Fwd: The Psychology Of Yogurt

[Victoria Hughes]

Probiotics, reduced anxiety, and thoughts about the weird, wrong perception that we exist separately from our bodies, somehow. 

Date: September 17, 2011 12:18:17 PM MDT

Subject: The Psychology Of Yogurt

Source: Wired Science » Frontal Cortex

Author: Jonah Lehrer

My latest WSJ column uses a new study on probiotics as a launching pad to explore the mind-body problem, perhaps the most perplexing mystery in modern science:

One of the deepest mysteries of the human mind is that it doesn’t feel like part of the body. Our consciousness seems to exist in an immaterial realm, distinct from the meat on our bones. We feel like the ghost, not like the machine.

This ancient paradox—it’s known as the mind-body problem—has long perplexed philosophers. It has also interested neuroscientists, who have traditionally argued that the three pounds of our brain are a sufficient explanation for the so-called soul. There is no mystery, just anatomy.

In recent years, however, a spate of research has put an interesting twist on this old conundrum. The problem is even more bewildering than we thought, for it’s not just the coiled cortex that gives rise to the mind—it’s the entire body. As the neuroscientist Antonio Damasio writes, “The mind is embodied, not just embrained.”

The latest evidence comes from a new study of probiotic bacteria, the microorganisms typically found in yogurt and dairy products. While most investigations of probiotics have focused on their gastrointestinal benefits—the bacteria reduce the symptoms of diarrhea and irritable bowel syndrome—this new research explored the effect of probiotics on the brain.

The experiment, led by Javier Bravo at University College Cork in Ireland, was straightforward. First, he fed normal lab mice a diet full of probiotics. Then, Mr. Bravo’s team tested for behavioral changes, which were significant: When probiotic-fed animals were put in stressful conditions, such as being dropped into a pool of water, they were less anxious and released less stress hormone.

How did the food induce these changes? The answer involves GABA, a neurotransmitter that reduces the activity of neurons. When Mr. Bravo looked at the brains of the mice, he found that those fed probiotics had more GABA receptors in areas associated with memory and the regulation of emotions. (This change mimics the effects of popular antianxiety medications in humans.)

Furthermore, when he severed the nerve connecting the gut and brain in a control group of mice, these neural changes disappeared. The probiotic diet no longer relieved the symptoms of stress.

Though it might seem odd that a cup of yogurt can influence behavior, the phenomenon has been repeatedly confirmed, at least in rodents. Earlier this year, Swedish scientists showed that the presence of gut bacteria shapes the development of the mouse brain, while French researchers found that treating human subjects with large doses of probiotics for 30 days reduced levels of “psychological distress.” There’s nothing metaphorical about “gut feelings,” for what happens in the gut really does influence what we feel.

Nor is it just the gastrointestinal tract that alters our minds. Mr. Damasio has shown that neurological patients who are unable to detect changes in their own bodies, like an increased heart rate or sweaty palms, are also unable to make effective decisions. When given a simple gambling task, they behave erratically and lose vast sums of money. Because they can’t experience the fleshy symptoms of fear, they never learn from their mistakes.

This research shows that the immateriality of mind is a deep illusion. Although we feel like a disembodied soul, many feelings and choices are actually shaped by the microbes in our gut and the palpitations of our heart. Nietzsche was right: “There is more reason in your body than in your best wisdom.”

This doesn’t mean, of course, that the mind-body problem has been solved. Though scientists have ransacked our matter and searched everywhere inside the skull, they still have no idea why we feel like a ghost. But it’s now abundantly clear that the mind is not separate from the body, hidden away in some ethereal province of thought. Rather, we emerge from the very same stuff that digests our lunch.

If you’d like to learn about the microbiome lurking inside your pipes, I highly recommend this wonderful slideshow by Ed Yong.

Read more…

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

[Nick Thompson]

I cannot … for the life of me …. Understand what the mind-body “problem” is any more than I can understand what the computing-transistor problem is (if, indeed, there are still transistors in computers.)  We would never wonder why a better transistor would make the computing better; why would we wonder why a better stomach would make the mind work better.   To me, the interesting psychological question is why people see it is a problem.  What is that they want to make of the mind that makes the mind-body problem a problem?

 

Nick

 

From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Victoria Hughes
Sent: Saturday, September 17, 2011 1:09 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: [FRIAM] Fwd: The Psychology Of Yogurt

 

Probiotics, reduced anxiety, and thoughts about the weird, wrong perception that we exist separately from our bodies, somehow. 

 

 

Date: September 17, 2011 12:18:17 PM MDT

Subject: The Psychology Of Yogurt

Source: Wired Science » Frontal Cortex

Author: Jonah Lehrer

 

My latest WSJ column uses a new study on probiotics as a launching pad to explore the mind-body problem, perhaps the most perplexing mystery in modern science:

One of the deepest mysteries of the human mind is that it doesn’t feel like part of the body. Our consciousness seems to exist in an immaterial realm, distinct from the meat on our bones. We feel like the ghost, not like the machine.

This ancient paradox—it’s known as the mind-body problem—has long perplexed philosophers. It has also interested neuroscientists, who have traditionally argued that the three pounds of our brain are a sufficient explanation for the so-called soul. There is no mystery, just anatomy.

In recent years, however, a spate of research has put an interesting twist on this old conundrum. The problem is even more bewildering than we thought, for it’s not just the coiled cortex that gives rise to the mind—it’s the entire body. As the neuroscientist Antonio Damasio writes, “The mind is embodied, not just embrained.”

The latest evidence comes from a new study of probiotic bacteria, the microorganisms typically found in yogurt and dairy products. While most investigations of probiotics have focused on their gastrointestinal benefits—the bacteria reduce the symptoms of diarrhea and irritable bowel syndrome—this new research explored the effect of probiotics on the brain.

The experiment, led by Javier Bravo at University College Cork in Ireland, was straightforward. First, he fed normal lab mice a diet full of probiotics. Then, Mr. Bravo’s team tested for behavioral changes, which were significant: When probiotic-fed animals were put in stressful conditions, such as being dropped into a pool of water, they were less anxious and released less stress hormone.

How did the food induce these changes? The answer involves GABA, a neurotransmitter that reduces the activity of neurons. When Mr. Bravo looked at the brains of the mice, he found that those fed probiotics had more GABA receptors in areas associated with memory and the regulation of emotions. (This change mimics the effects of popular antianxiety medications in humans.)

Furthermore, when he severed the nerve connecting the gut and brain in a control group of mice, these neural changes disappeared. The probiotic diet no longer relieved the symptoms of stress.

Though it might seem odd that a cup of yogurt can influence behavior, the phenomenon has been repeatedly confirmed, at least in rodents. Earlier this year, Swedish scientists showed that the presence of gut bacteria shapes the development of the mouse brain, while French researchers found that treating human subjects with large doses of probiotics for 30 days reduced levels of “psychological distress.” There’s nothing metaphorical about “gut feelings,” for what happens in the gut really does influence what we feel.

Nor is it just the gastrointestinal tract that alters our minds. Mr. Damasio has shown that neurological patients who are unable to detect changes in their own bodies, like an increased heart rate or sweaty palms, are also unable to make effective decisions. When given a simple gambling task, they behave erratically and lose vast sums of money. Because they can’t experience the fleshy symptoms of fear, they never learn from their mistakes.

This research shows that the immateriality of mind is a deep illusion. Although we feel like a disembodied soul, many feelings and choices are actually shaped by the microbes in our gut and the palpitations of our heart. Nietzsche was right: “There is more reason in your body than in your best wisdom.”

This doesn’t mean, of course, that the mind-body problem has been solved. Though scientists have ransacked our matter and searched everywhere inside the skull, they still have no idea why we feel like a ghost. But it’s now abundantly clear that the mind is not separate from the body, hidden away in some ethereal province of thought. Rather, we emerge from the very same stuff that digests our lunch.

If you’d like to learn about the microbiome lurking inside your pipes, I highly recommend this wonderful slideshow by Ed Yong.

Read more…

 

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

[Douglas Roberts-2]

Maybe it's a cultural difference.  I prefer kefir, myself.  But then, I'm pro-biotic...

--Doug

On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 2:09 PM, Nicholas Thompson <[hidden email]> wrote:

I cannot … for the life of me …. Understand what the mind-body “problem” is any more than I can understand what the computing-transistor problem is (if, indeed, there are still transistors in computers.)  We would never wonder why a better transistor would make the computing better; why would we wonder why a better stomach would make the mind work better.   To me, the interesting psychological question is why people see it is a problem.  What is that they want to make of the mind that makes the mind-body problem a problem?

 

Nick

 

From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Victoria Hughes
Sent: Saturday, September 17, 2011 1:09 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: [FRIAM] Fwd: The Psychology Of Yogurt

 

Probiotics, reduced anxiety, and thoughts about the weird, wrong perception that we exist separately from our bodies, somehow. 

 

 

Date: September 17, 2011 12:18:17 PM MDT

Subject: The Psychology Of Yogurt

Source: Wired Science » Frontal Cortex

Author: Jonah Lehrer

 

My latest WSJ column uses a new study on probiotics as a launching pad to explore the mind-body problem, perhaps the most perplexing mystery in modern science:

One of the deepest mysteries of the human mind is that it doesn’t feel like part of the body. Our consciousness seems to exist in an immaterial realm, distinct from the meat on our bones. We feel like the ghost, not like the machine.

This ancient paradox—it’s known as the mind-body problem—has long perplexed philosophers. It has also interested neuroscientists, who have traditionally argued that the three pounds of our brain are a sufficient explanation for the so-called soul. There is no mystery, just anatomy.

In recent years, however, a spate of research has put an interesting twist on this old conundrum. The problem is even more bewildering than we thought, for it’s not just the coiled cortex that gives rise to the mind—it’s the entire body. As the neuroscientist Antonio Damasio writes, “The mind is embodied, not just embrained.”

The latest evidence comes from a new study of probiotic bacteria, the microorganisms typically found in yogurt and dairy products. While most investigations of probiotics have focused on their gastrointestinal benefits—the bacteria reduce the symptoms of diarrhea and irritable bowel syndrome—this new research explored the effect of probiotics on the brain.

The experiment, led by Javier Bravo at University College Cork in Ireland, was straightforward. First, he fed normal lab mice a diet full of probiotics. Then, Mr. Bravo’s team tested for behavioral changes, which were significant: When probiotic-fed animals were put in stressful conditions, such as being dropped into a pool of water, they were less anxious and released less stress hormone.

How did the food induce these changes? The answer involves GABA, a neurotransmitter that reduces the activity of neurons. When Mr. Bravo looked at the brains of the mice, he found that those fed probiotics had more GABA receptors in areas associated with memory and the regulation of emotions. (This change mimics the effects of popular antianxiety medications in humans.)

Furthermore, when he severed the nerve connecting the gut and brain in a control group of mice, these neural changes disappeared. The probiotic diet no longer relieved the symptoms of stress.

Though it might seem odd that a cup of yogurt can influence behavior, the phenomenon has been repeatedly confirmed, at least in rodents. Earlier this year, Swedish scientists showed that the presence of gut bacteria shapes the development of the mouse brain, while French researchers found that treating human subjects with large doses of probiotics for 30 days reduced levels of “psychological distress.” There’s nothing metaphorical about “gut feelings,” for what happens in the gut really does influence what we feel.

Nor is it just the gastrointestinal tract that alters our minds. Mr. Damasio has shown that neurological patients who are unable to detect changes in their own bodies, like an increased heart rate or sweaty palms, are also unable to make effective decisions. When given a simple gambling task, they behave erratically and lose vast sums of money. Because they can’t experience the fleshy symptoms of fear, they never learn from their mistakes.

This research shows that the immateriality of mind is a deep illusion. Although we feel like a disembodied soul, many feelings and choices are actually shaped by the microbes in our gut and the palpitations of our heart. Nietzsche was right: “There is more reason in your body than in your best wisdom.”

This doesn’t mean, of course, that the mind-body problem has been solved. Though scientists have ransacked our matter and searched everywhere inside the skull, they still have no idea why we feel like a ghost. But it’s now abundantly clear that the mind is not separate from the body, hidden away in some ethereal province of thought. Rather, we emerge from the very same stuff that digests our lunch.

If you’d like to learn about the microbiome lurking inside your pipes, I highly recommend this wonderful slideshow by Ed Yong.

Read more…

 

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

[Eric Charles]

Nick,
I have been thinking recently about trying to write a short story. It would start with a version of Daniel Dennet's wonderful brain-in-a-vat. It would be a story of a valiant man who volunteered for the procedure; he volunteered for his love of science and the deep impact it would have on the most fundamental of questions, the relation of brain, mind, and body. There would be dual devices; the device in the head functioned to replicate effects at the surface of the brain and keep the space filled, the vat kept the brain alive, received input measures from the in-head device, and read any and all brain outputs. There would be details of how the vat perfectly replicates all effects the body would have on the brain, and how the artificial implant perfectly replicates all effects the brain would have on the body. All effects: Neuronal, hormonal, temperature, chemical force, everything - no safety for the body in a boxing ring or any other situation. And of course, our protagonist's heroism is rewarded. Mr. Brain-in-the-Vat functioned amazingly; he could move around, communicate, feel emotions, dream, everything. People came from miles around to wonder at him and get autographs ($15 extra for the paper to be signed on the vat). He was interviewed on every major TV show, and Larry Flynt even paid him a fortune for... being in film.

