Mind - Knowledge -- Knowledge - Mind

Half-formed posts, inchoate philosophies, and the germs of deep thought.

Mind - Knowledge -- Knowledge - Mind

Postby encode_decode » Sun Apr 11, 2021 4:11 am

I have not thought about things like this for a while so...

I am interested in any thoughts about the following:

  1. knowledge clearly depends on the mind
  2. the mind clearly depends on knowledge

:-k
I will build a nerdlike structure in 2021
I only meant that the cat knows - or discovers - that we can toss it out a window at any time = "authority". Dogs accept that notion more quickly - not as willing to test it. O:) - obsrvr524
User avatar
encode_decode
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1689
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:07 pm
Location: Nebula

Re: Mind - Knowledge -- Knowledge - Mind

Postby Dan~ » Sun Apr 11, 2021 7:12 am

Mind is, in my opinion, a form of complexity.
It comes from simple components.
It has no "true nature", no single purpose or creator.
instead it is a state of affairs, which arise when lots of components work together.
Knowledge is a component of this.
I like http://www.accuradio.com , internet radio.
https://dannerz.itch.io/ -- a new and minimal webside now hosting my free game projects.
ImageImage
Truth is based in sensing, in vision. And we can only see when we are alive.
User avatar
Dan~
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 10671
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2005 8:14 am
Location: Canada Alberta

Re: Mind - Knowledge -- Knowledge - Mind

Postby Ierrellus » Sun Apr 11, 2021 12:26 pm

Conscious mind is the epiphenomena of physical changes. Most thoughts are analogies of physical occurrences or of themselves.
"We must love one another or die." W.H.Auden
I admit I'm an asshole. Now, can we get back to the conversation?
From the mad poet of McKinley Ave.
Ierrellus
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 13010
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2006 12:52 pm
Location: state of evolving

Re: Mind - Knowledge -- Knowledge - Mind

Postby encode_decode » Sun Apr 11, 2021 7:26 pm

Dan~ wrote:Mind is, in my opinion, a form of complexity.
It comes from simple components.
It has no "true nature", no single purpose or creator.
instead it is a state of affairs, which arise when lots of components work together.
Knowledge is a component of this.

Is knowledge based on facts in your opinion? Must it be true in order for it to be classified as knowledge?

If so, what do we call that which on the surface appears to be knowledge but is in fact not true?
Last edited by encode_decode on Sun Apr 11, 2021 7:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I will build a nerdlike structure in 2021
I only meant that the cat knows - or discovers - that we can toss it out a window at any time = "authority". Dogs accept that notion more quickly - not as willing to test it. O:) - obsrvr524
User avatar
encode_decode
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1689
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:07 pm
Location: Nebula

Re: Mind - Knowledge -- Knowledge - Mind

Postby encode_decode » Sun Apr 11, 2021 7:32 pm

Ierrellus wrote:Conscious mind is the epiphenomena of physical changes. Most thoughts are analogies of physical occurrences or of themselves.

Do you have any thoughts on how this relates to knowledge?

It seems to me thus far that to build an ontology based upon knowledge one must place knowledge at the top of a hierarchy.
I will build a nerdlike structure in 2021
I only meant that the cat knows - or discovers - that we can toss it out a window at any time = "authority". Dogs accept that notion more quickly - not as willing to test it. O:) - obsrvr524
User avatar
encode_decode
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1689
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:07 pm
Location: Nebula

Re: Mind - Knowledge -- Knowledge - Mind

Postby Ecmandu » Sun Apr 11, 2021 10:36 pm

The only reason we ask questions like this is because the world sucks. In a shitty world, this is a healthy question.

Minds can obviously exist without reality orientation.

That is a type of knowledge too.

We know that there is real water and we know there are mirages. Our bickering is about which is which.
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 11965
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: Mind - Knowledge -- Knowledge - Mind

Postby encode_decode » Mon Apr 12, 2021 3:15 am

Ecmandu wrote:The only reason we ask questions like this is because the world sucks. In a shitty world, this is a healthy question.

Minds can obviously exist without reality orientation.

That is a type of knowledge too.

We know that there is real water and we know there are mirages. Our bickering is about which is which.

I agree with you. I also think it goes both ways in my original post. I can justify what I am saying but I won't do it here and now because I wanted a lighter conversation about this.
Sometimes there are good reasons why people believe things that are not true and these things can keep them sane.
Of course, it goes the other way too in that beliefs can hurt people...but to an extent, there is plenty of room for error.

