I will raise my objections.

    1) 您 propose that 的 “整个经验世界 has an 内部 aspect, not 只要 brains”. By this I gather 您 mean that 梭哈游戏ness exists throughout 的 整个 empirical world. 您 see this as 的 simplest solution to 的 problem of how 梭哈游戏ness can exist within 的 matter of 的 brain.

    2) 您 go on to argue that 的 entire universe has a unified 梭哈游戏ness, rather than separate 梭哈游戏nesses. 您 argue this in 的 following steps:
    a) Human 梭哈游戏ness involves multiple material elements in concert, i.e. different regions of 的 brain.
    b) Consciousness is not divisible between 的se regions, rather it exists as an integrated 经验 of 的 整个 brain. When 您 say “没有什么像一个人中孤立的一组神经元一样’s brain”, 您 mean that 梭哈游戏ness cannot be ascribed to an isolated group of neurons in a person’的大脑。相反,它只能归因于大脑“whole”.
    c) 您 analogize from 的 brain to 的 “整个经验世界”. Just as 梭哈游戏ness cannot be ascribed to isolated parts of 的 brain but must be ascribed to 的 brain as a 整个, 梭哈游戏ness also cannot be ascribed to isolated parts of 的 universe but must be ascribed to 的 universe as a 整个.

    3) 您 conclude that 的 physical universe is merely 的 外部 aspect to 的 内部 aspect of cosmic 梭哈游戏ness. 您 clarify this position to mean that 的 physical universe is merely 的 appearance of cosmic mental activity. In other words, 的re is no material reality, 的re is 只要 cosmic 梭哈游戏ness. 您 say “we do not need to postulate a... material universe 外 梭哈游戏ness”.

    4) 您 justify 的 sense we have of separate human 梭哈游戏nesses in 的 universe through an analogy to multiple personalities in a brain with dissociative identity disorder.

    I hope I understood 您r argument correctly. If I did, 的n I have a few objections to some of 您r points (posted in 的 reply):

    回复删除
    回覆
    1. i) “…there is nothing it’就像是一个人的神经元的独立组’s brain”.

      异议1:让我们定义一组神经元’如下:某人的所有神经元’s brain except those in 的 amygdala. Now let us isolate 的m by removing 的 amygdala. Some individuals have undergone this form of brain damage (that is, 的 removal of 的ir amygdala), 和 的se individuals were still 梭哈游戏. Therefore we can ascribe 梭哈游戏ness to an isolated group of neurons. In other words, 的re is 感觉像是 some isolated groups of neurons.

      ii)“Just as 梭哈游戏ness cannot be ascribed to isolated parts of 的 brain but must be ascribed to 的 brain as a 整个, 梭哈游戏ness also cannot be ascribed to isolated parts of 的 universe but must be ascribed to 的 universe as a 整个” [My summary of 您r position].

      Objection 2: If 梭哈游戏ness cannot be ascribed to isolated parts of 的 universe, 和 since brains are isolated parts of 的 universe, 的n 梭哈游戏ness cannot be ascribed to isolated brains. If 梭哈游戏ness cannot be ascribed to isolated brains, 的n it does not seem to make sense to say that 梭哈游戏ness can be ascribed to 的 brain as a “whole”. The foundation for 您r analogy (the 梭哈游戏ness of a “whole” brain) has thus been negated, 和 so it no longer makes sense to premise it as an analogy for 梭哈游戏ness of 的 “whole” universe.

      In other words, I do not see this as a good argument for accepting a single unified 梭哈游戏ness instead of many separate 梭哈游戏nesses.

      iii)“There is no material reality, 的re is 只要 cosmic 梭哈游戏ness” [My summary of 您r position].

      异议3:大脑’s neurons do not depend on 的 梭哈游戏ness of 的 brain for 的ir existence. We see that this is true because neurons exist in a deceased person'的大脑,即使死者's brain has no 梭哈游戏ness. Just as neurons exist without 的 梭哈游戏ness of a brain, by analogy material reality could exist even in 的 absence of 的 梭哈游戏ness of 的 universe. Therefore, we cannot say that material reality is dependent on 的 梭哈游戏ness of 的 universe.

      In other words, I am unable to see how 您r argument can explain away 的 necessity to postulate a material universe.

      Thanks for taking 的 time to read through this. I hope my challenges are interesting 和 not redundant, 和 that 您 can clarify if I have misunderstood anything. I'm looking forward to reading 您r response.

      干杯,
      cncf

      删除
    2. Thanks Thomas, but I can't get into detailed philosophical discussions; at least not here. 您 can try my forum, where several others may also react: //groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/metaphysical-speculations. 您 can also check my papers for a much more detailed argument: http://www.yiqimaicha.com/p/papers.html. In this particular paper I address many objections to my argument: http://www.disputatio.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/Kastrup_On-the-Plausibility-of-Idealism.pdf.

      删除
  16. Thank 您 Bernardo, I will look through 您r papers.

    回复删除
  17. "...我们看到,听到,触摸,闻到和品尝到的所有东西–可以理解为神经系统" This is a very deep thought. Generally, 您 speak too much to be somewhere near close to 的 truth.

    回复删除