How mind can intervene when body behaves according to laws of nature

Is the mind the same as the body? What is consciousness? Can machines have it?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
bahman
Posts: 5071
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

How mind can intervene when body behaves according to laws of nature

Post by bahman »

Mind intervenes when the matter is in an undecided state.
Dimebag
Posts: 402
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 2:12 am

Re: How mind can intervene when body behaves according to laws of nature

Post by Dimebag »

bahman wrote: Tue Jun 15, 2021 4:48 pm Mind intervenes when the matter is in an undecided state.
So you are saying mind doesn’t behave according to laws of nature? Can you give examples of where matter is in an undecided state and mind intervenes, producing matter acting not according to natural laws?
User avatar
bahman
Posts: 5071
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: How mind can intervene when body behaves according to laws of nature

Post by bahman »

Dimebag wrote: Mon Jun 21, 2021 7:06 am
bahman wrote: Tue Jun 15, 2021 4:48 pm Mind intervenes when the matter is in an undecided state.
So you are saying mind doesn’t behave according to laws of nature?.
Yes, mind is free. That is body that behaves according to the laws of nature.
Dimebag wrote: Mon Jun 21, 2021 7:06 am Can you give examples of where matter is in an undecided state and mind intervenes, producing matter acting not according to natural laws?
Matter always acts according to laws of nature but it can reach to an undecided state. An example of such a situation is when a chain of causality forks. Another example when you are sitting. Our bodies are close in an undecided state when it is in motion too. That is why we can plan the motion of our bodies.
Dimebag
Posts: 402
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 2:12 am

Re: How mind can intervene when body behaves according to laws of nature

Post by Dimebag »

bahman wrote: Mon Jun 21, 2021 3:20 pm
Dimebag wrote: Mon Jun 21, 2021 7:06 am
bahman wrote: Tue Jun 15, 2021 4:48 pm Mind intervenes when the matter is in an undecided state.
So you are saying mind doesn’t behave according to laws of nature?.
Yes, mind is free. That is body that behaves according to the laws of nature.
Dimebag wrote: Mon Jun 21, 2021 7:06 am Can you give examples of where matter is in an undecided state and mind intervenes, producing matter acting not according to natural laws?
Matter always acts according to laws of nature but it can reach to an undecided state. An example of such a situation is when a chain of causality forks. Another example when you are sitting. Our bodies are close in an undecided state when it is in motion too. That is why we can plan the motion of our bodies.
There is obviously uncertainty at the quantum level, where there is no definite state known about quanta, or where for example decay may happen a certain % time. I am not sure I would apply this same uncertainty to the macro world of our bodies. There is a sense in which, even though we can’t predict the motion or momentum of every single particle in our bodies, they follow causal laws, and as such are in theory predictable. The problem arises due to the sheer complexity of our bodies, or indeed, any physical system beyond a few particles. The three body problem is an example where complexity outweighs our ability to deterministically predict with any accuracy the outcome of interactions between a system of more than two Newtonian bodies. Physics has found ways around this, though they are unable to greatly scale up such a simulation to predict behaviour of a system, as such, they must rely on statistical means of making predictions and modelling complex systems.

The human body is too complex to model in a leplacian demon manner. But there is a sense that, given enough knowledge about the human body, it would be possible in theory to predict future actions. In practice it is not possible, and the practical resolution of measurement of the arrangements of matter would be limited, but possibly not affected by the quantum uncertainty, if we were able to track the states of matter at a coarse enough level for quantum uncertainty to be insignificant yet allow enough predictive power to guide models. Given such a possibility, at what level would this causal branching human body exist?