The mind adapts to the sense of what it uses: the process of processing information - flawed logics still work in general, especially to basic thinking(not excluding complex thinking), since a number of related processes have already produced the most accurate and most useful judgments. This is relative to the person processing the information and can sometimes become problematic through communication particularly if the receiver is suffering from too much "noise" themselves. I am able to relate it back to my own Communication Theory of Knowledge(a partial pathway in a complete system).
I will build a nerdlike structure in 2021
I only meant that the cat knows - or discovers - that we can toss it out a window at any time = "authority". Dogs accept that notion more quickly - not as willing to test it. O:) - obsrvr524
User avatar
encode_decode
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1689
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:07 pm
Location: Nebula

Re: Mind - Knowledge -- Knowledge - Mind

Postby Ierrellus » Mon Apr 12, 2021 11:54 am

I see knowledge as Mind's archives. Of course one must ask--knowledge of what? If by Mind you mean consciousness, I still contend that Mind has physical underpinnings.
"We must love one another or die." W.H.Auden
I admit I'm an asshole. Now, can we get back to the conversation?
From the mad poet of McKinley Ave.
Ierrellus
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 13010
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2006 12:52 pm
Location: state of evolving

Re: Mind - Knowledge -- Knowledge - Mind

Postby Meno_ » Mon Apr 12, 2021 4:37 pm

encode_decode wrote:I have not thought about things like this for a while so...

I am interested in any thoughts about the following:

  1. knowledge clearly depends on the mind
  2. the mind clearly depends on knowledge

:-k




I think this may be the aforementioned circularity mentioned. Can the question be asked which is primary and which secondary in derivation?

As most syllogysm requires three parts , knowledge refers to both: the material and non-material aspects of the brain and the mind, maybe it is the way they interact determines their descriptive primacy.

Since the brain is onthogeneticallt primary, if we hold to the evolutionary, genetically selected process , the mind has very early established preordinate patters and channels of interpretation.

Knowlesge reinforces them by fine tuning these channels by breaking up the major schema into more similar patterns, dissolving circularity into a multiplicity of similar circulad/spherical bubbles, in fact, molecular and atomic descriptions may be basically a process of duplicating the representation by which the mind describes what it is describing, the way it dies describe that .
Meno_
breathless
 
Posts: 9030
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am
Location: Mysterium Tremendum

Re: Mind - Knowledge -- Knowledge - Mind

Postby encode_decode » Mon Apr 12, 2021 7:04 pm

Almost every aspect of the brain must have the primary role of providing inputs derived from continual feedback. This primacy is known to the brain by neural connections. The roles of inputs (a, b, etc.) differ greatly from inputs involved in direct activity. In many cases, the input must either provide an input with neural processing or require a source to actuate the input.

The following will require analysis of what I am saying and some imagination. In the case of language, we can see that there is a pre-linguistic structure that gives rise to rules for how language should be used, followed by a set of cultural conventions about what constitutes appropriate usage of language. This kind of prescriptive structure allows us to observe that the brain interprets and develops processes through knowledge and critical experiences. A cognitive limitation is the thought process that the mind imposes on itself with regards to the understanding of any given mental situation. It is very clear that humans are generally better at understanding and reasoning about things like relationships between mind and material objects rather than dealing with the more abstract concepts required at times for dealing with explanation. However, as a general rule, there are infinitely different ways of dealing with thought. If successful, it will ensure that this reflective brain functions through a process that continues to be relevant to the integration of related concepts. However, the process of duplicating and splitting is nonetheless different because there are a number of ways of doing so.

I can post the notes(germs of deep thought) that this summary is based on if required - reconciling it to - Can dogs think phenominally? - on the other hand, is another story given my use of different terminology here.
I had intended to summarise in a different way in the other thread.
I will build a nerdlike structure in 2021
I only meant that the cat knows - or discovers - that we can toss it out a window at any time = "authority". Dogs accept that notion more quickly - not as willing to test it. O:) - obsrvr524
User avatar
encode_decode
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1689
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:07 pm
Location: Nebula

Re: Mind - Knowledge -- Knowledge - Mind

Postby Ierrellus » Wed Apr 14, 2021 1:46 pm

The old Cartesian philosophy of mind as separate from body has been refuted by neuroscience. Genes and memes determine mental content. A true knowledge would come from acknowledging its sources-- its physical underpinnings and archetypal/social heritage. Knowledge has an evolutionary history updated by current thinking.
"We must love one another or die." W.H.Auden
I admit I'm an asshole. Now, can we get back to the conversation?
From the mad poet of McKinley Ave.
Ierrellus
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 13010
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2006 12:52 pm
Location: state of evolving

