[extropy-chat] "Dead Time" of the Brain.

[Heartland]

> "Heartland" <velvet977 at hotmail.com>

>> Minds are not information aka. pattern of brain structure, but a
>> 4-dimensional object

> And you say mind is an object, well the brain is an object, but mind? Mind is 
> what a brain does and what something does is not an object.


And there you have illustrated a common frustration that people experience when 
reacting to these ideas. My whole argument is based on 4-D perspective, while 
people tend to apply it to 3-D, which is understandable. Obviously, a 3-D 
perspective produces nonsense. We all live in 3-D so it's hard to imagine reality 
at 4-D level. That's what I mean when I say it takes weeks or more to internalize 
this argument, not because one needs IQ pills, but because one needs to learn 
unnatural skill of looking at things from the added time dimension perspective. At 
least that's my suspicion. Otherwise, I don't think it should be very hard to 
follow the argument.

So, a brain is a 3-D object. Mind is a 4-D object.


>> Preservation of subjective experience is more important than preservation
>> of personal memory that includes memory of "self"
>
> So you think remembering being you yesterday is not a subjective experience
> and that also makes not one particle of sense.

It could be part of SE, sure. The point is, though, that you would still live and 
have SE if you didn't remember.


>> Preservation of subjective experience is more important than preservation
>> of personal memory that includes memory of "self"
>
> Something in the future that remembers being you is the very definition of
> survival; at least I'll be dammed if I can think of a better one.

I disagree. The essence of survival is preservation of subjective experience, a 
sensation of presence in the moment, continued perception of reality. Whatever you 
choose to preserve, of course, is your choice.


>> I don't expect anyone to fully imagine and internalize all this in a week
>
> What are you talking about, it's not like it's very deep. Yours is the
> conventional interpretation believed by every Tom Dick and Harry, but the
> conventional interpretation is wrong.

It's funny because I perceive "brain pattern is you" theory as conventional, 
inadequate, illogical and obsolete. I believed that stuff a long time ago.


>> A person can run only one instance of SE.
>
> Why not?

Because any additional thread of processing reality would be subsumed by the 
original process.

S.