If the quantum level were so causally influenced and prone to such stochastic intervention, would we not see far more unpredictable behaviour, as well as matter itself not following laws of classical physics more? If you need mind to insert itself into these areas of uncertainty, why even have a nervous system capable of transmitting neural signals to the limbs, why not simply have the signal sent directly to each muscle group in question?
User avatar
RCSaunders
Posts: 2959
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
Contact:

Re: How mind can intervene when body behaves according to laws of nature

Post by RCSaunders »

Dimebag wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 11:19 am There is obviously uncertainty at the quantum level, where there is no definite state known about quanta ...
Believing that one's ignorance of something is some kind of understanding is absurd. Just because you do not know what a quantum state is, does not mean there is not one. There are lots of things in physics that cannot be known, such as the next state after an identified one in any system based on, "chaos" or, "strange-attractor," mathematics.
Age
Posts: 7652
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: How mind can intervene when body behaves according to laws of nature

Post by Age »

bahman wrote: Mon Jun 21, 2021 3:20 pm
Dimebag wrote: Mon Jun 21, 2021 7:06 am
bahman wrote: Tue Jun 15, 2021 4:48 pm Mind intervenes when the matter is in an undecided state.
So you are saying mind doesn’t behave according to laws of nature?.
Yes, mind is free. That is body that behaves according to the laws of nature.
So, what are the 'laws of nature', which this mind thing supposedly does not behave according to?

And, what does this mind thing behave according to, EXACTLY?

How, how can this mind thing or ANY thing be outside of or beyond the 'laws of nature'?
bahman wrote: Mon Jun 21, 2021 3:20 pm
Dimebag wrote: Mon Jun 21, 2021 7:06 am Can you give examples of where matter is in an undecided state and mind intervenes, producing matter acting not according to natural laws?
Matter always acts according to laws of nature but it can reach to an undecided state.
What is a 'decided state', and, what is an 'undecided state'?

And, how could matter itself even 'decide'?
bahman wrote: Mon Jun 21, 2021 3:20 pm An example of such a situation is when a chain of causality forks.
The term 'chain of causality' means or refers to NOT being able to be broken NOR fork, does it not?

If the phrase 'chain of causality' means unbroken links, then WHY say "forks" here?
bahman wrote: Mon Jun 21, 2021 3:20 pm
Another example when you are sitting. Our bodies are close in an undecided state when it is in motion too. That is why we can plan the motion of our bodies.
None of this makes ANY sense to me. And, I do NOT even know where to begin to try and makes sense of this. Firstly I hope you defined what an 'undecided state' is, above.

Next, there is a human body sitting down on some thing. If this is correct, then I understand this.

But, we will have to wait to see what an 'undecided state' actually means.

Now, how does it supposedly logically follow that because when human bodies are moving, and NOT sitting, "only then 'we', (whatever 'you' are referring to here) can plan the motion of "our" bodies"?

Why can 'you' NOT plan the motion of "your" body when the body is sitting down?
Dimebag
Posts: 402
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 2:12 am

Re: How mind can intervene when body behaves according to laws of nature

Post by Dimebag »

RCSaunders wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 4:49 pm
Dimebag wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 11:19 am There is obviously uncertainty at the quantum level, where there is no definite state known about quanta ...
Believing that one's ignorance of something is some kind of understanding is absurd. Just because you do not know what a quantum state is, does not mean there is not one. There are lots of things in physics that cannot be known, such as the next state after an identified one in any system based on, "chaos" or, "strange-attractor," mathematics.
I don’t disagree that there could be hidden variables which underly the “uncertainty” found in quantum electrodynamics. That’s not the currently accepted view, however, I tend to be skeptical of the shut up and calculate view of physics. And yes, I am aware of chaos theory, the three body problem is an example of chaos theory. Where I disagree with bahman is, he is trying to insert mind into this uncertainty. As you mentioned, uncertainty could just be our ignorance, our inability to know, which is not truly non deterministic, and therefore not an area to “insert” mind into the matter intervention process.

