Origin of thought

kenneth collins kenneth.p.collins at worldnet.att.net
Mon Dec 27 05:00:57 EST 2004


"Jim" <uhor3rih at hotmail.com> wrote in message news:11Ozd.125397$dP1.450776 at newsc.telia.net...
| Hi Zigoteau! Thanks for your answer. I have problem to believe it starts
| there. It should then start at a molecular and the smaller sub atomic
| levels. But do we then control what happens? And how can we control the
| start of a biochemical thought if there are no chemical reactions before
| that one?
|
| But of course, if our thoughts just happen in random :0)
|
| Best regards
| [...]

Our Beings are "emersed" within
vastly-larger external experiential
physical reality.

Think of this in terms of a fish that
exists within the water of a stream.

The way that the water flows in the
stream "tells" the fish's nervous sys-
tem how it must activate the fish's
muscualture so that the fish will be
able to travel from one 'point' in the
stream to 'any' other 'point' in the
stream [funny-quotes, here, be-
cause, in some streams, there are
'places' where a given fish 'cannot'
go -- at least not under the power
of its musculature -- be-cause the
flowing of the stream is so much
more powerful than the fish's musc-
ulature.

There's no 'mystery' in the fish's be-
havior with respect to the flowing
of the stream in which it exists.

And it's also easy to see that the
fullness of a fish's analogue of
"thought" does not derive solely
in the biochemistry that happens
within the fish's nervous system.

It's the 'same' with Human Thought.

We are "emersed" within a larger
external experiential physical real-
ity in a way that's exactly analog-
ous to the way the fish exists in the
stream's water [and the various
nutrient-concentration gradients,
behaviors of other stuff [prey and
predators] that exists in the water.

The old saw about "No man [being]
an island unto himself" is literally
True :-]

Now, when I said, above, that there
is no 'mystery' in any of this, I was
referring =solely= to the correlated
=nervous system= dynamics. Although
there'll always remain more work that
needs doing, what nervous systems
do has been worked-out in a way
that delineates everything that remains
needing-doing -- but the external ex-
periential environments in which nerv-
ous systems' host organisms exist ex-
tend to Infinity, so there's a =lot= of
stuff that occurs within such external
experiential environments that remains
'mysterious'. It's 'just' that that stuff
all occurs as functions of stuff that
remains 'outside' of nervous systems,
in a way that's analogous to the way
the flowing of the stream's water re-
mains outside of the fish's nervous
system, but, nevertheless, acts-upon
the fish's nervous system in ways that
do enter into the neural activation
dynamics that occur within the fish's
nervous system.

This's also True with respect to Human
nervous systems, as they exist within
their larger external experiential physical
realities.

The Biochemistry is as a "tool" that
is part of what enables nervous sys-
tems to literally grasp the external
experiential realities in which their
host organisms exist -- to "Know" them,
so that behaviors can be converged
upon that will enable either fish or
Human to exist and survive within
the energydynamics that comprise
their external physical realities.

"Thought" does =not= occur "ran-
domly". Nervous systems' function-
ings can tend toward 'randomness',
but that's a divergence from their
'normal' functionings -- one that oc-
curs when stuff is happening within
external experiential environments
at 'rates' that exceed nervous sys-
tems' information-handling capacities.

Like when a fish gets caught-up in
a whirlpool's violent flow-dynamics.

When such occurs, all semblance
of "thought" ceases and lower-'level'
nervous system dynamics are activ-
ated to cope with the 'abnormal' ex-
ternal experiential dynamics that've
been encountered.

All of this happens in Humans, too,
except that it can happen as a re-
sult of long-term external experiential
circumstances to a much-greater extent
in Humans.

[For those who have it, see the dis-
cussion of the "zone of randomness"
and "the fundamental wisdom" in AoK,
Ap4. What I've discussed in the last
part of this post is correlated.]

k. p. collins 





More information about the Neur-sci mailing list