But one day another man showed up on Daniel's doorstep. He too had volunteered for a brave experiment. Sitting next to him on the veranda was a vat that held his kidneys and perfectly replicated all effects the body would have on the kidneys, and inside him was a genius device that perfectly replicated all effects the kidneys would have on the brain.

But everyone knew that would work, the kidneys after all are JUST a physiological system. And so, no one cared.

---
Eric



On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 04:09 PM, "Nicholas Thompson" <[hidden email]> wrote:

I cannot … for the life of me …. Understand what the mind-body “problem” is any more than I can understand what the computing-transistor problem is (if, indeed, there are still transistors in computers.)  We would never wonder why a better transistor would make the computing better; why would we wonder why a better stomach would make the mind work better.   To me, the interesting psychological question is why people see it is a problem.  What is that they want to make of the mind that makes the mind-body problem a problem?

 

Nick

 

From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Victoria Hughes
Sent: Saturday, September 17, 2011 1:09 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: [FRIAM] Fwd: The Psychology Of Yogurt

 

Probiotics, reduced anxiety, and thoughts about the weird, wrong perception that we exist separately from our bodies, somehow. 

 

 

Date: September 17, 2011 12:18:17 PM MDT

Subject: The Psychology Of Yogurt

Source: Wired Science » Frontal Cortex

Author: Jonah Lehrer

 

My latest WSJ <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111904265504576566820066488938.html" onclick="window.open('http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111904265504576566820066488938.html');return false;">column uses a new study on probiotics as a launching pad to explore the mind-body problem, perhaps the most perplexing mystery in modern science:

One of the deepest mysteries of the human mind is that it doesn’t feel like part of the body. Our consciousness seems to exist in an immaterial realm, distinct from the meat on our bones. We feel like the ghost, not like the machine.

This ancient paradox—it’s known as the mind-body problem—has long perplexed philosophers. It has also interested neuroscientists, who have traditionally argued that the three pounds of our brain are a sufficient explanation for the so-called soul. There is no mystery, just anatomy.

In recent years, however, a spate of research has put an interesting twist on this old conundrum. The problem is even more bewildering than we thought, for it’s not just the coiled cortex that gives rise to the mind—it’s the entire body. As the neuroscientist Antonio Damasio writes, “The mind is embodied, not just embrained.”

The latest evidence comes from a new study of probiotic bacteria, the microorganisms typically found in yogurt and dairy products. While most investigations of probiotics have focused on their gastrointestinal benefits—the bacteria reduce the symptoms of diarrhea and irritable bowel syndrome—this new research explored the effect of probiotics on the brain.

The experiment, led by Javier Bravo at University College Cork in Ireland, was straightforward. First, he fed normal lab mice a diet full of probiotics. Then, Mr. Bravo’s team tested for behavioral changes, which were significant: When probiotic-fed animals were put in stressful conditions, such as being dropped into a pool of water, they were less anxious and released less stress hormone.

How did the food induce these changes? The answer involves GABA, a neurotransmitter that reduces the activity of neurons. When Mr. Bravo looked at the brains of the mice, he found that those fed probiotics had more GABA receptors in areas associated with memory and the regulation of emotions. (This change mimics the effects of popular antianxiety medications in humans.)

Furthermore, when he severed the nerve connecting the gut and brain in a control group of mice, these neural changes disappeared. The probiotic diet no longer relieved the symptoms of stress.

Though it might seem odd that a cup of yogurt can influence behavior, the phenomenon has been repeatedly confirmed, at least in rodents. Earlier this year, Swedish scientists showed that the presence of gut bacteria shapes the development of the mouse brain, while French researchers found that treating human subjects with large doses of probiotics for 30 days reduced levels of “psychological distress.” There’s nothing metaphorical about “gut feelings,” for what happens in the gut really does influence what we feel.

Nor is it just the gastrointestinal tract that alters our minds. Mr. Damasio has shown that neurological patients who are unable to detect changes in their own bodies, like an increased heart rate or sweaty palms, are also unable to make effective decisions. When given a simple gambling task, they behave erratically and lose vast sums of money. Because they can’t experience the fleshy symptoms of fear, they never learn from their mistakes.

This research shows that the immateriality of mind is a deep illusion. Although we feel like a disembodied soul, many feelings and choices are actually shaped by the microbes in our gut and the palpitations of our heart. Nietzsche was right: “There is more reason in your body than in your best wisdom.”

This doesn’t mean, of course, that the mind-body problem has been solved. Though scientists have ransacked our matter and searched everywhere inside the skull, they still have no idea why we feel like a ghost. But it’s now abundantly clear that the mind is not separate from the body, hidden away in some ethereal province of thought. Rather, we emerge from the very same stuff that digests our lunch.

If you’d like to learn about the microbiome lurking inside your pipes, I highly recommend this wonderful <a href="http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2010/08/08/an-introduction-to-the-microbiome/" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2010/08/08/an-introduction-to-the-microbiome/');return false;">slideshow by Ed Yong.

<a href="http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2011/09/the-psychology-of-yogurt/" id="AppleMailRSSReadMore" onclick="window.open('http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2011/09/the-psychology-of-yogurt/');return false;">Read more…

 

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

Eric Charles

Professional Student and
Assistant Professor of Psychology
Penn State University
Altoona, PA 16601

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

[Steve Smith]

This reminds me too much of two disparate concepts:

SF Author (from ABQ no less) book "Proxies" where orphaned children with severe physical disabilities are offered an alternate existence by becoming telepresence operators of space equipment (cheaper than actually putting/keeping humans in space and a reasonable alternative for otherwise hugely physically limited children who can now have expanded sensoria and mobility but in an artificial habitat... raised as a family (of orphans), etc...   and all that goes with it utopian/dystopian SF Style.

    http://www.amazon.com/Proxies-Laura-J-Mixon/dp/0812523873

And the Honey Mummy ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mellified_man ) aka, the mellified man.   Not unlike a petrified tree but with a human and honey instead of tree and minerals.  Great source of all the necessary/appropriate vitamins and minerals, and tasty too!

- Steve

Nick,
I have been thinking recently about trying to write a short story. It would start with a version of Daniel Dennet's wonderful brain-in-a-vat. It would be a story of a valiant man who volunteered for the procedure; he volunteered for his love of science and the deep impact it would have on the most fundamental of questions, the relation of brain, mind, and body. There would be dual devices; the device in the head functioned to replicate effects at the surface of the brain and keep the space filled, the vat kept the brain alive, received input measures from the in-head device, and read any and all brain outputs. There would be details of how the vat perfectly replicates all effects the body would have on the brain, and how the artificial implant perfectly replicates all effects the brain would have on the body. All effects: Neuronal, hormonal, temperature, chemical force, everything - no safety for the body in a boxing ring or any other situation. And of course, our protagonist's heroism is rewarded. Mr. Brain-in-the-Vat functioned amazingly; he could move around, communicate, feel emotions, dream, everything. People came from miles around to wonder at him and get autographs ($15 extra for the paper to be signed on the vat). He was interviewed on every major TV show, and Larry Flynt even paid him a fortune for... being in film.

But one day another man showed up on Daniel's doorstep. He too had volunteered for a brave experiment. Sitting next to him on the veranda was a vat that held his kidneys and perfectly replicated all effects the body would have on the kidneys, and inside him was a genius device that perfectly replicated all effects the kidneys would have on the brain.

But everyone knew that would work, the kidneys after all are JUST a physiological system. And so, no one cared.

---
Eric



On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 04:09 PM, "Nicholas Thompson" [hidden email] wrote:

I cannot … for the life of me …. Understand what the mind-body “problem” is any more than I can understand what the computing-transistor problem is (if, indeed, there are still transistors in computers.)  We would never wonder why a better transistor would make the computing better; why would we wonder why a better stomach would make the mind work better.   To me, the interesting psychological question is why people see it is a problem.  What is that they want to make of the mind that makes the mind-body problem a problem?

 

Nick

 

From: [hidden email] [[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Victoria Hughes
Sent: Saturday, September 17, 2011 1:09 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: [FRIAM] Fwd: The Psychology Of Yogurt

 

Probiotics, reduced anxiety, and thoughts about the weird, wrong perception that we exist separately from our bodies, somehow. 

 

 

Date: September 17, 2011 12:18:17 PM MDT

Subject: The Psychology Of Yogurt

Source: Wired Science » Frontal Cortex

Author: Jonah Lehrer

 

My latest WSJ <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111904265504576566820066488938.html" onclick="window.open('http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111904265504576566820066488938.html');return false;">column uses a new study on probiotics as a launching pad to explore the mind-body problem, perhaps the most perplexing mystery in modern science:

One of the deepest mysteries of the human mind is that it doesn’t feel like part of the body. Our consciousness seems to exist in an immaterial realm, distinct from the meat on our bones. We feel like the ghost, not like the machine.

This ancient paradox—it’s known as the mind-body problem—has long perplexed philosophers. It has also interested neuroscientists, who have traditionally argued that the three pounds of our brain are a sufficient explanation for the so-called soul. There is no mystery, just anatomy.

In recent years, however, a spate of research has put an interesting twist on this old conundrum. The problem is even more bewildering than we thought, for it’s not just the coiled cortex that gives rise to the mind—it’s the entire body. As the neuroscientist Antonio Damasio writes, “The mind is embodied, not just embrained.”

The latest evidence comes from a new study of probiotic bacteria, the microorganisms typically found in yogurt and dairy products. While most investigations of probiotics have focused on their gastrointestinal benefits—the bacteria reduce the symptoms of diarrhea and irritable bowel syndrome—this new research explored the effect of probiotics on the brain.

The experiment, led by Javier Bravo at University College Cork in Ireland, was straightforward. First, he fed normal lab mice a diet full of probiotics. Then, Mr. Bravo’s team tested for behavioral changes, which were significant: When probiotic-fed animals were put in stressful conditions, such as being dropped into a pool of water, they were less anxious and released less stress hormone.

How did the food induce these changes? The answer involves GABA, a neurotransmitter that reduces the activity of neurons. When Mr. Bravo looked at the brains of the mice, he found that those fed probiotics had more GABA receptors in areas associated with memory and the regulation of emotions. (This change mimics the effects of popular antianxiety medications in humans.)

Furthermore, when he severed the nerve connecting the gut and brain in a control group of mice, these neural changes disappeared. The probiotic diet no longer relieved the symptoms of stress.

Though it might seem odd that a cup of yogurt can influence behavior, the phenomenon has been repeatedly confirmed, at least in rodents. Earlier this year, Swedish scientists showed that the presence of gut bacteria shapes the development of the mouse brain, while French researchers found that treating human subjects with large doses of probiotics for 30 days reduced levels of “psychological distress.” There’s nothing metaphorical about “gut feelings,” for what happens in the gut really does influence what we feel.

Nor is it just the gastrointestinal tract that alters our minds. Mr. Damasio has shown that neurological patients who are unable to detect changes in their own bodies, like an increased heart rate or sweaty palms, are also unable to make effective decisions. When given a simple gambling task, they behave erratically and lose vast sums of money. Because they can’t experience the fleshy symptoms of fear, they never learn from their mistakes.

This research shows that the immateriality of mind is a deep illusion. Although we feel like a disembodied soul, many feelings and choices are actually shaped by the microbes in our gut and the palpitations of our heart. Nietzsche was right: “There is more reason in your body than in your best wisdom.”

This doesn’t mean, of course, that the mind-body problem has been solved. Though scientists have ransacked our matter and searched everywhere inside the skull, they still have no idea why we feel like a ghost. But it’s now abundantly clear that the mind is not separate from the body, hidden away in some ethereal province of thought. Rather, we emerge from the very same stuff that digests our lunch.

If you’d like to learn about the microbiome lurking inside your pipes, I highly recommend this wonderful <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2010/08/08/an-introduction-to-the-microbiome/" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2010/08/08/an-introduction-to-the-microbiome/');return false;">slideshow by Ed Yong.

<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2011/09/the-psychology-of-yogurt/" id="AppleMailRSSReadMore" onclick="window.open('http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2011/09/the-psychology-of-yogurt/');return false;">Read more…

 

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

Eric Charles

Professional Student and
Assistant Professor of Psychology
Penn State University
Altoona, PA 16601

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

[Victoria Hughes]

I suppose a reference to Horace the cheese would be too obscure...

Tory Hughes

www.toryhughes.com

Milagro Hacienda creativity retreat 

The Creative Development manual 

On Sep 17, 2011, at 8:01 PM, Steve Smith wrote:

This reminds me too much of two disparate concepts:

SF Author (from ABQ no less) book "Proxies" where orphaned children with severe physical disabilities are offered an alternate existence by becoming telepresence operators of space equipment (cheaper than actually putting/keeping humans in space and a reasonable alternative for otherwise hugely physically limited children who can now have expanded sensoria and mobility but in an artificial habitat... raised as a family (of orphans), etc...   and all that goes with it utopian/dystopian SF Style.

    http://www.amazon.com/Proxies-Laura-J-Mixon/dp/0812523873

And the Honey Mummy ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mellified_man ) aka, the mellified man.   Not unlike a petrified tree but with a human and honey instead of tree and minerals.  Great source of all the necessary/appropriate vitamins and minerals, and tasty too!