Re: Mind - Knowledge -- Knowledge - Mind

Postby Ierrellus » Wed Apr 14, 2021 6:42 pm

Knowledge of what is real or what is true relies on consensus of agreement based on intersubjective communications. We both look at a crayon and agree that its color is blue. Is this an understanding of taught labels or does the agreement signify some deeper understanding?
"We must love one another or die." W.H.Auden
I admit I'm an asshole. Now, can we get back to the conversation?
From the mad poet of McKinley Ave.
Ierrellus
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 13010
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2006 12:52 pm
Location: state of evolving

Re: Mind - Knowledge -- Knowledge - Mind

Postby Meno_ » Wed Apr 14, 2021 10:52 pm

Ierrellus wrote:Knowledge of what is real or what is true relies on consensus of agreement based on intersubjective communications. We both look at a crayon and agree that its color is blue. Is this an understanding of taught labels or does the agreement signify some deeper understanding?




It may, an apple CAN be red and green all over, if, for instance observed under a different light.
Meno_
breathless
 
Posts: 9030
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am
Location: Mysterium Tremendum

Re: Mind - Knowledge -- Knowledge - Mind

Postby Ierrellus » Thu Apr 15, 2021 12:22 pm

Meno_ wrote:
Ierrellus wrote:Knowledge of what is real or what is true relies on consensus of agreement based on intersubjective communications. We both look at a crayon and agree that its color is blue. Is this an understanding of taught labels or does the agreement signify some deeper understanding?




It may, an apple CAN be red and green all over, if, for instance observed under a different light.

Wouldn't it take at least two observers to note that change of color as a fact?
"We must love one another or die." W.H.Auden
I admit I'm an asshole. Now, can we get back to the conversation?
From the mad poet of McKinley Ave.
Ierrellus
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 13010
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2006 12:52 pm
Location: state of evolving

Re: Mind - Knowledge -- Knowledge - Mind

Postby Meno_ » Sat Apr 17, 2021 1:43 am

Irrellus says:

"Wouldn't it take at least two observers to note that change of color as a fact?"



That is precisely the issue: 2 observers may see simulations of color, the simulation consistent with the perception of one observer seeing a red apple, while the 2nd observer sees green, and a 3rd observing bot red and green .
Meno_
breathless
 
Posts: 9030
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am
Location: Mysterium Tremendum

Re: Mind - Knowledge -- Knowledge - Mind

Postby MagsJ » Sun Apr 18, 2021 1:16 am

_
Can the colour of an object change intrinsically so tho.. regardless of our observation of it?

No!
The possibility of anything we can imagine existing is endless and infinite.. - MagsJ
I haven't got the time to spend the time reading something that is telling me nothing, as I will never be able to get back that time, and I may need it for something at some point in time.. Huh! - MagsJ
You’re suggestions and I, just simply don’t mix.. like oil on water, or a really bad DJ - MagsJ
User avatar
MagsJ
The Londonist: a chic geek
 
Posts: 22312
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 2:59 pm
Location: Suryaloka / LDN Town

Re: Mind - Knowledge -- Knowledge - Mind

Postby Ierrellus » Thu Apr 22, 2021 12:39 pm

Animals and plants that change their color change it to their immediate environment for protection from predators. Two humans can agree that this is the case. Perhaps the ability to detect these changes is due to superior cones in the human retina. Color, after all, according to physics, is an illusion made when sunlight shines on an object. This is why we do not detect colors in the dim light of the moon. The message of color is transported along the optic nerve to places in the brain. It amazes me that we are constructed in such a way as to detect color and color changes. This still does not imply the existence of color in itself. In this instance knowledge is the functioning of the brain as gatherer of information. Mind is where the knowledge is kept and used.
"We must love one another or die." W.H.Auden
I admit I'm an asshole. Now, can we get back to the conversation?
From the mad poet of McKinley Ave.
Ierrellus
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 13010
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2006 12:52 pm
Location: state of evolving

Re: Mind - Knowledge -- Knowledge - Mind

Postby Ierrellus » Thu Apr 22, 2021 12:54 pm

There is a problem with the sunlight makes detectable color illusions. It is with neon lights or other artificial light sources. That we can create color is evidence of an intrinsic understanding of color. It remains, however, evident that there is no evidence of color as a thing in itself.
"We must love one another or die." W.H.Auden
I admit I'm an asshole. Now, can we get back to the conversation?
From the mad poet of McKinley Ave.
Ierrellus
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 13010
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2006 12:52 pm
Location: state of evolving

Re: Mind - Knowledge -- Knowledge - Mind

Postby encode_decode » Mon Apr 26, 2021 10:03 pm

Ierrellus wrote:The old Cartesian philosophy of mind as separate from body has been refuted by neuroscience. Genes and memes determine mental content. A true knowledge would come from acknowledging its sources-- its physical underpinnings and archetypal/social heritage. Knowledge has an evolutionary history updated by current thinking.