Furthermore, if mind were non deterministic, or a causal, how could it produce useful actions to guide the body?
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 4340
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 7:18 pm
Location: NYC Man

Re: How mind can intervene when body behaves according to laws of nature

Post by Terrapin Station »

Dimebag wrote: Wed Jun 23, 2021 10:30 am
RCSaunders wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 4:49 pm
Dimebag wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 11:19 am There is obviously uncertainty at the quantum level, where there is no definite state known about quanta ...
Believing that one's ignorance of something is some kind of understanding is absurd. Just because you do not know what a quantum state is, does not mean there is not one. There are lots of things in physics that cannot be known, such as the next state after an identified one in any system based on, "chaos" or, "strange-attractor," mathematics.
I don’t disagree that there could be hidden variables which underly the “uncertainty” found in quantum electrodynamics. That’s not the currently accepted view, however, I tend to be skeptical of the shut up and calculate view of physics. And yes, I am aware of chaos theory, the three body problem is an example of chaos theory. Where I disagree with bahman is, he is trying to insert mind into this uncertainty. As you mentioned, uncertainty could just be our ignorance, our inability to know, which is not truly non deterministic, and therefore not an area to “insert” mind into the matter intervention process.

Furthermore, if mind were non deterministic, or a causal, how could it produce useful actions to guide the body?
Re the last part, as I've mentioned elsewhere, that something is non-deterministic doesn't imply that the possible outcomes are equiprobable.

It's possible that we can dynamically bias non-equiprobable outcomes (so that the probabilities change--gradually or in spurts or whatever, in other words), to a point where during the process, one outcome goes from a non-100% probability to 100% via our volition. Re how that would work, it can simply be via more than one outcome being possible, and as we contemplate the options, we start to favor one or the other until we make up our mind and put the rest of our body into action.
Age
Posts: 7652
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: How mind can intervene when body behaves according to laws of nature

Post by Age »

Dimebag wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 11:19 am
bahman wrote: Mon Jun 21, 2021 3:20 pm
Dimebag wrote: Mon Jun 21, 2021 7:06 am
So you are saying mind doesn’t behave according to laws of nature?.
Yes, mind is free. That is body that behaves according to the laws of nature.
Dimebag wrote: Mon Jun 21, 2021 7:06 am Can you give examples of where matter is in an undecided state and mind intervenes, producing matter acting not according to natural laws?
Matter always acts according to laws of nature but it can reach to an undecided state. An example of such a situation is when a chain of causality forks. Another example when you are sitting. Our bodies are close in an undecided state when it is in motion too. That is why we can plan the motion of our bodies.
There is obviously uncertainty at the quantum level, where there is no definite state known about quanta, or where for example decay may happen a certain % time.
But what happens at the quantum level of things is the EXACT SAME as what happens in the classical level of things, and which is the EXACT SAME state as well.

Human beings, in the days when this was written, just had NOT YET come to REALIZE and KNOW this FACT. That is just because of the WAY that they LOOKED AT and SAW things.
Dimebag wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 11:19 am I am not sure I would apply this same uncertainty to the macro world of our bodies. There is a sense in which, even though we can’t predict the motion or momentum of every single particle in our bodies, they follow causal laws, and as such are in theory predictable. The problem arises due to the sheer complexity of our bodies, or indeed, any physical system beyond a few particles. The three body problem is an example where complexity outweighs our ability to deterministically predict with any accuracy the outcome of interactions between a system of more than two Newtonian bodies. Physics has found ways around this, though they are unable to greatly scale up such a simulation to predict behaviour of a system, as such, they must rely on statistical means of making predictions and modelling complex systems.

The human body is too complex to model in a leplacian demon manner. But there is a sense that, given enough knowledge about the human body, it would be possible in theory to predict future actions. In practice it is not possible, and the practical resolution of measurement of the arrangements of matter would be limited, but possibly not affected by the quantum uncertainty, if we were able to track the states of matter at a coarse enough level for quantum uncertainty to be insignificant yet allow enough predictive power to guide models. Given such a possibility, at what level would this causal branching human body exist?

If the quantum level were so causally influenced and prone to such stochastic intervention, would we not see far more unpredictable behaviour, as well as matter itself not following laws of classical physics more? If you need mind to insert itself into these areas of uncertainty, why even have a nervous system capable of transmitting neural signals to the limbs, why not simply have the signal sent directly to each muscle group in question?
Dimebag
Posts: 402
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 2:12 am

Re: How mind can intervene when body behaves according to laws of nature

Post by Dimebag »

Terrapin Station wrote: Wed Jun 23, 2021 11:36 am
Dimebag wrote: Wed Jun 23, 2021 10:30 am
RCSaunders wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 4:49 pm
Believing that one's ignorance of something is some kind of understanding is absurd. Just because you do not know what a quantum state is, does not mean there is not one. There are lots of things in physics that cannot be known, such as the next state after an identified one in any system based on, "chaos" or, "strange-attractor," mathematics.
I don’t disagree that there could be hidden variables which underly the “uncertainty” found in quantum electrodynamics. That’s not the currently accepted view, however, I tend to be skeptical of the shut up and calculate view of physics. And yes, I am aware of chaos theory, the three body problem is an example of chaos theory. Where I disagree with bahman is, he is trying to insert mind into this uncertainty. As you mentioned, uncertainty could just be our ignorance, our inability to know, which is not truly non deterministic, and therefore not an area to “insert” mind into the matter intervention process.

Furthermore, if mind were non deterministic, or a causal, how could it produce useful actions to guide the body?
Re the last part, as I've mentioned elsewhere, that something is non-deterministic doesn't imply that the possible outcomes are equiprobable.

It's possible that we can dynamically bias non-equiprobable outcomes (so that the probabilities change--gradually or in spurts or whatever, in other words), to a point where during the process, one outcome goes from a non-100% probability to 100% via our volition. Re how that would work, it can simply be via more than one outcome being possible, and as we contemplate the options, we start to favor one or the other until we make up our mind and put the rest of our body into action.
Okay, so here you seem to be proposing that the volition of mind in such a scenario described above is one which can influence possible actions.

I don’t discount that this happens. In fact, I am almost certain it most likely does happen.

I agree with your above regarding the way in which actions which are produced can be selected from possibilities.

I would suggest the way these possible outcomes are instantiated is via mental “prediction”. That is, our mind runs mini simulations of the outcome of possible actions, and thus, there is some ability to “choose between” those possibilities. Or maybe viewed from another angle, the different possible action simulations run, and the most favourable and probable outcome is selected for in a Darwinian manor. Such a competing of mental simulations might be the sensation of choice.
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 4340
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 7:18 pm
Location: NYC Man

Re: How mind can intervene when body behaves according to laws of nature

Post by Terrapin Station »

Dimebag wrote: Wed Jun 23, 2021 12:15 pm
Terrapin Station wrote: Wed Jun 23, 2021 11:36 am
Dimebag wrote: Wed Jun 23, 2021 10:30 am
I don’t disagree that there could be hidden variables which underly the “uncertainty” found in quantum electrodynamics. That’s not the currently accepted view, however, I tend to be skeptical of the shut up and calculate view of physics. And yes, I am aware of chaos theory, the three body problem is an example of chaos theory. Where I disagree with bahman is, he is trying to insert mind into this uncertainty. As you mentioned, uncertainty could just be our ignorance, our inability to know, which is not truly non deterministic, and therefore not an area to “insert” mind into the matter intervention process.

Furthermore, if mind were non deterministic, or a causal, how could it produce useful actions to guide the body?
Re the last part, as I've mentioned elsewhere, that something is non-deterministic doesn't imply that the possible outcomes are equiprobable.

It's possible that we can dynamically bias non-equiprobable outcomes (so that the probabilities change--gradually or in spurts or whatever, in other words), to a point where during the process, one outcome goes from a non-100% probability to 100% via our volition. Re how that would work, it can simply be via more than one outcome being possible, and as we contemplate the options, we start to favor one or the other until we make up our mind and put the rest of our body into action.
Okay, so here you seem to be proposing that the volition of mind in such a scenario described above is one which can influence possible actions.

I don’t discount that this happens. In fact, I am almost certain it most likely does happen.

I agree with your above regarding the way in which actions which are produced can be selected from possibilities.

I would suggest the way these possible outcomes are instantiated is via mental “prediction”. That is, our mind runs mini simulations of the outcome of possible actions, and thus, there is some ability to “choose between” those possibilities. Or maybe viewed from another angle, the different possible action simulations run, and the most favourable and probable outcome is selected for in a Darwinian manor. Such a competing of mental simulations might be the sensation of choice.
I think it sometimes helps here to focus on whim choices, though--a la "'randomly' choose the left or right button," because in that case, we're making a choice but it doesn't have to do with "favorable" outcomes, and it's at least difficult to figure what the starting biased probabilities would be.
User avatar
bahman
Posts: 5071
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: How mind can intervene when body behaves according to laws of nature

Post by bahman »

Dimebag wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 11:19 am
bahman wrote: Mon Jun 21, 2021 3:20 pm
Dimebag wrote: Mon Jun 21, 2021 7:06 am
So you are saying mind doesn’t behave according to laws of nature?.
Yes, mind is free. That is body that behaves according to the laws of nature.
Dimebag wrote: Mon Jun 21, 2021 7:06 am Can you give examples of where matter is in an undecided state and mind intervenes, producing matter acting not according to natural laws?
Matter always acts according to laws of nature but it can reach to an undecided state. An example of such a situation is when a chain of causality forks. Another example when you are sitting. Our bodies are close in an undecided state when it is in motion too. That is why we can plan the motion of our bodies.
There is obviously uncertainty at the quantum level, where there is no definite state known about quanta, or where for example decay may happen a certain % time. I am not sure I would apply this same uncertainty to the macro world of our bodies. There is a sense in which, even though we can’t predict the motion or momentum of every single particle in our bodies, they follow causal laws, and as such are in theory predictable. The problem arises due to the sheer complexity of our bodies, or indeed, any physical system beyond a few particles. The three body problem is an example where complexity outweighs our ability to deterministically predict with any accuracy the outcome of interactions between a system of more than two Newtonian bodies. Physics has found ways around this, though they are unable to greatly scale up such a simulation to predict behaviour of a system, as such, they must rely on statistical means of making predictions and modelling complex systems.
Our bodies are macroscopic. It definitely contains so many particles that make it difficult to simulate it. Here, we are not interested to see what would be the result of this microsimulation. We are happy to know that our bodies obey causal laws.
Dimebag wrote: Mon Jun 21, 2021 7:06 am The human body is too complex to model in a leplacian demon manner. But there is a sense that, given enough knowledge about the human body, it would be possible in theory to predict future actions. In practice it is not possible, and the practical resolution of measurement of the arrangements of matter would be limited, but possibly not affected by the quantum uncertainty, if we were able to track the states of matter at a coarse enough level for quantum uncertainty to be insignificant yet allow enough predictive power to guide models. Given such a possibility, at what level would this causal branching human body exist?
When the human body is in equilibrium for example. Of course, I mean macroscopic level when I talk about equilibrium.
Dimebag wrote: Mon Jun 21, 2021 7:06 am If the quantum level were so causally influenced and prone to such stochastic intervention, would we not see far more unpredictable behaviour, as well as matter itself not following laws of classical physics more?
Matter always follows the laws of physics.
Dimebag wrote: Mon Jun 21, 2021 7:06 am If you need mind to insert itself into these areas of uncertainty, why even have a nervous system capable of transmitting neural signals to the limbs, why not simply have the signal sent directly to each muscle group in question?
This is an interesting question but it is beyond the scope of this thread. I think that the brain is the seat of the mind.
User avatar
bahman
Posts: 5071
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: How mind can intervene when body behaves according to laws of nature

Post by bahman »

Age wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 10:55 pm
bahman wrote: Mon Jun 21, 2021 3:20 pm
Dimebag wrote: Mon Jun 21, 2021 7:06 am
So you are saying mind doesn’t behave according to laws of nature?.
Yes, mind is free. That is body that behaves according to the laws of nature.
So, what are the 'laws of nature', which this mind thing supposedly does not behave according to?
The laws of Newton for example.
Age wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 10:55 pm And, what does this mind thing behave according to, EXACTLY?
Mind is free so it does not behave according to anything.
Age wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 10:55 pm How, how can this mind thing or ANY thing be outside of or beyond the 'laws of nature'?
It is what it is.
Age wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 10:55 pm
bahman wrote: Mon Jun 21, 2021 3:20 pm
Dimebag wrote: Mon Jun 21, 2021 7:06 am Can you give examples of where matter is in an undecided state and mind intervenes, producing matter acting not according to natural laws?
Matter always acts according to laws of nature but it can reach to an undecided state.
What is a 'decided state', and, what is an 'undecided state'?
Decided like when you decided what you want to do with your body and your body follows it. Undecided like when you are in a situation that a decision is needed.
Age wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 10:55 pm And, how could matter itself even 'decide'?
Matter just follows and it cannot decide. That is the mind which decides.
Age wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 10:55 pm
bahman wrote: Mon Jun 21, 2021 3:20 pm An example of such a situation is when a chain of causality forks.
The term 'chain of causality' means or refers to NOT being able to be broken NOR fork, does it not?
A chain of causality can reach to an undecided situation/fork.
Age wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 10:55 pm If the phrase 'chain of causality' means unbroken links, then WHY say "forks" here?
Matter follow chaing causality when it is in decided state.
Age wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 10:55 pm
bahman wrote: Mon Jun 21, 2021 3:20 pm Another example when you are sitting. Our bodies are close in an undecided state when it is in motion too. That is why we can plan the motion of our bodies.
None of this makes ANY sense to me. And, I do NOT even know where to begin to try and makes sense of this. Firstly I hope you defined what an 'undecided state' is, above.
I did.
Age wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 10:55 pm Next, there is a human body sitting down on some thing. If this is correct, then I understand this.
Ok.
Age wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 10:55 pm But, we will have to wait to see what an 'undecided state' actually means.
I did.
Age wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 10:55 pm Now, how does it supposedly logically follow that because when human bodies are moving, and NOT sitting, "only then 'we', (whatever 'you' are referring to here) can plan the motion of "our" bodies"?
I said that we can plan motion of our body.
Age wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 10:55 pm Why can 'you' NOT plan the motion of "your" body when the body is sitting down?
You can.
Age
Posts: 7652
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: How mind can intervene when body behaves according to laws of nature

Post by Age »

bahman wrote: Thu Jun 24, 2021 11:50 am
Age wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 10:55 pm
bahman wrote: Mon Jun 21, 2021 3:20 pm
Yes, mind is free. That is body that behaves according to the laws of nature.
So, what are the 'laws of nature', which this mind thing supposedly does not behave according to?
The laws of Newton for example.
What are the "laws of newton", EXACTLY, to you, and, HOW does this "mind" thing NOT behave according to those "laws of newton"?
bahman wrote: Thu Jun 24, 2021 11:50 am
Age wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 10:55 pm And, what does this mind thing behave according to, EXACTLY?
Mind is free so it does not behave according to anything.
Age wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 10:55 pm How, how can this mind thing or ANY thing be outside of or beyond the 'laws of nature'?
It is what it is.
Is this another way of saying that 'you' have ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA NOR CLUE?
Age wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 10:55 pm
bahman wrote: Mon Jun 21, 2021 3:20 pm
Matter always acts according to laws of nature but it can reach to an undecided state.
What is a 'decided state', and, what is an 'undecided state'?
Decided like when you decided what you want to do with your body and your body follows it. Undecided like when you are in a situation that a decision is needed.[/quote]

'Needed' is a VERY RELATIVE WORD.

Since when have the "laws of newton" made the ruling that matter is in a 'decided state'.

I, for example, have NEVER seen matter, in the shape of an apple or of a table 'decide' to just do some thing, which apples and tables are NOT known for 'doing'.

What the word 'you' refers to here, which CAN MAKE DECISIONS, and thus DECIDE, is VERY, VERY DIFFERENT from 'matter', itself.
bahman wrote: Thu Jun 24, 2021 11:50 am
Age wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 10:55 pm And, how could matter itself even 'decide'?
Matter just follows and it cannot decide. That is the mind which decides.
So, WHY say and CLAIM that matter "can reach to an undecided state"?

If matter CANNOT even 'decide', in the beginning, then HOW can matter, supposedly, "reach to an undecided state"?

Matter, to me, exists in a causal state, and ALWAYS EXISTS IN THIS STATE, and as such is NEVER NEITHER in a, so called, "decided state" NOR an "undecided state".

'you', however, are ABSOLUTELY FREE to choose (or decide) to BELIEVE whatever 'you' WANT to BELIEVE, or NOT.
bahman wrote: Thu Jun 24, 2021 11:50 am
Age wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 10:55 pm
bahman wrote: Mon Jun 21, 2021 3:20 pm An example of such a situation is when a chain of causality forks.
The term 'chain of causality' means or refers to NOT being able to be broken NOR fork, does it not?
A chain of causality can reach to an undecided situation/fork.
Will you provide an example, so that we, at least, have SOME 'thing' to LOOK AT and SEE.

Also, IF, as you CLAIM, matter just follows and 'it' cannot decide, then matter is either ALWAYS in an "undecided situation" ANYWAY, OR, matter can NEVER 'decide' ANYWAY and so is NEVER in a "decided situation" in or order to then become in an "undecided situation" ANYWAY.

Also, if a 'chain of causality' could fork, then when it does it would, OBVIOUSLY, then be NOT a 'chain of causality', ANYWAY, correct?
bahman wrote: Thu Jun 24, 2021 11:50 am
Age wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 10:55 pm If the phrase 'chain of causality' means unbroken links, then WHY say "forks" here?
Matter follow chaing causality when it is in decided state.
You JUST SAID, only two sentences ago, that matter CANNOT DECIDE.

So, now, HOW can matter now be in a "decided state"?

By the way, "bahman", what you are so desperately 'trying to' say and explain CAN BE said and EXPLAINED VERY SIMPLY and VERY EASILY, ANYWAY.
bahman wrote: Thu Jun 24, 2021 11:50 am
Age wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 10:55 pm
bahman wrote: Mon Jun 21, 2021 3:20 pm Another example when you are sitting. Our bodies are close in an undecided state when it is in motion too. That is why we can plan the motion of our bodies.
None of this makes ANY sense to me. And, I do NOT even know where to begin to try and makes sense of this. Firstly I hope you defined what an 'undecided state' is, above.
I did.
You wrote, and claimed, that; an 'undecided state' is like when you are in a situation that a decision is needed.

But what has this got to do with ANY thing about HOW the human body, itself, or an apple or a table can be close to being in a situation that a decision is needed.

Whenever 'you', human beings, "yourselves", are existing, then decisions are needed, correct?

And, what this clarifying question is alluding to would be VERY OBVIOUS, to some.
bahman wrote: Thu Jun 24, 2021 11:50 am
Age wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 10:55 pm Next, there is a human body sitting down on some thing. If this is correct, then I understand this.
Ok.
Age wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 10:55 pm But, we will have to wait to see what an 'undecided state' actually means.
I did.
Age wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 10:55 pm Now, how does it supposedly logically follow that because when human bodies are moving, and NOT sitting, "only then 'we', (whatever 'you' are referring to here) can plan the motion of "our" bodies"?
I said that we can plan motion of our body.
What you ACTUALLY said and stated was:

"Our bodies are close in an undecided state when it is in motion too.", and, "That is why we can plan the motion of our bodies."