- Steve

Nick,
I have been thinking recently about trying to write a short story. It would start with a version of Daniel Dennet's wonderful brain-in-a-vat. It would be a story of a valiant man who volunteered for the procedure; he volunteered for his love of science and the deep impact it would have on the most fundamental of questions, the relation of brain, mind, and body. There would be dual devices; the device in the head functioned to replicate effects at the surface of the brain and keep the space filled, the vat kept the brain alive, received input measures from the in-head device, and read any and all brain outputs. There would be details of how the vat perfectly replicates all effects the body would have on the brain, and how the artificial implant perfectly replicates all effects the brain would have on the body. All effects: Neuronal, hormonal, temperature, chemical force, everything - no safety for the body in a boxing ring or any other situation. And of course, our protagonist's heroism is rewarded. Mr. Brain-in-the-Vat functioned amazingly; he could move around, communicate, feel emotions, dream, everything. People came from miles around to wonder at him and get autographs ($15 extra for the paper to be signed on the vat). He was interviewed on every major TV show, and Larry Flynt even paid him a fortune for... being in film.

But one day another man showed up on Daniel's doorstep. He too had volunteered for a brave experiment. Sitting next to him on the veranda was a vat that held his kidneys and perfectly replicated all effects the body would have on the kidneys, and inside him was a genius device that perfectly replicated all effects the kidneys would have on the brain.

But everyone knew that would work, the kidneys after all are JUST a physiological system. And so, no one cared.

---
Eric



On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 04:09 PM, "Nicholas Thompson" [hidden email] wrote:

I cannot … for the life of me …. Understand what the mind-body “problem” is any more than I can understand what the computing-transistor problem is (if, indeed, there are still transistors in computers.)  We would never wonder why a better transistor would make the computing better; why would we wonder why a better stomach would make the mind work better.   To me, the interesting psychological question is why people see it is a problem.  What is that they want to make of the mind that makes the mind-body problem a problem?

 

Nick

 

From: [hidden email] [[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Victoria Hughes
Sent: Saturday, September 17, 2011 1:09 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: [FRIAM] Fwd: The Psychology Of Yogurt

 

Probiotics, reduced anxiety, and thoughts about the weird, wrong perception that we exist separately from our bodies, somehow. 

 

 

Date: September 17, 2011 12:18:17 PM MDT

Subject: The Psychology Of Yogurt

Source: Wired Science » Frontal Cortex

Author: Jonah Lehrer

 

My latest WSJ <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111904265504576566820066488938.html" onclick="window.open('http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111904265504576566820066488938.html');return false;">column uses a new study on probiotics as a launching pad to explore the mind-body problem, perhaps the most perplexing mystery in modern science:

One of the deepest mysteries of the human mind is that it doesn’t feel like part of the body. Our consciousness seems to exist in an immaterial realm, distinct from the meat on our bones. We feel like the ghost, not like the machine.

This ancient paradox—it’s known as the mind-body problem—has long perplexed philosophers. It has also interested neuroscientists, who have traditionally argued that the three pounds of our brain are a sufficient explanation for the so-called soul. There is no mystery, just anatomy.

In recent years, however, a spate of research has put an interesting twist on this old conundrum. The problem is even more bewildering than we thought, for it’s not just the coiled cortex that gives rise to the mind—it’s the entire body. As the neuroscientist Antonio Damasio writes, “The mind is embodied, not just embrained.”

The latest evidence comes from a new study of probiotic bacteria, the microorganisms typically found in yogurt and dairy products. While most investigations of probiotics have focused on their gastrointestinal benefits—the bacteria reduce the symptoms of diarrhea and irritable bowel syndrome—this new research explored the effect of probiotics on the brain.

The experiment, led by Javier Bravo at University College Cork in Ireland, was straightforward. First, he fed normal lab mice a diet full of probiotics. Then, Mr. Bravo’s team tested for behavioral changes, which were significant: When probiotic-fed animals were put in stressful conditions, such as being dropped into a pool of water, they were less anxious and released less stress hormone.

How did the food induce these changes? The answer involves GABA, a neurotransmitter that reduces the activity of neurons. When Mr. Bravo looked at the brains of the mice, he found that those fed probiotics had more GABA receptors in areas associated with memory and the regulation of emotions. (This change mimics the effects of popular antianxiety medications in humans.)

Furthermore, when he severed the nerve connecting the gut and brain in a control group of mice, these neural changes disappeared. The probiotic diet no longer relieved the symptoms of stress.

Though it might seem odd that a cup of yogurt can influence behavior, the phenomenon has been repeatedly confirmed, at least in rodents. Earlier this year, Swedish scientists showed that the presence of gut bacteria shapes the development of the mouse brain, while French researchers found that treating human subjects with large doses of probiotics for 30 days reduced levels of “psychological distress.” There’s nothing metaphorical about “gut feelings,” for what happens in the gut really does influence what we feel.

Nor is it just the gastrointestinal tract that alters our minds. Mr. Damasio has shown that neurological patients who are unable to detect changes in their own bodies, like an increased heart rate or sweaty palms, are also unable to make effective decisions. When given a simple gambling task, they behave erratically and lose vast sums of money. Because they can’t experience the fleshy symptoms of fear, they never learn from their mistakes.

This research shows that the immateriality of mind is a deep illusion. Although we feel like a disembodied soul, many feelings and choices are actually shaped by the microbes in our gut and the palpitations of our heart. Nietzsche was right: “There is more reason in your body than in your best wisdom.”

This doesn’t mean, of course, that the mind-body problem has been solved. Though scientists have ransacked our matter and searched everywhere inside the skull, they still have no idea why we feel like a ghost. But it’s now abundantly clear that the mind is not separate from the body, hidden away in some ethereal province of thought. Rather, we emerge from the very same stuff that digests our lunch.

If you’d like to learn about the microbiome lurking inside your pipes, I highly recommend this wonderful <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2010/08/08/an-introduction-to-the-microbiome/" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2010/08/08/an-introduction-to-the-microbiome/');return false;">slideshow by Ed Yong.

<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2011/09/the-psychology-of-yogurt/" id="AppleMailRSSReadMore" onclick="window.open('http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2011/09/the-psychology-of-yogurt/');return false;">Read more…

 

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

Eric Charles

Professional Student and
Assistant Professor of Psychology
Penn State University
Altoona, PA 16601

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

[Vladimyr Burachynsky]

 

Hello gentlemen and ladies,

 

I have been off chasing the moon again but I have been drawn back to earth,

 

Sounds like an overworked story line, but with a curiously contemporary vein. I would hazard a guess you can turn this into a romp.

 

Might I suggest another twist to make it a bit more deliciously disturbing. ( I have a Slavic streak of Black Humor)

Your hero eventually has a problem with his surrogate devices, and discovers he is being poisoned/drugged. He has to discover why the justice system is having trouble  finding the unknown villain and then realizes that the justice system itself is divided on the definition of attempted murder or was it simply mechanical malfeasance. He thinks he is still human but there is serious disagreement in the public.

 

I agree the mind/body issue is over worked , the Human being versus non human intelligence is trickier. We could add to the melee a large number of recipients of artificial heart devices that are being declared dead because they no longer have a heart beat. So what is human and how do we define life. Human rights activists are unprepared for the debate as one side argues foetuses to be non human while possessing all the attributes  of bona fide human beings? It degenerates into a campaign where the prejudices of some People define who is and who is not human enough for protection.

 

I recall a disasterous argument I had once with a young female student when she asked if I was pro or con abortion. I said off handedly that society already tolerates an enormous amount of murder without blinking an eye and could see no difficulty expecting society to tolerate even more murder.

 

She then declared it was not in fact murder since it was simply a lump of flesh. Being a biologist as she wished to become, I asked “So what is this lump you call flesh?” She looked amazed at the question. “ Is it a snail, is it a dog maybe a tree, if it exists and has life what is it then?”  She withdrew in a huff and deprecating manner of body language. I then asked others that overheard the question, What is the problem with legally tolerated murder? Why does the change of name change the ethical status? Or does it? The evil we do is  given a new name and becomes a virtue. Perhaps the brain in the bottle loses such psychological trickery and has to live with the truth of events around himself. Then when he wishes to escape he has to find a means of committing suicide or can he ( a good literary device )? Put our hero on the Women’s talk show circuit and follow the body language. I would love to see a sketch of the hero in a two way debate with Anne Coulter, Michele Bachman or any other Right wingers?  Have the brain become a Blogger… commenting on humanity

 

I think the mind/body issue is deceptive. Since we think it purely self referential.  My nagging question is perhaps more important. Why do we need to dehumanize someone before we execute them? Why does a murderer strain logic to justify his acts to be other than what it is ? The mind/body debate hides much uncertainty about our intelligence , ethics morality and desires. Blaming the body strips us of free will. Our justice system assumes we are informed and competent when that may be seriously in doubt. I agree most people are deluded but the court system usually is aware of the fact and strictly deals with more bloody matters.

 

Somewhere lurking behind so many social situations is the problem of intent. The intent is transformed from murder to pest disposal and we all agree to use language to disguise the truth in that we create a society of corruption.  I think what your scenario for a novel prods at is that secret cognitive dissonance that allows a person to deform language and exonerate themselves  from a crime. Does the Bottle brain still have the secret dissonance in place after the transformation.? Will he lie to himself about the nature of his past life? Perhaps he was a bogus war hero, tax evader or drug addict anything is possible?

 

What if the bottle brain now unable to deceive others or himself discovers his intellect to be a fiction?

 

The scenario seems to be a good first chapter, now consider the brain to be the evil within us that we strive to reform through theatrical sincerity.

There is something about your scenario that reminds me of one of C.S.Lewis ‘ sci fi stories The title escapes me but perhaps it was “The Horror”

 

Bulgakov wrote a short story about a scientist who experimented on a dog to enhance its development. The result was a new form of Soviet era atrocity appearing human but acting beastly. He graduated to becoming a soviet style apparatchik.

 

The scenario needs a Hook on the nature of being Human without all the flesh.

 

Lovely notion seems there is a lot of territory to explore when you get rolling. I hope you drop us hints of what you struggle with in your new adventure.

In another offshoot it reminds me of getting older where society imposes on us a state of delegitimation or disenfranchisement.  Often I watch younger people assume that white hair means we are past prime and  no longer what we thought we were. I think it worth examining the beliefs of the young grad student who thought that a good argument and a nasty gaze could change murder into a virtue as if she had a special magical  wand. Is the issue of human rights really so trivial that one individual can strip another of protection because of a hidden desire?

Good luck.

 

 

Vladimyr Burachynsky.

 

From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Steve Smith
Sent: September-17-11 9:02 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Fwd: The Psychology Of Yogurt

 

This reminds me too much of two disparate concepts:

SF Author (from ABQ no less) book "Proxies" where orphaned children with severe physical disabilities are offered an alternate existence by becoming telepresence operators of space equipment (cheaper than actually putting/keeping humans in space and a reasonable alternative for otherwise hugely physically limited children who can now have expanded sensoria and mobility but in an artificial habitat... raised as a family (of orphans), etc...   and all that goes with it utopian/dystopian SF Style.

    http://www.amazon.com/Proxies-Laura-J-Mixon/dp/0812523873

And the Honey Mummy ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mellified_man ) aka, the mellified man.   Not unlike a petrified tree but with a human and honey instead of tree and minerals.  Great source of all the necessary/appropriate vitamins and minerals, and tasty too!

- Steve

Nick,
I have been thinking recently about trying to write a short story. It would start with a version of Daniel Dennet's wonderful brain-in-a-vat. It would be a story of a valiant man who volunteered for the procedure; he volunteered for his love of science and the deep impact it would have on the most fundamental of questions, the relation of brain, mind, and body. There would be dual devices; the device in the head functioned to replicate effects at the surface of the brain and keep the space filled, the vat kept the brain alive, received input measures from the in-head device, and read any and all brain outputs. There would be details of how the vat perfectly replicates all effects the body would have on the brain, and how the artificial implant perfectly replicates all effects the brain would have on the body. All effects: Neuronal, hormonal, temperature, chemical force, everything - no safety for the body in a boxing ring or any other situation. And of course, our protagonist's heroism is rewarded. Mr. Brain-in-the-Vat functioned amazingly; he could move around, communicate, feel emotions, dream, everything. People came from miles around to wonder at him and get autographs ($15 extra for the paper to be signed on the vat). He was interviewed on every major TV show, and Larry Flynt even paid him a fortune for... being in film.

But one day another man showed up on Daniel's doorstep. He too had volunteered for a brave experiment. Sitting next to him on the veranda was a vat that held his kidneys and perfectly replicated all effects the body would have on the kidneys, and inside him was a genius device that perfectly replicated all effects the kidneys would have on the brain.

But everyone knew that would work, the kidneys after all are JUST a physiological system. And so, no one cared.

---
Eric



On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 04:09 PM, "Nicholas Thompson" [hidden email] wrote:

I cannot … for the life of me …. Understand what the mind-body “problem” is any more than I can understand what the computing-transistor problem is (if, indeed, there are still transistors in computers.)  We would never wonder why a better transistor would make the computing better; why would we wonder why a better stomach would make the mind work better.   To me, the interesting psychological question is why people see it is a problem.  What is that they want to make of the mind that makes the mind-body problem a problem?

 

Nick

 

From: [hidden email] [[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Victoria Hughes
Sent: Saturday, September 17, 2011 1:09 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: [FRIAM] Fwd: The Psychology Of Yogurt

 

Probiotics, reduced anxiety, and thoughts about the weird, wrong perception that we exist separately from our bodies, somehow. 

 

 

Date: September 17, 2011 12:18:17 PM MDT

Subject: The Psychology Of Yogurt

Source: Wired Science » Frontal Cortex

Author: Jonah Lehrer

 

My latest WSJ column uses a new study on probiotics as a launching pad to explore the mind-body problem, perhaps the most perplexing mystery in modern science:

One of the deepest mysteries of the human mind is that it doesn’t feel like part of the body. Our consciousness seems to exist in an immaterial realm, distinct from the meat on our bones. We feel like the ghost, not like the machine.

This ancient paradox—it’s known as the mind-body problem—has long perplexed philosophers. It has also interested neuroscientists, who have traditionally argued that the three pounds of our brain are a sufficient explanation for the so-called soul. There is no mystery, just anatomy.

In recent years, however, a spate of research has put an interesting twist on this old conundrum. The problem is even more bewildering than we thought, for it’s not just the coiled cortex that gives rise to the mind—it’s the entire body. As the neuroscientist Antonio Damasio writes, “The mind is embodied, not just embrained.”

The latest evidence comes from a new study of probiotic bacteria, the microorganisms typically found in yogurt and dairy products. While most investigations of probiotics have focused on their gastrointestinal benefits—the bacteria reduce the symptoms of diarrhea and irritable bowel syndrome—this new research explored the effect of probiotics on the brain.

The experiment, led by Javier Bravo at University College Cork in Ireland, was straightforward. First, he fed normal lab mice a diet full of probiotics. Then, Mr. Bravo’s team tested for behavioral changes, which were significant: When probiotic-fed animals were put in stressful conditions, such as being dropped into a pool of water, they were less anxious and released less stress hormone.

How did the food induce these changes? The answer involves GABA, a neurotransmitter that reduces the activity of neurons. When Mr. Bravo looked at the brains of the mice, he found that those fed probiotics had more GABA receptors in areas associated with memory and the regulation of emotions. (This change mimics the effects of popular antianxiety medications in humans.)

Furthermore, when he severed the nerve connecting the gut and brain in a control group of mice, these neural changes disappeared. The probiotic diet no longer relieved the symptoms of stress.

Though it might seem odd that a cup of yogurt can influence behavior, the phenomenon has been repeatedly confirmed, at least in rodents. Earlier this year, Swedish scientists showed that the presence of gut bacteria shapes the development of the mouse brain, while French researchers found that treating human subjects with large doses of probiotics for 30 days reduced levels of “psychological distress.” There’s nothing metaphorical about “gut feelings,” for what happens in the gut really does influence what we feel.

Nor is it just the gastrointestinal tract that alters our minds. Mr. Damasio has shown that neurological patients who are unable to detect changes in their own bodies, like an increased heart rate or sweaty palms, are also unable to make effective decisions. When given a simple gambling task, they behave erratically and lose vast sums of money. Because they can’t experience the fleshy symptoms of fear, they never learn from their mistakes.

This research shows that the immateriality of mind is a deep illusion. Although we feel like a disembodied soul, many feelings and choices are actually shaped by the microbes in our gut and the palpitations of our heart. Nietzsche was right: “There is more reason in your body than in your best wisdom.”

This doesn’t mean, of course, that the mind-body problem has been solved. Though scientists have ransacked our matter and searched everywhere inside the skull, they still have no idea why we feel like a ghost. But it’s now abundantly clear that the mind is not separate from the body, hidden away in some ethereal province of thought. Rather, we emerge from the very same stuff that digests our lunch.

If you’d like to learn about the microbiome lurking inside your pipes, I highly recommend this wonderful slideshow by Ed Yong.

Read more…

 

============================================================

FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv

Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College

lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

Eric Charles

Professional Student and
Assistant Professor of Psychology
Penn State University
Altoona, PA 16601

============================================================

FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv

Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College

lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

 

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

[glen ep ropella]

Nicholas Thompson wrote circa 11-09-17 01:09 PM:
> We would never wonder why a better transistor would make the
> computing better; why would we wonder why a better stomach would make
> the mind work better.

I'm a bit amazed at this statement. 8^)  So much is packed into the word
"better" that it makes the statement incomprehensible to me.  Sure,
under one understanding of "better", a better transistor makes for
better computing (or a better stomach makes a better mind).  But there
are so many other understandings of "better" where that may not be the
case that they completely swamp the smaller set.

My point being that systemic organization is not as simple as that.  Not
only are complex systems nonlinear in the way their components'
behaviors generate the systemic behavior, but they are also nonlinear in
the way the components' purposes/requirements compose the system's
purpose/requirements.

We _can_ do this with transistors and computers because we _designed_
("engineered" is probably a better word) the damned things.  It's like
my knowledge of the Android phones vs. my knowledge of the iPhone.  The
fact that I can root around inside an Android phone makes hypotheses
about its inner workings easier to triage.  The iPhone ... not so much.

Take that reasoning to another layer and we have the _lack_ of ability
to triage hypotheses about the human body vs. the very competent ability
to triage hypotheses about the workings of a computer.

--
glen e. p. ropella, 971-222-9095, http://tempusdictum.com


============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

[Nick Thompson]

I dunno, Glen.  

You are talking to a man with an insulin pump.  I start to think VERY BADLY
if anything goes wrong with it.

Nick

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf
Of glen e. p. ropella
Sent: Monday, September 19, 2011 11:04 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Fwd: The Psychology Of Yogurt

Nicholas Thompson wrote circa 11-09-17 01:09 PM:
> We would never wonder why a better transistor would make the computing
> better; why would we wonder why a better stomach would make the mind
> work better.

I'm a bit amazed at this statement. 8^)  So much is packed into the word
"better" that it makes the statement incomprehensible to me.  Sure, under
one understanding of "better", a better transistor makes for better
computing (or a better stomach makes a better mind).  But there are so many
other understandings of "better" where that may not be the case that they
completely swamp the smaller set.

My point being that systemic organization is not as simple as that.  Not
only are complex systems nonlinear in the way their components'
behaviors generate the systemic behavior, but they are also nonlinear in the
way the components' purposes/requirements compose the system's
purpose/requirements.

We _can_ do this with transistors and computers because we _designed_
("engineered" is probably a better word) the damned things.  It's like my
knowledge of the Android phones vs. my knowledge of the iPhone.  The fact
that I can root around inside an Android phone makes hypotheses about its
inner workings easier to triage.  The iPhone ... not so much.

Take that reasoning to another layer and we have the _lack_ of ability to
triage hypotheses about the human body vs. the very competent ability to
triage hypotheses about the workings of a computer.

--
glen e. p. ropella, 971-222-9095, http://tempusdictum.com


============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org


============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

[glen ep ropella]

Nicholas Thompson wrote circa 11-09-19 01:07 PM:
> You are talking to a man with an insulin pump.  I start to think VERY BADLY
> if anything goes wrong with it.

Yeah, I don't know either.  But part of my fascination with this topic
lies in the use of psychedelic drugs (not _my_ use of such, of course
... the FSM knows I would never touch such stuff).  We (humans and some
animals, it seems) purposefully make worse some specific body processes
in order to "think badly".

It seems to me that a little "bad thinking" now and again can be a Good
Thing(TM).

--
glen e. p. ropella, 971-222-9095, http://tempusdictum.com


============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

[glen ep ropella]

glen e. p. ropella wrote circa 11-09-19 03:30 PM:

> Nicholas Thompson wrote circa 11-09-19 01:07 PM:
>> You are talking to a man with an insulin pump.  I start to think VERY BADLY
>> if anything goes wrong with it.
>
> Yeah, I don't know either.  But part of my fascination with this topic
> lies in the use of psychedelic drugs (not _my_ use of such, of course
> ... the FSM knows I would never touch such stuff).  We (humans and some
> animals, it seems) purposefully make worse some specific body processes
> in order to "think badly".
>
> It seems to me that a little "bad thinking" now and again can be a Good
> Thing(TM).

Oh, I forgot to mention that I think this issue (mind-body problem) is
intimately related to the old adage "the dose is the poison".  Whether
an alteration in a physiological process is "bad", "good", "better", or
"worse", depends a very great deal on just how altered the process is.
It seems reasonable that a little of the poisonous ethanol on a regular
basis is "good" and a debilitating inhibition of dopamine production is
"bad".  But there is a large swatch of gray in between where "bad" and
"good" are too oversimplifying to be useful.

In any case, it's pretty easy for me to see a mind-body problem and to
see it as a fundamental, immediate, medical issue.  I've experimented
quite a bit with my own mind-body dichotomy by switching hands on
various tasks.  I recently switched _back_ to using my right hand to
brush my teeth.  When I switched to my left (something like 10 years
ago), I could barely finish the job without tiring out my arm.  None of
the muscles worked in any way that might be called efficient, even
though I felt like I was telling my body to behave the same way it did
when I'd use my right hand.  Well, I finally got good at doing it with
my left hand, although in a different way from what I remember for my
right hand.  I used my wrist much more with my right hand, and my elbow
much more with my left hand.  Well, when I switched just recently, I
seemed to be using my right arm like I learned to use my left arm!  I.e.
very little give in the wrist and most movement in the elbow.  I'm now
trying to re-learn to use my wrist more with my right hand.  If I do,
then I'll switch again and try to do the same with my left.

Although this sort of thing may not _seem_ like a mind-body problem, it
most definitely is.  Despite our realization that the mind is embodied,
there may be some processes that can be swapped out, a perfect
"impedance match", with another process (like an artificial eyeball,
limb, or insulin pump).  And yet, there may not be any such processes.
If every little mechanism in our body has a salient impact on our mind,
then the mind-body problem disappears.  But if not, then the mind-body
problem becomes one of requirements analysis, scaling, and the autonomy
of various components.

--
glen e. p. ropella, 971-222-9095, http://tempusdictum.com


============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

[Nick Thompson]

Glen,

I realize that you didn't start this thread, so you may be as perplexed as I
am, but, what exactly IS the mind-body problem?  

Also, not that it's essential, but could you DISAMBIGUATE? I, of course,
instantly assumed you were referring to number eleven.  

    Flying Spaghetti Monster, the deity of Pastafarianism, a parody religion
    FIFA Soccer Manager, a video game about football management
    Fighting Spirit magazine, a professional wrestling periodical
    Film Score Monthly, a record label and online magazine
    Forgetting Sarah Marshall, a motion picture
    Free Software Magazine, a computing periodical/website
    Free software movement, a sociopolitical movement in computing
    Fiji School of Medicine, the central medical school of the University of
the South Pacific
    Fixed Survey Meter, an instrument used by the British Royal Observer
Corps during the Cold War to detect nuclear fallout
    Folded spectrum method, a Solver for Eigenvalue problems
    Free Speech Movement, at the University of California, Berkeley, in 1964
    Finite-state machine, a model of computation
    Field service management, optimization of the field operations of
technicians
    Fatih Sultan Mehmet (as Mehmed II), 7th sultan of the Ottoman Empire
    Fabryka Samochodów Małolitrażowych Polish car factory
    Federated States of Micronesia, an Oceanic island nation
    Fort Smith Regional Airport (IATA code: FSM) in Arkansas, United States
    Mauritian Solidarity Front, in French Front Solidarité Mauricien (FSM)

THANKS,

Nick

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf
Of glen e. p. ropella
Sent: Monday, September 19, 2011 5:46 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Fwd: The Psychology Of Yogurt

glen e. p. ropella wrote circa 11-09-19 03:30 PM:

> Nicholas Thompson wrote circa 11-09-19 01:07 PM:
>> You are talking to a man with an insulin pump.  I start to think VERY
>> BADLY if anything goes wrong with it.
>
> Yeah, I don't know either.  But part of my fascination with this topic
> lies in the use of psychedelic drugs (not _my_ use of such, of course
> ... the FSM knows I would never touch such stuff).  We (humans and
> some animals, it seems) purposefully make worse some specific body
> processes in order to "think badly".
>
> It seems to me that a little "bad thinking" now and again can be a
> Good Thing(TM).

Oh, I forgot to mention that I think this issue (mind-body problem) is
intimately related to the old adage "the dose is the poison".  Whether an
alteration in a physiological process is "bad", "good", "better", or
"worse", depends a very great deal on just how altered the process is.
It seems reasonable that a little of the poisonous ethanol on a regular
basis is "good" and a debilitating inhibition of dopamine production is
"bad".  But there is a large swatch of gray in between where "bad" and
"good" are too oversimplifying to be useful.

In any case, it's pretty easy for me to see a mind-body problem and to see
it as a fundamental, immediate, medical issue.  I've experimented quite a
bit with my own mind-body dichotomy by switching hands on various tasks.  I
recently switched _back_ to using my right hand to brush my teeth.  When I
switched to my left (something like 10 years ago), I could barely finish the
job without tiring out my arm.  None of the muscles worked in any way that
might be called efficient, even though I felt like I was telling my body to
behave the same way it did when I'd use my right hand.  Well, I finally got
good at doing it with my left hand, although in a different way from what I
remember for my right hand.  I used my wrist much more with my right hand,
and my elbow much more with my left hand.  Well, when I switched just
recently, I seemed to be using my right arm like I learned to use my left
arm!  I.e.
very little give in the wrist and most movement in the elbow.  I'm now
trying to re-learn to use my wrist more with my right hand.  If I do, then
I'll switch again and try to do the same with my left.

Although this sort of thing may not _seem_ like a mind-body problem, it most
definitely is.  Despite our realization that the mind is embodied, there may
be some processes that can be swapped out, a perfect "impedance match", with
another process (like an artificial eyeball, limb, or insulin pump).  And
yet, there may not be any such processes.
If every little mechanism in our body has a salient impact on our mind, then
the mind-body problem disappears.  But if not, then the mind-body problem
becomes one of requirements analysis, scaling, and the autonomy of various
components.

--
glen e. p. ropella, 971-222-9095, http://tempusdictum.com


============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org


============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

[glen ep ropella]

Nicholas Thompson wrote circa 11-09-19 05:19 PM:
> I realize that you didn't start this thread, so you may be as perplexed as I
> am, but, what exactly IS the mind-body problem?  

As I understand it, it's the perplexing sense that there are parts
(extended to processes by me if not others) of the body that seem to
have little or nothing to do with the mind.  And vice versa: there seem
to be thoughts that have little or nothing to do with the body.

> Also, not that it's essential, but could you DISAMBIGUATE? I, of course,
> instantly assumed you were referring to number eleven.  
>
>     Flying Spaghetti Monster, the deity of Pastafarianism, a parody religion
>     FIFA Soccer Manager, a video game about football management
>     Fighting Spirit magazine, a professional wrestling periodical
>     Film Score Monthly, a record label and online magazine
>     Forgetting Sarah Marshall, a motion picture
>     Free Software Magazine, a computing periodical/website
>     Free software movement, a sociopolitical movement in computing
>     Fiji School of Medicine, the central medical school of the University of
> the South Pacific
>     Fixed Survey Meter, an instrument used by the British Royal Observer
> Corps during the Cold War to detect nuclear fallout
>     Folded spectrum method, a Solver for Eigenvalue problems
>     Free Speech Movement, at the University of California, Berkeley, in 1964
>     Finite-state machine, a model of computation
>     Field service management, optimization of the field operations of
> technicians
>     Fatih Sultan Mehmet (as Mehmed II), 7th sultan of the Ottoman Empire
>     Fabryka Samochodów Ma³olitra¿owych Polish car factory
>     Federated States of Micronesia, an Oceanic island nation
>     Fort Smith Regional Airport (IATA code: FSM) in Arkansas, United States
>     Mauritian Solidarity Front, in French Front Solidarité Mauricien (FSM)

Ha! 8^)  That's hilarious.  Using a little substitution ...

   "The Fort Smith Regional Airport knows I would never ..."
   "The Folded Spectrum Method knows I would never ..."
   "The Fiji School of Medicine knows I would never ..."

FSM only knows which is the correct referent. ;-)

--
glen e. p. ropella, 971-222-9095, http://tempusdictum.com


============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

[Eric Charles]

Nick,
In his last paper, "William James as a Psychologist," Holt tells us that the William James was never one to shun contradictions, and that the one outstanding contradiction in psychology is: The mind seems dependent upon the body, while the mind also seems independent of the body.

Traditionally psychology and philosophy try to somehow divide up the turf, but James insisted the problems of the mind and of the body cannot be solved independent of each other. Another way to phrase this would be to say that the problems of knowledge are ultimately identical to the problems of physiological psychology.

I wager that you no longer understand the problem, because you are familiar with the century worth of work supporting James's position. A century of research showing that mind and body are not different in such a way as to allow for a 'mind-body' problem. People who don't know about this work still think it is mysterious.

Eric

P.S. My hunch is that all scientific fields have complaints about things that were solved long ago, but that people still insist are mysterious. Since there are lots of computer people on the list. Imagine that you were stuck in a room with people debating whether there were any problems that computers couldn't solve. You keep trying to convince them that there are well known classes of problems computers cannot solve, and much of the work on this problem was solved long ago, and that there is no 'can computers solve everything' mysterious. However, no matter how much you protest, they are so vested in the mysteriousness that they don't believe you.



On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 08:19 PM, "Nicholas Thompson" <[hidden email]> wrote:

Glen, 

I realize that you didn't start this thread, so you may be as perplexed as I
am, but, what exactly IS the mind-body problem?  

Also, not that it's essential, but could you DISAMBIGUATE? I, of course,
instantly assumed you were referring to number eleven.  

    Flying Spaghetti Monster, the deity of Pastafarianism, a parody religion
    FIFA Soccer Manager, a video game about football management
    Fighting Spirit magazine, a professional wrestling periodical
    Film Score Monthly, a record label and online magazine
    Forgetting Sarah Marshall, a motion picture
    Free Software Magazine, a computing periodical/website
    Free software movement, a sociopolitical movement in computing
    Fiji School of Medicine, the central medical school of the University of
the South Pacific
    Fixed Survey Meter, an instrument used by the British Royal Observer
Corps during the Cold War to detect nuclear fallout
    Folded spectrum method, a Solver for Eigenvalue problems
    Free Speech Movement, at the University of California, Berkeley, in 1964
    Finite-state machine, a model of computation
    Field service management, optimization of the field operations of
technicians
    Fatih Sultan Mehmet (as Mehmed II), 7th sultan of the Ottoman
Empire
    Fabryka Samochodów Małolitrażowych Polish car factory
    Federated States of Micronesia, an Oceanic island nation
    Fort Smith Regional Airport (IATA code: FSM) in Arkansas, United
States
    Mauritian Solidarity Front, in French Front Solidarité Mauricien
(FSM)

THANKS, 

Nick 

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf
Of glen e. p. ropella
Sent: Monday, September 19, 2011 5:46 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Fwd: The Psychology Of Yogurt

glen e. p. ropella wrote circa 11-09-19 03:30 PM:
> Nicholas Thompson wrote circa 11-09-19 01:07 PM:
> You are talking to a man with an insulin pump.  I start to think VERY 
> BADLY if anything goes wrong with it.
> 
> Yeah, I don't know either.  But part of my fascination with this topic 
> lies in the use of psychedelic drugs (not _my_ use of such, of course 
> ... the FSM knows I would never touch such stuff).  We (humans
and 
> some animals, it seems) purposefully make worse some specific body 
> processes in order to "think badly".
> 
> It seems to me that a little "bad thinking" now and again can be
a 
> Good Thing(TM).

Oh, I forgot to mention that I think this issue (mind-body problem) is
intimately related to the old adage "the dose is the poison". 
Whether an
alteration in a physiological process is "bad", "good",
"better", or
"worse", depends a very great deal on just how altered the process is.
It seems reasonable that a little of the poisonous ethanol on a regular
basis is "good" and a debilitating inhibition of dopamine production
is
"bad".  But there is a large swatch of gray in between where
"bad" and
"good" are too oversimplifying to be useful.

In any case, it's pretty easy for me to see a mind-body problem and to see
it as a fundamental, immediate, medical issue.  I've experimented quite a
bit with my own mind-body dichotomy by switching hands on various tasks.  I
recently switched _back_ to using my right hand to brush my teeth.  When I
switched to my left (something like 10 years ago), I could barely
finish the
job without tiring out my arm.  None of the muscles worked in any way that
might be called efficient, even though I felt like I was telling my body to
behave the same way it did when I'd use my right hand.  Well, I finally got
good at doing it with my left hand, although in a different way from what I
remember for my right hand.  I used my wrist much more with my right hand,
and my elbow much more with my left hand.  Well, when I switched just
recently, I seemed to be using my right arm like I learned to use my left
arm!  I.e.
very little give in the wrist and most movement in the elbow.  I'm now
trying to re-learn to use my wrist more with my right hand.  If I do, then
I'll switch again and try to do the same with my left.

Although this sort of thing may not _seem_ like a mind-body problem, it most
definitely is.  Despite our realization that the mind is embodied, there may
be some processes that can be swapped out, a perfect "impedance
match", with
another process (like an artificial eyeball, limb, or insulin pump). 
And
yet, there may not be any such processes.
If every little mechanism in our body has a salient impact on our mind, then
the mind-body problem disappears.  But if not, then the mind-body problem
becomes one of requirements analysis, scaling, and the autonomy of various
components.

--
glen e. p. ropella, 971-222-9095, http://tempusdictum.com


============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org


============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

Eric Charles

Professional Student and
Assistant Professor of Psychology
Penn State University
Altoona, PA 16601

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

[Jochen Fromm-5]

If the mind-body problem is solved, we can say how the mind emerges from the body, i.e. from the interactions of billions of neurons and joghurt cells. Can we? 

-J.

Sent from Android

"ERIC P. CHARLES" <[hidden email]> wrote:

Nick,
In his last paper, "William James as a Psychologist," Holt tells us that the William James was never one to shun contradictions, and that the one outstanding contradiction in psychology is: The mind seems dependent upon the body, while the mind also seems independent of the body.

Traditionally psychology and philosophy try to somehow divide up the turf, but James insisted the problems of the mind and of the body cannot be solved independent of each other. Another way to phrase this would be to say that the problems of knowledge are ultimately identical to the problems of physiological psychology.

I wager that you no longer understand the problem, because you are familiar with the century worth of work supporting James's position. A century of research showing that mind and body are not different in such a way as to allow for a 'mind-body' problem. People who don't know about this work still think it is mysterious.

Eric

P.S. My hunch is that all scientific fields have complaints about things that were solved long ago, but that people still insist are mysterious. Since there are lots of computer people on the list. Imagine that you were stuck in a room with people debating whether there were any problems that computers couldn't solve. You keep trying to convince them that there are well known classes of problems computers cannot solve, and much of the work on this problem was solved long ago, and that there is no 'can computers solve everything' mysterious. However, no matter how much you protest, they are so vested in the mysteriousness that they don't believe you.



On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 08:19 PM, "Nicholas Thompson" <[hidden email]> wrote:

Glen, 

I realize that you didn't start this thread, so you may be as perplexed as I
am, but, what exactly IS the mind-body problem?  

Also, not that it's essential, but could you DISAMBIGUATE? I, of course,
instantly assumed you were referring to number eleven.  

    Flying Spaghetti Monster, the deity of Pastafarianism, a parody religion
    FIFA Soccer Manager, a video game about football management
    Fighting Spirit magazine, a professional wrestling periodical
    Film Score Monthly, a record label and online magazine
    Forgetting Sarah Marshall, a motion picture
    Free Software Magazine, a computing periodical/website
    Free software movement, a sociopolitical movement in computing
    Fiji School of Medicine, the central medical school of the University of
the South Pacific
    Fixed Survey Meter, an instrument used by the British Royal Observer
Corps during the Cold War to detect nuclear fallout
    Folded spectrum method, a Solver for Eigenvalue problems
    Free Speech Movement, at the University of California, Berkeley, in 1964
    Finite-state machine, a model of computation
    Field service management, optimization of the field operations of
technicians
    Fatih Sultan Mehmet (as Mehmed II), 7th sultan of the Ottoman
Empire
    Fabryka Samochodów Małolitrażowych Polish car factory
    Federated States of Micronesia, an Oceanic island nation
    Fort Smith Regional Airport (IATA code: FSM) in Arkansas, United
States
    Mauritian Solidarity Front, in French Front Solidarité Mauricien
(FSM)

THANKS, 

Nick 

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf
Of glen e. p. ropella
Sent: Monday, September 19, 2011 5:46 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Fwd: The Psychology Of Yogurt

glen e. p. ropella wrote circa 11-09-19 03:30 PM:
> Nicholas Thompson wrote circa 11-09-19 01:07 PM:
> You are talking to a man with an insulin pump.  I start to think VERY 
> BADLY if anything goes wrong with it.
> 
> Yeah, I don't know either.  But part of my fascination with this topic 
> lies in the use of psychedelic drugs (not _my_ use of such, of course 
> ... the FSM knows I would never touch such stuff).  We (humans
and 
> some animals, it seems) purposefully make worse some specific body 
> processes in order to "think badly".
> 
> It seems to me that a little "bad thinking" now and again can be
a 
> Good Thing(TM).

Oh, I forgot to mention that I think this issue (mind-body problem) is
intimately related to the old adage "the dose is the poison". 
Whether an
alteration in a physiological process is "bad", "good",
"better", or
"worse", depends a very great deal on just how altered the process is.
It seems reasonable that a little of the poisonous ethanol on a regular
basis is "good" and a debilitating inhibition of dopamine production
is
"bad".  But there is a large swatch of gray in between where
"bad" and
"good" are too oversimplifying to be useful.

In any case, it's pretty easy for me to see a mind-body problem and to see
it as a fundamental, immediate, medical issue.  I've experimented quite a
bit with my own mind-body dichotomy by switching hands on various tasks.  I
recently switched _back_ to using my right hand to brush my teeth.  When I
switched to my left (something like 10 years ago), I could barely
finish the
job without tiring out my arm.  None of the muscles worked in any way that
might be called efficient, even though I felt like I was telling my body to
behave the same way it did when I'd use my right hand.  Well, I finally got
good at doing it with my left hand, although in a different way from what I
remember for my right hand.  I used my wrist much more with my right hand,
and my elbow much more with my left hand.  Well, when I switched just
recently, I seemed to be using my right arm like I learned to use my left
arm!  I.e.
very little give in the wrist and most movement in the elbow.  I'm now
trying to re-learn to use my wrist more with my right hand.  If I do, then
I'll switch again and try to do the same with my left.

Although this sort of thing may not _seem_ like a mind-body problem, it most
definitely is.  Despite our realization that the mind is embodied, there may
be some processes that can be swapped out, a perfect "impedance
match", with
another process (like an artificial eyeball, limb, or insulin pump). 
And
yet, there may not be any such processes.
If every little mechanism in our body has a salient impact on our mind, then
the mind-body problem disappears.  But if not, then the mind-body problem
becomes one of requirements analysis, scaling, and the autonomy of various
components.

--
glen e. p. ropella, 971-222-9095, http://tempusdictum.com


============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org


============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

Eric Charles

Professional Student and
Assistant Professor of Psychology
Penn State University
Altoona, PA 16601

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

[Eric Charles]

Well... yes and no.

To keep my metaphor in the 'P.S.' going, we also can't say exactly how a computer could solve every solvable problem... but that doesn't mean there is a Big Question 'solveability' mystery still around. Instead there are many little mysteries: How would this particular problem be solved?

For example, the point I was trying to make was that mind and body do not differ in the manner the Big Question version of the 'mind-body' problem assumes. Mental things are one of the many things that bodies do, nothing more. If you accept that (which I am fairly certain you do), then you have already moved beyond thinking there is mystery of how mind and body are related. What you (and I) are left with is a bunch of little, normal science questions. What is the exact mechanism of X? How does Y develop? etc. Such questions represent scientific unknowns, just as do questions about how to synthesize a particular compound. There has been much success in solving many of the little mysteries. Many, many, brilliant experiments illuminating the mechanisms by which bodies do mental things, and explaining how such mechanisms develop. I could recommend several large books if desired.

When people talk about a 'mind-body' problem, they are convinced there is still a Big Question. Something like the question of where and how the soul enters the body, or the question about how the ethereal mind connects with our corporeal mere-matter. Robert's link showed this nicely. Though some of that language has been rejected (souls are not mentioned much anymore), any sense of Big Question 'mysteriousness' indicates that people are still thinking along those lines.

Eric


On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 04:19 AM, Jochen Fromm <[hidden email]> wrote:

If the mind-body problem is solved, we can say how the mind emerges from the body, i.e. from the interactions of billions of neurons and joghurt cells. Can we? 

-J.

Sent from Android

"ERIC P. CHARLES" <[hidden email]> wrote:

Nick,
In his last paper, "William James as a Psychologist," Holt tells us that the William James was never one to shun contradictions, and that the one outstanding contradiction in psychology is: The mind seems dependent upon the body, while the mind also seems independent of the body.

Traditionally psychology and philosophy try to somehow divide up the turf, but James insisted the problems of the mind and of the body cannot be solved independent of each other. Another way to phrase this would be to say that the problems of knowledge are ultimately identical to the problems of physiological psychology.

I wager that you no longer understand the problem, because you are familiar with the century worth of work supporting James's position. A century of research showing that mind and body are not different in such a way as to allow for a 'mind-body' problem. People who don't know about this work still think it is mysterious.

Eric

P.S. My hunch is that all scientific fields have complaints about things that were solved long ago, but that people still insist are mysterious. Since there are lots of computer people on the list. Imagine that you were stuck in a room with people debating whether there were any problems that computers couldn't solve. You keep trying to convince them that there are well known classes of problems computers cannot solve, and much of the work on this problem was solved long ago, and that there is no 'can computers solve everything' mysterious. However, no matter how much you protest, they are so vested in the mysteriousness that they don't believe you.



On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 08:19 PM, "Nicholas Thompson" <[hidden email]> wrote:

Glen, 

I realize that you didn't start this thread, so you may be as perplexed as I
am, but, what exactly IS the mind-body problem?  

Also, not that it's essential, but could you DISAMBIGUATE? I, of course,
instantly assumed you were referring to number eleven.  

    Flying Spaghetti Monster, the deity of Pastafarianism, a parody religion
    FIFA Soccer Manager, a video game about football management
    Fighting Spirit magazine, a professional wrestling periodical
    Film Score Monthly, a record label and online magazine
    Forgetting Sarah Marshall, a motion picture
    Free Software Magazine, a computing periodical/website
    Free software movement, a sociopolitical movement in computing
    Fiji School of Medicine, the central medical school of the University of
the South Pacific
    Fixed Survey Meter, an instrument used by the British Royal Observer
Corps during the Cold War to detect nuclear fallout
    Folded spectrum method, a Solver for Eigenvalue problems
    Free Speech Movement, at the University of California, Berkeley, in 1964
    Finite-state machine, a model of computation
    Field service management, optimization of the field operations of
technicians
    Fatih Sultan Mehmet (as Mehmed II), 7th sultan of the Ottoman
Empire
    Fabryka Samochodów Małolitrażowych Polish car factory
    Federated States of Micronesia, an Oceanic island nation
    Fort Smith Regional Airport (IATA code: FSM) in Arkansas, United
States
    Mauritian Solidarity Front, in French Front Solidarité Mauricien
(FSM)

THANKS, 

Nick 

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf
Of glen e. p. ropella
Sent: Monday, September 19, 2011 5:46 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Fwd: The Psychology Of Yogurt

glen e. p. ropella wrote circa 11-09-19 03:30 PM:
> Nicholas Thompson wrote circa 11-09-19 01:07 PM:
> You are talking to a man with an insulin pump.  I start to think VERY 
> BADLY if anything goes wrong with it.
> 
> Yeah, I don't know either.  But part of my fascination with this topic 
> lies in the use of psychedelic drugs (not _my_ use of such, of course 
> ... the FSM knows I would never touch such stuff).  We (humans
and 
> some animals, it seems) purposefully make worse some specific body 
> processes in order to "think badly".
> 
> It seems to me that a little "bad thinking" now and again can be
a 
> Good Thing(TM).

Oh, I forgot to mention that I think this issue (mind-body problem) is
intimately related to the old adage "the dose is the poison". 
Whether an
alteration in a physiological process is "bad", "good",
"better", or
"worse", depends a very great deal on just how altered the process is.
It seems reasonable that a little of the poisonous ethanol on a regular
basis is "good" and a debilitating inhibition of dopamine production
is
"bad".  But there is a large swatch of gray in between where
"bad" and
"good" are too oversimplifying to be useful.

In any case, it's pretty easy for me to see a mind-body problem and to see
it as a fundamental, immediate, medical issue.  I've experimented quite a
bit with my own mind-body dichotomy by switching hands on various tasks.  I
recently switched _back_ to using my right hand to brush my teeth.  When I
switched to my left (something like 10 years ago), I could barely
finish the
job without tiring out my arm.  None of the muscles worked in any way that
might be called efficient, even though I felt like I was telling my body to
behave the same way it did when I'd use my right hand.  Well, I finally got
good at doing it with my left hand, although in a different way from what I
remember for my right hand.  I used my wrist much more with my right hand,
and my elbow much more with my left hand.  Well, when I switched just
recently, I seemed to be using my right arm like I learned to use my left
arm!  I.e.
very little give in the wrist and most movement in the elbow.  I'm now
trying to re-learn to use my wrist more with my right hand.  If I do, then
I'll switch again and try to do the same with my left.

Although this sort of thing may not _seem_ like a mind-body problem, it most
definitely is.  Despite our realization that the mind is embodied, there may
be some processes that can be swapped out, a perfect "impedance
match", with
another process (like an artificial eyeball, limb, or insulin pump). 
And
yet, there may not be any such processes.
If every little mechanism in our body has a salient impact on our mind, then
the mind-body problem disappears.  But if not, then the mind-body problem
becomes one of requirements analysis, scaling, and the autonomy of various
components.

--
glen e. p. ropella, 971-222-9095, http://tempusdictum.com


============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org


============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

Eric Charles

Professional Student and
Assistant Professor of Psychology
Penn State University
Altoona, PA 16601

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

Eric Charles

Professional Student and
Assistant Professor of Psychology
Penn State University
Altoona, PA 16601

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

[Nick Thompson]

Jochen,

 

This is starting to remind me of the vortex-drain-water discussion.  You recall that I was castigated by experts on the list for trivializing fluid dynamics by asking a naïve question about wash-basin drainage.  Explaining vortices in washbasins was beyond my understanding.  The complexity was just too great.  The devil was in the details, and I was not well-trained enough to know them, let alone to build a theory of wash-basin drainage. 

 

Critical as they were for my asking the question, NONE of them asserted that there was a vortex/water  problem in the same sense (I suspect) that some would like to assert that there is a mind/body problem.

 

Emergence can always seem mysterious, if one is the right frame of mind.  How mysterious are the structural properties of a triangle, as I hold in my hands three unconnected sticks of wood!  The British Emergentist Philosophers (Mill?) liked to say that we should approach any instance of emergence with Natural Piety.  Well, bugger that! 

 

To channel Eric, here.  Yes there are mysteries, but there is no Mystery.

 

Best,

 

Nick  

 

From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Jochen Fromm
Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2011 2:20 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Mind-Body (was: The Psychology Of Yogurt)

 

If the mind-body problem is solved, we can say how the mind emerges from the body, i.e. from the interactions of billions of neurons and joghurt cells. Can we? 

 

-J.

Sent from Android

"ERIC P. CHARLES" <[hidden email]> wrote:

Nick,
In his last paper, "William James as a Psychologist," Holt tells us that the William James was never one to shun contradictions, and that the one outstanding contradiction in psychology is: The mind seems dependent upon the body, while the mind also seems independent of the body.

Traditionally psychology and philosophy try to somehow divide up the turf, but James insisted the problems of the mind and of the body cannot be solved independent of each other. Another way to phrase this would be to say that the problems of knowledge are ultimately identical to the problems of physiological psychology.

I wager that you no longer understand the problem, because you are familiar with the century worth of work supporting James's position. A century of research showing that mind and body are not different in such a way as to allow for a 'mind-body' problem. People who don't know about this work still think it is mysterious.

Eric

P.S. My hunch is that all scientific fields have complaints about things that were solved long ago, but that people still insist are mysterious. Since there are lots of computer people on the list. Imagine that you were stuck in a room with people debating whether there were any problems that computers couldn't solve. You keep trying to convince them that there are well known classes of problems computers cannot solve, and much of the work on this problem was solved long ago, and that there is no 'can computers solve everything' mysterious. However, no matter how much you protest, they are so vested in the mysteriousness that they don't believe you.



On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 08:19 PM, "Nicholas Thompson" <[hidden email]> wrote:

Glen, 

I realize that you didn't start this thread, so you may be as perplexed as I

am, but, what exactly IS the mind-body problem?  

Also, not that it's essential, but could you DISAMBIGUATE? I, of course,

instantly assumed you were referring to number eleven.  

    Flying Spaghetti Monster, the deity of Pastafarianism, a parody religion

    FIFA Soccer Manager, a video game about football management

    Fighting Spirit magazine, a professional wrestling periodical

    Film Score Monthly, a record label and online magazine

    Forgetting Sarah Marshall, a motion picture

    Free Software Magazine, a computing periodical/website

    Free software movement, a sociopolitical movement in computing

    Fiji School of Medicine, the central medical school of the University of

the South Pacific

    Fixed Survey Meter, an instrument used by the British Royal Observer

Corps during the Cold War to detect nuclear fallout

    Folded spectrum method, a Solver for Eigenvalue problems

    Free Speech Movement, at the University of California, Berkeley, in 1964

    Finite-state machine, a model of computation

    Field service management, optimization of the field operations of

technicians

    Fatih Sultan Mehmet (as Mehmed II), 7th sultan of the Ottoman

Empire

    Fabryka Samochodów Małolitrażowych Polish car factory

    Federated States of Micronesia, an Oceanic island nation

    Fort Smith Regional Airport (IATA code: FSM) in Arkansas, United

States

    Mauritian Solidarity Front, in French Front Solidarité Mauricien

(FSM)

THANKS, 

Nick 

-----Original Message-----

From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf

Of glen e. p. ropella

Sent: Monday, September 19, 2011 5:46 PM

To: [hidden email]

Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Fwd: The Psychology Of Yogurt

glen e. p. ropella wrote circa 11-09-19 03:30 PM:

> Nicholas Thompson wrote circa 11-09-19 01:07 PM:

> You are talking to a man with an insulin pump.  I start to think VERY 

> BADLY if anything goes wrong with it.

> 

> Yeah, I don't know either.  But part of my fascination with this topic 

> lies in the use of psychedelic drugs (not _my_ use of such, of course 

> ... the FSM knows I would never touch such stuff).  We (humans

and 

> some animals, it seems) purposefully make worse some specific body 

> processes in order to "think badly".

> 

> It seems to me that a little "bad thinking" now and again can be

a 

> Good Thing(TM).

Oh, I forgot to mention that I think this issue (mind-body problem) is

intimately related to the old adage "the dose is the poison". 

Whether an

alteration in a physiological process is "bad", "good",

"better", or

"worse", depends a very great deal on just how altered the process is.

It seems reasonable that a little of the poisonous ethanol on a regular

basis is "good" and a debilitating inhibition of dopamine production

is

"bad".  But there is a large swatch of gray in between where

"bad" and

"good" are too oversimplifying to be useful.

In any case, it's pretty easy for me to see a mind-body problem and to see

it as a fundamental, immediate, medical issue.  I've experimented quite a

bit with my own mind-body dichotomy by switching hands on various tasks.  I

recently switched _back_ to using my right hand to brush my teeth.  When I

switched to my left (something like 10 years ago), I could barely

finish the

job without tiring out my arm.  None of the muscles worked in any way that

might be called efficient, even though I felt like I was telling my body to

behave the same way it did when I'd use my right hand.  Well, I finally got

good at doing it with my left hand, although in a different way from what I

remember for my right hand.  I used my wrist much more with my right hand,

and my elbow much more with my left hand.  Well, when I switched just

recently, I seemed to be using my right arm like I learned to use my left

arm!  I.e.

very little give in the wrist and most movement in the elbow.  I'm now

trying to re-learn to use my wrist more with my right hand.  If I do, then

I'll switch again and try to do the same with my left.

Although this sort of thing may not _seem_ like a mind-body problem, it most

definitely is.  Despite our realization that the mind is embodied, there may

be some processes that can be swapped out, a perfect "impedance

match", with

another process (like an artificial eyeball, limb, or insulin pump). 

And

yet, there may not be any such processes.

If every little mechanism in our body has a salient impact on our mind, then

the mind-body problem disappears.  But if not, then the mind-body problem

becomes one of requirements analysis, scaling, and the autonomy of various

components.

--

glen e. p. ropella, 971-222-9095, http://tempusdictum.com

============================================================

FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv

Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College

lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

============================================================

FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv

Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College

lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

Eric Charles

Professional Student and
Assistant Professor of Psychology
Penn State University
Altoona, PA 16601

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

[Douglas Roberts-2]

Actually, NIck, you were "castigated" for refusing to accept that the answer to your vortex scenario was not a simple one, and for having elected to to claim that those of us who had ever worked on that type of hydrodynamics problem were either too lazy to be bothered to explain the solution properly, or had forgotten the answer to your (simple) question.

Let's not engage in revisionist history, now...

--Doug

-- 
Doug Roberts
[hidden email]
[hidden email]

http://parrot-farm.net/Second-Cousins

505-455-7333 - Office
505-670-8195 - Cell

On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 9:27 AM, Nicholas Thompson <[hidden email]> wrote:

Jochen,

 

This is starting to remind me of the vortex-drain-water discussion.  You recall that I was castigated by experts on the list for trivializing fluid dynamics by asking a naïve question about wash-basin drainage.  Explaining vortices in washbasins was beyond my understanding.  The complexity was just too great.  The devil was in the details, and I was not well-trained enough to know them, let alone to build a theory of wash-basin drainage. 

 

Critical as they were for my asking the question, NONE of them asserted that there was a vortex/water  problem in the same sense (I suspect) that some would like to assert that there is a mind/body problem.

 

Emergence can always seem mysterious, if one is the right frame of mind.  How mysterious are the structural properties of a triangle, as I hold in my hands three unconnected sticks of wood!  The British Emergentist Philosophers (Mill?) liked to say that we should approach any instance of emergence with Natural Piety.  Well, bugger that! 

 

To channel Eric, here.  Yes there are mysteries, but there is no Mystery.

 

Best,

 

Nick  

 

From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Jochen Fromm
Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2011 2:20 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Mind-Body (was: The Psychology Of Yogurt)

 

If the mind-body problem is solved, we can say how the mind emerges from the body, i.e. from the interactions of billions of neurons and joghurt cells. Can we? 

 

-J.

Sent from Android

"ERIC P. CHARLES" <[hidden email]> wrote:

Nick,
In his last paper, "William James as a Psychologist," Holt tells us that the William James was never one to shun contradictions, and that the one outstanding contradiction in psychology is: The mind seems dependent upon the body, while the mind also seems independent of the body.

Traditionally psychology and philosophy try to somehow divide up the turf, but James insisted the problems of the mind and of the body cannot be solved independent of each other. Another way to phrase this would be to say that the problems of knowledge are ultimately identical to the problems of physiological psychology.

I wager that you no longer understand the problem, because you are familiar with the century worth of work supporting James's position. A century of research showing that mind and body are not different in such a way as to allow for a 'mind-body' problem. People who don't know about this work still think it is mysterious.

Eric

P.S. My hunch is that all scientific fields have complaints about things that were solved long ago, but that people still insist are mysterious. Since there are lots of computer people on the list. Imagine that you were stuck in a room with people debating whether there were any problems that computers couldn't solve. You keep trying to convince them that there are well known classes of problems computers cannot solve, and much of the work on this problem was solved long ago, and that there is no 'can computers solve everything' mysterious. However, no matter how much you protest, they are so vested in the mysteriousness that they don't believe you.



On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 08:19 PM, "Nicholas Thompson" <[hidden email]> wrote:

Glen, 

I realize that you didn't start this thread, so you may be as perplexed as I

am, but, what exactly IS the mind-body problem?  

Also, not that it's essential, but could you DISAMBIGUATE? I, of course,

instantly assumed you were referring to number eleven.  

    Flying Spaghetti Monster, the deity of Pastafarianism, a parody religion

    FIFA Soccer Manager, a video game about football management

    Fighting Spirit magazine, a professional wrestling periodical

    Film Score Monthly, a record label and online magazine

    Forgetting Sarah Marshall, a motion picture

    Free Software Magazine, a computing periodical/website

    Free software movement, a sociopolitical movement in computing

    Fiji School of Medicine, the central medical school of the University of

the South Pacific

    Fixed Survey Meter, an instrument used by the British Royal Observer

Corps during the Cold War to detect nuclear fallout

    Folded spectrum method, a Solver for Eigenvalue problems

    Free Speech Movement, at the University of California, Berkeley, in 1964

    Finite-state machine, a model of computation

    Field service management, optimization of the field operations of

technicians

    Fatih Sultan Mehmet (as Mehmed II), 7th sultan of the Ottoman

Empire

    Fabryka Samochodów Małolitrażowych Polish car factory

    Federated States of Micronesia, an Oceanic island nation

    Fort Smith Regional Airport (IATA code: FSM) in Arkansas, United

States

    Mauritian Solidarity Front, in French Front Solidarité Mauricien

(FSM)

THANKS, 

Nick 

-----Original Message-----

From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf

Of glen e. p. ropella

Sent: Monday, September 19, 2011 5:46 PM

To: [hidden email]

Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Fwd: The Psychology Of Yogurt

glen e. p. ropella wrote circa 11-09-19 03:30 PM:

> Nicholas Thompson wrote circa 11-09-19 01:07 PM:

> You are talking to a man with an insulin pump.  I start to think VERY 

> BADLY if anything goes wrong with it.

> 

> Yeah, I don't know either.  But part of my fascination with this topic 

> lies in the use of psychedelic drugs (not _my_ use of such, of course 

> ... the FSM knows I would never touch such stuff).  We (humans

and 

> some animals, it seems) purposefully make worse some specific body 

> processes in order to "think badly".

> 

> It seems to me that a little "bad thinking" now and again can be

a 

> Good Thing(TM).

Oh, I forgot to mention that I think this issue (mind-body problem) is

intimately related to the old adage "the dose is the poison". 

Whether an

alteration in a physiological process is "bad", "good",

"better", or

"worse", depends a very great deal on just how altered the process is.

It seems reasonable that a little of the poisonous ethanol on a regular

basis is "good" and a debilitating inhibition of dopamine production

is

"bad".  But there is a large swatch of gray in between where

"bad" and

"good" are too oversimplifying to be useful.

In any case, it's pretty easy for me to see a mind-body problem and to see

it as a fundamental, immediate, medical issue.  I've experimented quite a

bit with my own mind-body dichotomy by switching hands on various tasks.  I

recently switched _back_ to using my right hand to brush my teeth.  When I

switched to my left (something like 10 years ago), I could barely

finish the

job without tiring out my arm.  None of the muscles worked in any way that

might be called efficient, even though I felt like I was telling my body to

behave the same way it did when I'd use my right hand.  Well, I finally got

good at doing it with my left hand, although in a different way from what I

remember for my right hand.  I used my wrist much more with my right hand,

and my elbow much more with my left hand.  Well, when I switched just

recently, I seemed to be using my right arm like I learned to use my left

arm!  I.e.

very little give in the wrist and most movement in the elbow.  I'm now

trying to re-learn to use my wrist more with my right hand.  If I do, then

I'll switch again and try to do the same with my left.

Although this sort of thing may not _seem_ like a mind-body problem, it most

definitely is.  Despite our realization that the mind is embodied, there may

be some processes that can be swapped out, a perfect "impedance

match", with

another process (like an artificial eyeball, limb, or insulin pump). 

And

yet, there may not be any such processes.

If every little mechanism in our body has a salient impact on our mind, then

the mind-body problem disappears.  But if not, then the mind-body problem

becomes one of requirements analysis, scaling, and the autonomy of various

components.

--

glen e. p. ropella, <a href="tel:[phone]" value="[phone]" target="_blank">971-222-9095, http://tempusdictum.com

============================================================

FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv

Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College

lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

============================================================

FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv

Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College

lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

Eric Charles

Professional Student and
Assistant Professor of Psychology
Penn State University
Altoona, PA 16601

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

[Nick Thompson]

Steve,

 

I suspect that your dislike for the triangle example is that it isn’t Mysterious enough.  In the classical literature on Emergence, the chemical properties of water are the salient example. (I.e., why combining Hydrogen and Oxygen, gets you something like water.)  Elemental as that question might seem to be, it is still, I gather, a mystery, although not a Mystery. (Water is apparently a wildly aberrant compound whose maximum density, for instance, is reached a few degrees before it freezes.  Hence ice floats.)

 

When trying to understand a class of phenomena, a strategy might be to find an example that is stripped of all but the ESSENTIAL complexities of the class of things one is curious about.  Do you agree that’s sometimes a useful strategy? If so, then you apparently believe that the triangle example is TOO simple. 

 

If so, what would you offer as the SIMPLEST example of the phenomenon of emergence? 

 

Nick

 

From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Steve Smith
Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2011 10:56 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Mind-Body (was: The Psychology Of Yogurt)

 

Good Fellow Friamers, Nick, Jochen, Glen, Eric, and everyone who ever ate Joghurt/Yogurt/Kefir (spoilt milk by any other name) -

I am perhaps too lazy to go back and reread this entire thread carefully to see precisely what has been asked and answered, what has been swept under the carpet, and what has been tossed over the fence into the neighbor's yard to deal with and what has been waxed up eloquently for a totally tubular ride inside the curl of the crashing wave of insight and understanding.

BUT... the mind-body problem as I *experience* it is the subjective mystery (which if I were more spiritual/religious, might actually be a Mystery as well) of why my consciousness seems to disembodied, why it, at best, depending on my mood and circumstance seems to hover inside my head, just behind my eyes, a little above and usually to the right?  Other times it expands and fills the general region I am inhabiting physically, often floating about my head, but sometime centered more near my chest, my heart I suspect... or other times my spleen or large colon (after ingesting spoilt milk).  

But most of this (if not simple rhetoric and imagry to dazzle my  faithful readers (all three of you)) is some kind of metaphorical projection.   The head-centering thing might be about my primary sensory organs being located there, the heart centering might be about the center of my more autonomic systems (heartbeat breathing, digestion, elimination) and a cultural metaphor or metonym (heart for the entire collection of viscera), the more expansive thing (filling the room, the glade, the entire mountainside or valley)  as some kind of projection of self onto all that I apprehend directly in the moment.  And perhaps when I unroll a map or pick up a globe (bwahahaha!) in my hands, this also accounts for my feeling of grandiosity that almost always rolls in (bwaha!).

I would say that by no means is the mind-body problem solved.  It is at best well ignored or well sublimated or well explained-away.  I think the logical-positivists (of which there appear to be no small number here) cannot even apprehend the question, much less the possibility of an answer in our lifetimes?

If there is ANY Mystery in the world (for me), it is the collective mysteries of emergent phenomena.   At least for me.  And among the mysteries of human experience, the mind-body problem is one of the fundamental ones for me. That I am not given much to invoking Mystery, could be my deep sense of rational athiestic humanism that I am blessed/cursed/saddled/riddled with.

I take task with Nick for his use of emergent to describe the properties of 3 sticks fastened well at their corners and their triangleness.  I agree/understand that a qualitatively *new* property exists in the triangle that did not exist in the individual sticks... and perhaps it is mere semantics that separates the emergent nature of vortex from the water molecules and the (I won't call it emergent) *collective* nature of triangle from sticks.  

Perhaps it is my training/experience in the Proto-Artificial Life work of the early/mid 80's.   I think I need to reserve the world emergent for systems which are not merely qualitatively different in the whole than they are in the parts, but which achieve this through some self-organizing process.   Autocatalytic networks, sand dunes, gliders and guns for gliders in ConwayLife, etc.   I suppose if Nick were to throw 1000 sticks  and 1000 blobs of glue into a hopper and stir them about for a few 1000 seconds and then shake them out onto the ground noticing that *some* of the sticks managed to connect up with blobs of glue end to end such that they formed various arrangements of linear chains, and some of them  were to form various n-gons, and even perhaps that statistically the triangle pattern was more common than the n-length chain or the n-gons where n > 3, then I'd be inclined to say emergence!   The glueballs "stickiness" might be calibrated such that they only adhere to "ends" (and not eachother), and the minimum angles might preclude sticks lining up in parallel and the agitation might be just great enough to shake off appendages from n-gons with extra 'whiskers'...   Triangles (and tetrahedra) would be the most likely  structures to be "accidentally" created and the most stable (fewest remaining degrees of freedom once joined up).   By explaining it this way, I may undermine the mystery in the emergence (and thereby the emergence itself?)

I know I'm like returning to 2008 when Nick was leading a study group on emergence and this may all be quite remedial, but I'd say along with the mind-body question, the emergence question has not been answered.   One may be a special case of the other?

Directly responsive to Nick's challenge about the "problem" of mind-body vs vortex-water... I think it WAS stated but as a special case of "self-organizing system" style emergence...     In fact, I wonder if a minor stretch cannot caste the *air column/spiral*) inside the water-spiral as a spandrel, and in my example of sticks, glue balls, and n-chains and n-gons (and 2/3d meshes/n=hedra, etc), the properties *we* deem interesting of triangles (e.g. their strength under compression, tension, torque) are NOT properties of their natural selection in their natural environment (the vat where they were stirred by Nick's hairy knuckled paw<grin>) but rather properties suitable for survival in yet another environment (Nick sorting through the joined sticks and piling the triangles up high declaring "what a good form are these!").

Guerin invokes symmetry breaking, but is there not also symmetry establishing?   Is that not some of what makes a triangle a Triangle (3-gon having some properties we humans/engineers get all excited about)?  By joining the ends of the sticks with some degree of strength or stiffness, 3 at a time, we reduce the degrees of freedom of the system... the three sticks are suddenly locked in a plane and other than rotations around the axes of the sticks themselves and rotations and translations of the resulting triangles, there is no remaining degrees of freedom?  Is this not the mystery Nick first brought to our attention when he went swirly with us?  Asking us why would a system (vortex) *emerge* within a larger system (basin/drain/water/spinning earth/gravity/atmospheric pressure/etc.) when it actually reduces the rate of energy dissipation.  I think the original question was directed at Guerin and the rest of us dogpiled Nick in his absence (he was rather busy laying in the sun in San Diego if I recall) with a whole range of lame to serious, sympathetic to unsympathetic offerings.  

In response to Doug's response to Nick's rememberance of the dogpile... I understand why Doug thought he (and others) were rightous in their dismissals of nick's questions, but I also understand why Nick heard it as pissiness.   Odd how there can be more than two sides to a given conversation!

I think I've exercised out all my need to ramble for the day... glad you (if you made it this far) enjoyed it, even if only through morbid fascination.

- Steve

Jochen,

 

This is starting to remind me of the vortex-drain-water discussion.  You recall that I was castigated by experts on the list for trivializing fluid dynamics by asking a naïve question about wash-basin drainage.  Explaining vortices in washbasins was beyond my understanding.  The complexity was just too great.  The devil was in the details, and I was not well-trained enough to know them, let alone to build a theory of wash-basin drainage. 

 

Critical as they were for my asking the question, NONE of them asserted that there was a vortex/water  problem in the same sense (I suspect) that some would like to assert that there is a mind/body problem.

 

Emergence can always seem mysterious, if one is the right frame of mind.  How mysterious are the structural properties of a triangle, as I hold in my hands three unconnected sticks of wood!  The British Emergentist Philosophers (Mill?) liked to say that we should approach any instance of emergence with Natural Piety.  Well, bugger that! 

 

To channel Eric, here.  Yes there are mysteries, but there is no Mystery.

 

Best,

 

Nick  

 

From: [hidden email] [[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Jochen Fromm
Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2011 2:20 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Mind-Body (was: The Psychology Of Yogurt)

 

If the mind-body problem is solved, we can say how the mind emerges from the body, i.e. from the interactions of billions of neurons and joghurt cells. Can we? 

 

-J.

Sent from Android

"ERIC P. CHARLES" <[hidden email]> wrote:

Nick,
In his last paper, "William James as a Psychologist," Holt tells us that the William James was never one to shun contradictions, and that the one outstanding contradiction in psychology is: The mind seems dependent upon the body, while the mind also seems independent of the body.

Traditionally psychology and philosophy try to somehow divide up the turf, but James insisted the problems of the mind and of the body cannot be solved independent of each other. Another way to phrase this would be to say that the problems of knowledge are ultimately identical to the problems of physiological psychology.

I wager that you no longer understand the problem, because you are familiar with the century worth of work supporting James's position. A century of research showing that mind and body are not different in such a way as to allow for a 'mind-body' problem. People who don't know about this work still think it is mysterious.

Eric

P.S. My hunch is that all scientific fields have complaints about things that were solved long ago, but that people still insist are mysterious. Since there are lots of computer people on the list. Imagine that you were stuck in a room with people debating whether there were any problems that computers couldn't solve. You keep trying to convince them that there are well known classes of problems computers cannot solve, and much of the work on this problem was solved long ago, and that there is no 'can computers solve everything' mysterious. However, no matter how much you protest, they are so vested in the mysteriousness that they don't believe you.



On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 08:19 PM, "Nicholas Thompson" <[hidden email]> wrote:

Glen, 

I realize that you didn't start this thread, so you may be as perplexed as I

am, but, what exactly IS the mind-body problem?  

Also, not that it's essential, but could you DISAMBIGUATE? I, of course,

instantly assumed you were referring to number eleven.  

    Flying Spaghetti Monster, the deity of Pastafarianism, a parody religion

    FIFA Soccer Manager, a video game about football management

    Fighting Spirit magazine, a professional wrestling periodical

    Film Score Monthly, a record label and online magazine

    Forgetting Sarah Marshall, a motion picture

    Free Software Magazine, a computing periodical/website

    Free software movement, a sociopolitical movement in computing

    Fiji School of Medicine, the central medical school of the University of

the South Pacific

    Fixed Survey Meter, an instrument used by the British Royal Observer

Corps during the Cold War to detect nuclear fallout

    Folded spectrum method, a Solver for Eigenvalue problems

    Free Speech Movement, at the University of California, Berkeley, in 1964

    Finite-state machine, a model of computation

    Field service management, optimization of the field operations of

technicians

    Fatih Sultan Mehmet (as Mehmed II), 7th sultan of the Ottoman

Empire

    Fabryka Samochodów Małolitrażowych Polish car factory

    Federated States of Micronesia, an Oceanic island nation

    Fort Smith Regional Airport (IATA code: FSM) in Arkansas, United

States

    Mauritian Solidarity Front, in French Front Solidarité Mauricien

(FSM)

THANKS, 

Nick 

-----Original Message-----

From: [hidden email] [[hidden email]] On Behalf

Of glen e. p. ropella

Sent: Monday, September 19, 2011 5:46 PM

To: [hidden email]

Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Fwd: The Psychology Of Yogurt

glen e. p. ropella wrote circa 11-09-19 03:30 PM:

> Nicholas Thompson wrote circa 11-09-19 01:07 PM:

> You are talking to a man with an insulin pump.  I start to think VERY 

> BADLY if anything goes wrong with it.

> 

> Yeah, I don't know either.  But part of my fascination with this topic 

> lies in the use of psychedelic drugs (not _my_ use of such, of course 

> ... the FSM knows I would never touch such stuff).  We (humans

and 

> some animals, it seems) purposefully make worse some specific body 

> processes in order to "think badly".

> 

> It seems to me that a little "bad thinking" now and again can be

a 

> Good Thing(TM).

Oh, I forgot to mention that I think this issue (mind-body problem) is

intimately related to the old adage "the dose is the poison". 

Whether an

alteration in a physiological process is "bad", "good",

"better", or

"worse", depends a very great deal on just how altered the process is.

It seems reasonable that a little of the poisonous ethanol on a regular

basis is "good" and a debilitating inhibition of dopamine production

is

"bad".  But there is a large swatch of gray in between where

"bad" and

"good" are too oversimplifying to be useful.

In any case, it's pretty easy for me to see a mind-body problem and to see

it as a fundamental, immediate, medical issue.  I've experimented quite a

bit with my own mind-body dichotomy by switching hands on various tasks.  I

recently switched _back_ to using my right hand to brush my teeth.  When I

switched to my left (something like 10 years ago), I could barely

finish the

job without tiring out my arm.  None of the muscles worked in any way that

might be called efficient, even though I felt like I was telling my body to

behave the same way it did when I'd use my right hand.  Well, I finally got

good at doing it with my left hand, although in a different way from what I

remember for my right hand.  I used my wrist much more with my right hand,

and my elbow much more with my left hand.  Well, when I switched just

recently, I seemed to be using my right arm like I learned to use my left

arm!  I.e.

very little give in the wrist and most movement in the elbow.  I'm now

trying to re-learn to use my wrist more with my right hand.  If I do, then

I'll switch again and try to do the same with my left.

Although this sort of thing may not _seem_ like a mind-body problem, it most

definitely is.  Despite our realization that the mind is embodied, there may

be some processes that can be swapped out, a perfect "impedance

match", with

another process (like an artificial eyeball, limb, or insulin pump). 

And

yet, there may not be any such processes.

If every little mechanism in our body has a salient impact on our mind, then

the mind-body problem disappears.  But if not, then the mind-body problem

becomes one of requirements analysis, scaling, and the autonomy of various

components.

--

glen e. p. ropella, 971-222-9095, http://tempusdictum.com

============================================================

FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv

Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College

lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

============================================================

FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv

Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College

lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

Eric Charles

Professional Student and
Assistant Professor of Psychology
Penn State University
Altoona, PA 16601

============================================================

FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv

Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College

lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

 

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

[Steve Smith]

Glen -
> Now, I'm not suggesting that the mind is generated by something other
> than the body.  All I'm doing is avoiding conviction within a particular
> conclusion[*].  I believe that the body is a medium for the mind (there
> may be other media).  In that, we agree.  But I am not so arrogant to
> say that the mind is solely a behavior of the body.  (And I'm especially
> not so arrogant as to claim we've proven that.)  The difference is
> subtle.  All we've done so far is demonstrate that there is an absence
> of evidence for the mind without the (a) body.  But absence of evidence
> is NOT evidence of absence.
I think this is well stated and on point.  However... to ask these
questions properly we must have a clearer notion of what we mean by mind
and/or thought and/or identity.   I am using as my working definition of
mind, the subjective (recursive?) experience "I" have of
"self-awareness" or "self-consciousness" as a key part of *my* mind.    
This may differ radically from other's definition here?

Many grant all living creatures to have minds, certainly all mammals,
probably birds, possibly all vertebrates, maybe anything with more than
some modest number of neurons...  or maybe anything *with* neurons.   Or
maybe...

Others extend the notion of life, of consciousness, even of "mind" and
"awareness" on to what others (myself usually included) to all matter
(and energy).   Not just the trees and lichen, but the stones and the
earth, the wind and the interstellar gasses, the electromagnetic and
gravitational flux of the universe.   But by that time, I'm not sure
what we are talking about anymore...

I don't want to presume to set the definitions but I propose the following.

We cannot talk about mind without life.
We cannot talk about life without some kind of self-organized, coherent
systems.

I'm game that life (and by extension mind) needn't exist only in a
matrix of cells, or even in protein or carbon chemistry.

I may be chauvinistic in wanting life to depend on a self-other
boundary, on identity, on self-awareness.    I know that nature (bio as
well as non-bio) blurs these boundaries.   What is an individual
Lichen?   What do a grove of genetically identical poplars know from one
another?   Where is the boundary of a star, of a swirling bathtub
vortex?   When is a planet not a planet (Pluto anyone?).

I may be only digging this hole deeper...   but without more definition,
I think we are blind men fondling the elephant?   Perhaps only infinite
regress awaits us in this.

- Steve

> There is clearly a Big Question.  And that is: What changes can we make
> to the body without categorically changing the mind?  Or, vice versa:
> What changes can we make to the mind without categorically changing the
> body?  We already know many of the changes.  You can change out
> someone's hip, for example, without fundamentally altering their mind.
>
> Medically, this Big Question flows down into questions like:
>
> 1) Does a person's identity change after a stroke?  Or the onset of
> Alzheimer's?  Parkinson's?  Cancer?  A bunion?
> 2) How is a schizophrenic person different from a "healthy" person and
> what changes can/should we make to "heal" such a person?
> 3) What is the personhood status of a fetus?  A comatose patient?  A
> brain-dead patient?
>
> These aren't just "little mysteries", as you so belittle them.  They are
> instances of the mind-body problem with very practical and often
> heartbreaking contexts.
>
> [*] We do have a significant non-whacko population of people who believe
> in things like memes, social construction/regulation of the mind,
> evo-devo, multi-level selection, extended physiology, etc.  To say the
> mind-body problem is solved is to dismiss all these positions and their
> backers.
>
> ERIC P. CHARLES wrote circa 11-09-20 07:48 AM:
>> Well... yes and no.
>>
>> To keep my metaphor in the 'P.S.' going, we also can't say exactly how a
>> computer could solve every solvable problem... but that doesn't mean
>> there is a Big Question 'solveability' mystery still around. Instead
>> there are many little mysteries: How would this particular problem be
>> solved?
>>
>> For example, the point I was trying to make was that mind and body do
>> not differ in the manner the Big Question version of the 'mind-body'
>> problem assumes. Mental things are one of the many things that bodies
>> do, nothing more. If you accept that (which I am fairly certain you do),
>> then you have already moved beyond thinking there is mystery of how mind
>> and body are related. What you (and I) are left with is a bunch of
>> little, normal science questions. What is the exact mechanism of X? How
>> does Y develop? etc. Such questions represent scientific unknowns, just
>> as do questions about how to synthesize a particular compound. There has
>> been much success in solving many of the little mysteries. Many, many,
>> brilliant experiments illuminating the mechanisms by which bodies do
>> mental things, and explaining how such mechanisms develop. I could
>> recommend several large books if desired.
>>
>> When people talk about a 'mind-body' problem, they are convinced there
>> is still a Big Question. Something like the question of where and how
>> the soul enters the body, or the question about how the ethereal mind
>> connects with our corporeal mere-matter. Robert's link showed this
>> nicely. Though some of that language has been rejected (souls are not
>> mentioned much anymore), any sense of Big Question 'mysteriousness'
>> indicates that people are still thinking along those lines.
>

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org