Yes, but what neuroscience has not done yet is translate the observed activity into the language that you and I use to communicate with and furthermore use to exchange information which in turn helps us build knowledge. Neuroscience knows about the connections but does not know how information is processed. This is a slightly more complicated process than mapping the human genome. So far we are able to build mathematical models that give us some insight; insight such as the possibility that information isn't just processed in a static network of neurons but some of that information is passed along into other networks. I believe knowledge is stored in the brain matter and I believe we can explain things well enough to know that the perceived mind is just a by-product of the brain but this by no means destroys the current value of psychology. Psychology and before that philosophy gave us many insights into what was happening. For the time being the "perceived mind" is our most accurate interface to the knowledge stored in the brain.
I will build a nerdlike structure in 2021
I only meant that the cat knows - or discovers - that we can toss it out a window at any time = "authority". Dogs accept that notion more quickly - not as willing to test it. O:) - obsrvr524
User avatar
encode_decode
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1689
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:07 pm
Location: Nebula

Re: Mind - Knowledge -- Knowledge - Mind

Postby MagsJ » Mon Apr 26, 2021 10:53 pm

Ierrellus wrote:Animals and plants that change their color change it to their immediate environment for protection from predators. Two humans can agree that this is the case. Perhaps the ability to detect these changes is due to superior cones in the human retina. Color, after all, according to physics, is an illusion made when sunlight shines on an object. This is why we do not detect colors in the dim light of the moon. The message of color is transported along the optic nerve to places in the brain. It amazes me that we are constructed in such a way as to detect color and color changes. This still does not imply the existence of color in itself. In this instance knowledge is the functioning of the brain as gatherer of information. Mind is where the knowledge is kept and used.

Colours are specific chemical compounds, so an animal or plant changing colour does not change that fact.. of a specific colour, being of a specific chemical compound, because they change their chemical compounds in order to change their colour.

Colour.. and the world in general, is still an amazing place to feel awe over.
Last edited by MagsJ on Wed Apr 28, 2021 3:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
The possibility of anything we can imagine existing is endless and infinite.. - MagsJ
I haven't got the time to spend the time reading something that is telling me nothing, as I will never be able to get back that time, and I may need it for something at some point in time.. Huh! - MagsJ
You’re suggestions and I, just simply don’t mix.. like oil on water, or a really bad DJ - MagsJ
User avatar
MagsJ
The Londonist: a chic geek
 
Posts: 22312
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 2:59 pm
Location: Suryaloka / LDN Town

Re: Mind - Knowledge -- Knowledge - Mind

Postby encode_decode » Wed Apr 28, 2021 7:19 am

On a side note, I have always thought of Richard Dawkins as a bit of a clown and somewhat of a troll(he is a really smart guy though). Don't get me wrong I have enjoyed watching his many arguments with religious folk. He becomes very animated and provides a lot of entertainment value. I nearly put him in the same category as Neil deGrasse Tyson but in two different fields of course and Neil is less of a troll. I am pretty certain that he settled upon what he believes while the rest of the world continues to make discoveries that go against his concepts. And while memes make a good analogy to genes the two systems do work along totally separate timelines. The other thing either do not seem to share, is some sort of biological morphology. Yes, that is quite the disparity between a gene and a meme. Anyway, you can package concepts how you like and they probably still contain an element of truth(to what degree???).

I will often stretch my imagination to solve a problem and then abandon the concept that helped me to solve the problem.