So, HOW does it, logically follow, that the reason WHY "we can plan the motion of "our" bodies" IS BECAUSE "our bodies are (supposedly) close in an undecided state when the body is in motion too"?
bahman wrote: Thu Jun 24, 2021 11:50 am
Age wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 10:55 pm Why can 'you' NOT plan the motion of "your" body when the body is sitting down?
You can.
Okay. So, what you were 'trying to' say is NOT what you ACTUALLY said, and stated.
Age
Posts: 7652
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: How mind can intervene when body behaves according to laws of nature

Post by Age »

bahman wrote: Wed Jun 23, 2021 3:56 pm
Dimebag wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 11:19 am
bahman wrote: Mon Jun 21, 2021 3:20 pm
Yes, mind is free. That is body that behaves according to the laws of nature.


Matter always acts according to laws of nature but it can reach to an undecided state. An example of such a situation is when a chain of causality forks. Another example when you are sitting. Our bodies are close in an undecided state when it is in motion too. That is why we can plan the motion of our bodies.
There is obviously uncertainty at the quantum level, where there is no definite state known about quanta, or where for example decay may happen a certain % time. I am not sure I would apply this same uncertainty to the macro world of our bodies. There is a sense in which, even though we can’t predict the motion or momentum of every single particle in our bodies, they follow causal laws, and as such are in theory predictable. The problem arises due to the sheer complexity of our bodies, or indeed, any physical system beyond a few particles. The three body problem is an example where complexity outweighs our ability to deterministically predict with any accuracy the outcome of interactions between a system of more than two Newtonian bodies. Physics has found ways around this, though they are unable to greatly scale up such a simulation to predict behaviour of a system, as such, they must rely on statistical means of making predictions and modelling complex systems.
Our bodies are macroscopic. It definitely contains so many particles that make it difficult to simulate it. Here, we are not interested to see what would be the result of this microsimulation. We are happy to know that our bodies obey causal laws.
But you are the one CLAIMING otherwise.

You are CLAIMING that the body follows "decisions made by some "mind" thing", which is; "outside of causal laws and thus does NOT follow causal laws", or something very similar, correct?

If this is correct, then "our" bodies do NOT necessarily follow causal laws AT ALL. That is; they follow the "mind", which you CLAIM there is at least two of.
bahman wrote: Wed Jun 23, 2021 3:56 pm
Dimebag wrote: Mon Jun 21, 2021 7:06 am The human body is too complex to model in a leplacian demon manner. But there is a sense that, given enough knowledge about the human body, it would be possible in theory to predict future actions. In practice it is not possible, and the practical resolution of measurement of the arrangements of matter would be limited, but possibly not affected by the quantum uncertainty, if we were able to track the states of matter at a coarse enough level for quantum uncertainty to be insignificant yet allow enough predictive power to guide models. Given such a possibility, at what level would this causal branching human body exist?
When the human body is in equilibrium for example. Of course, I mean macroscopic level when I talk about equilibrium.
Dimebag wrote: Mon Jun 21, 2021 7:06 am If the quantum level were so causally influenced and prone to such stochastic intervention, would we not see far more unpredictable behaviour, as well as matter itself not following laws of classical physics more?
Matter always follows the laws of physics.
Dimebag wrote: Mon Jun 21, 2021 7:06 am If you need mind to insert itself into these areas of uncertainty, why even have a nervous system capable of transmitting neural signals to the limbs, why not simply have the signal sent directly to each muscle group in question?
This is an interesting question but it is beyond the scope of this thread. I think that the brain is the seat of the mind.
If you, now, think that the brain, which is, OBVIOUSLY, just made up of matter, ONLY, is the " seat of the "mind" ", then HOW does this "logically follow" on from your previous statements and CLAIMS that:

1. Matter ALWAYS acts according to laws of nature. But,

2. Mind is free and does NOT behave according to the laws of nature?
Post Reply