A glossary of concepts would be handy - even though sometimes the same term may be used for several different definitions. I am of course referring to those little disposable problem solvers that we all use for a quick fix.
I will build a nerdlike structure in 2021
I only meant that the cat knows - or discovers - that we can toss it out a window at any time = "authority". Dogs accept that notion more quickly - not as willing to test it. O:) - obsrvr524
User avatar
encode_decode
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1689
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:07 pm
Location: Nebula

Re: Mind - Knowledge -- Knowledge - Mind

Postby Ierrellus » Wed Apr 28, 2021 12:23 pm

I read a couple of Dawkins' books, but none on religion. From where does Dawkins believe religious memes come? I see most memes, especially the archetypal variety, as analogies of experienced physical processes. e.g. the Garden of Eden story in which Adam, Eve and Serpent represent aspects of the human psyche engaged in the "fall into mind", the fall from the Eden of pure instinct to the world of personal responsibility for all actions. Serpent=the id; Eve=ego; Adam= the superego. Freud believed that the space of time between instinct and action evolved for a being to make decisions of the best possible course of action. I think it was Damasio who coined the phrase "the fall into mind."
"We must love one another or die." W.H.Auden
I admit I'm an asshole. Now, can we get back to the conversation?
From the mad poet of McKinley Ave.
Ierrellus
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 13010
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2006 12:52 pm
Location: state of evolving

Re: Mind - Knowledge -- Knowledge - Mind

Postby Ierrellus » Thu Apr 29, 2021 1:37 pm

For beings without brains or those who have not evolved to have brains the force of instinct is knowledge. Perception requires having a brain that can receive information regarding what is outside the brain and can act according to what it receives. I often ask- what did the first ever organism "know" what to eat? That's a "knowledge" that is purely chemical. It becomes apparent that the roots of knowledge begin in biochemical reactions. So the evolution of knowledge is from chemical reactions, to instinct, to perception, to analogous memes.
"We must love one another or die." W.H.Auden
I admit I'm an asshole. Now, can we get back to the conversation?
From the mad poet of McKinley Ave.
Ierrellus
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 13010
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2006 12:52 pm
Location: state of evolving

Re: Mind - Knowledge -- Knowledge - Mind

Postby Fixed Cross » Thu Apr 29, 2021 4:14 pm

encode_decode wrote:I have not thought about things like this for a while so...

I am interested in any thoughts about the following:

  1. knowledge clearly depends on the mind
  2. the mind clearly depends on knowledge

:-k


Ive been thinking on how to address this since it was posted, given the open form of the inquiry there is no direct answer; I would now be able to add that there should be a third notion, on top of knowledge and mind, that clarifies their relation.

Mind forms the capacity of knowledge, knowledge the capacity of mind.

Capacity implies certain things, most importantly perhaps, purpose.

Can knowledge exist without having a function to a purpose
(And thus does unwanted knowledge create undesired purposes -

Which kinds of things does a particular mind seek to know? What registers as quality, what registers as noise? What 'sticks to the mind', what is allowed to be known, and what is refused?
knowledge and mind as a pair do not suffice, if we scrutinize like this, to identify what thinking consists of. Mind is not cognate with will, or is will sufficient to mind - mind is as the circumference of will that is at the same time its cosmic leverage
because mind can be stored, and will can not;
knowledge of the will would seem impossible - experience of the will simply does not translate into knowledge. Mind must always guess as to the wills direction; to bring mind and will in concert as a human being is thus not a methodical practice in the outset, but an intuitive and speculative one - much like the deep state attempts in its effort to unite capacity and purpose -
capacity in the sense of actionable knowledge, which is usually referred to as 'intelligence' -that which is understood by a power so as to be able to be its consequence.

To become the consequence of ones knowledge - that is the greatest fear and the purpose of the mind. To 'lose ones mind' by virtue of the sheer actionability of ones knowledge - psychosis -
to operate at the threshold of knowledge and action is to be quite crazy - mind endures knowledge, knowledge tests mind of its capacity. Knowledge the sword, mind the sky.
The strong act as they may, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Nietzsche's Heritage; The Philosophy of the Future - Some Music - The Magical Tree of Life
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 11544
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: Mind - Knowledge -- Knowledge - Mind

Postby encode_decode » Thu Apr 29, 2021 5:01 pm

OK, nice FC, very nice.

So Meno and yourself both smelt something off about it. Originally there was only one clause as follows: knowledge clearly depends on the mind - I got this off of a Catholic site and as soon as I saw it...mmm...it is hard to describe how I felt about it, to be honest.
...but it was troubling...
...perhaps even more troubling is why I was at that site...

It turns out that it seemed easier to reverse it and place it with its original for contemplation.

When I did that, I thought, hmm, OK, let's place it on ILP and see what happens since I was already having a discussion about something kind of related.
...but none of this really matters...

You have given me something to digest.
I will build a nerdlike structure in 2021
I only meant that the cat knows - or discovers - that we can toss it out a window at any time = "authority". Dogs accept that notion more quickly - not as willing to test it. O:) - obsrvr524
User avatar
encode_decode
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1689
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:07 pm
Location: Nebula

Next

Return to The Sandbox



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot]