Help! Brain overheating.

[Snoe]

Two concepts that I've been thinking about are driving me nuts. I need some of you geniuses to slap me out of it:

1) If I move my arm, from my side, to parallel my shoulders. If I were to have a freeze frame of my arm everytime it moved (I.E. like a standing, frozen picture in mid air) there would be an infinite amount of freeze frames. Because, like the rule of half states, if theres a picture for every distance moved, then there is a picture for every half way toward the distance. Since there is an infinite number of halves (which, once again must have a freeze frame for each one since it is part of the distance), then there was an infinite distance between my beginning and end. How can I cover an infinite amount of distance with a finite amount of movement?

2) How can there be a plausible theory that allows free will? Whether or not the mind is metaphysical, or there are metaphysical forces at play, all things that happen have an origin. Whether or not there are concepts like time, or metaphysical things that are in a non-temporal dimension- so long as there is sequence, then there must be cause and effect. If there is sequence without cause and effect, or there is no sequence, then everything is absolutely ridiculous and nonesensical and we cannot grasp anything. A series of random things that no sense can be made out of, no matter how you define sense.

Furthermore, I am granted my mind, or, if materialism is right, my brain (possibly both). My mind processes information that is given to it. I get my information from some source. The mind must already know how to compute, or have a method of computing. Because, if it learns to compute through some way, then it must have the ability to compute how to compute, ad infinitum.

So if there is the information that is granted to me (controlled by my environment and circumstance) and my mind/whatever else is involved (already set up, without my control), then there is nothing there that is "free will." Furthermore, we have to base decision off of SOMETHING. To base it off something, we must be bias in someway- I.E. if we had no bias then we could never choose, out of having no priority. The only way to obtain bias is for it to be granted or learned. And for it to be learned and processed, there must be a bias that allowed that, ad infinitum. And choosing is an example of cause and effect.

It always pissed me off in some way when people would say something like "theres a 50% chance to get heads or tails on a quarter." Because I always imagined, that the side it landed on was determined by things such as wind pressure, force exerted on it, it's weight- etc. There was no "chance" There was 100% probability, whichever side it lands on. The only reason why we give the concept of chance, is because we have the current inability to process and compute all data, so that we definitely know the specifics of all events (if cause and effect/no free will is true as I have assumed it to be, then the infinite future is absolutely predertimined) and all events to come.

Just like I don't believe you have a 50% chance to get heads or tails on a quarter, since the outcome is determined by preexisting factors- this also brings out the question of ability. For example, 5 minutes ago I was walking in my kitchen and did not jump. Now, I assume my muscles were able to jump, or would allow it. Yet, since I did not jump, that would in many ways mean I didn't have the capability to. Only if it happens through cause and effect, only if it happens at all is it able to happen. Things can only happen if they are predetermined.

Should I see a shrink?

Thanks,
Theo

[Gift Horse]

yes

[Gift Horse]

sorry, I couldn't resist.

I also can't resist a plea for help!

I try not to give advice unless of course, I am asked.
So, since you asked....

I would reccomend experiencing the richness in the present moment. Sink your teeth into the challenge of remaining in the present moment. Notice how often you go into the past or the future. After a while, the moment starts to stretch out.

If I need releif from a worried mind, I head for the Here and Now, and practice being fully present. It is very soothing.

my 2 cents

[nanouk]

Snoe, this has been my favorite since i was about 9...

"If you fold a piece of A4 paper in half 44 times it will reach the moon"

love and respect,
n.

[Snoe]

Woah. I don't know what A4 paper is but I'm going to assume it's either very long or very thick. Furthermore, I thought that a piece of paper couldn't be folded in half more than 7 times or something? Am I going to the moon?

[Lowlight]

hey snoe,

i read your posts a few days ago about the half movement thing. It also confounded me and i thought about it for a while.

maybe im wrong up this is what occured to me. the argument assumes that there is always distance to be covered before you get there, no matter how close. the smallest measurable distance is the Planck's constant which is insanely small, smaller even than the hypothetical superstrings that make up atoms. Below this level of measuremant nothing is known and can probably not be known as it is said that time and space in some way merge at this point. the laws of physics do noy apply here. so we dont know if there is in fact space to divide at this level of reality, if there isnt then there is the answer, a point is reached where things do actually meet. Another option is that maybe the problem occurs do to the way the question is framed. the meeting of two points is one way to look at it, but it could also be looked at like this...how much energy can be focussed in a single point? when two things meet to what extent are they 'touching' anyway? on an atomic level where do you draw the line? i will have to think about this last bit some more. i will try and post somethimg on freewill when i get the chance. i hope this all makes sense anyway.

Lowlight (formerly LowlightOracle)

[michael heany]

Snoe,

I'm with you. There's some heavy paradoxes that will rock you if you go deep enough. The temptation is to go a little deeper and then you'll get it. It can be fun, but it can also lead to a bunch of knots. Confusion.

My take on free will is this: you're mind is never going to be able to figure that out. It's possible you might reach a point where it's revealed to you, at least whether you're determined or have free will. Until that point, free will will always be you're perspective.

There's alot of basic problems the mind can't seem to solve. If the mind could really solve these things, there'd be no mystery. And without mystery, how can you go forward, right?

[Slow Dancer]

when you move your arm
you are effecting the orbit of pluto

and pluto is effecting the movement of your arm

all motion is infinite

[Humming]

The infinite exists within the finite. This is the eternal oversoul which manifests in you with every breath.

You can feel it if you focus. If you're not down for psychedelics, try conscious dreaming: it's the same trip.

[Snoe]

Thanks for the responses guys.

Gift horse: Hehe. I spend my life playing chess, strategy games, and planning for the future! Now I'm told to live in the present :confused: tongue.gif tongue.gif .

Lowlight: I see your point and it's a very good one. The first argument reminds me of anothing thing. Basically, when we learn what atoms are made of, things like "quarks" if the quarks themselves have no real physical force or power, I don't understand how they create something that does? If, ultimately you seek to see what everything is made of, won't you eventually get to the point where something is made out of nothing?

The second argument is a good one. Kind of reminds me of that theory that we never really "touch" anything, theres always a small cushion of air, or material between us and the object. I'll look forward to your free will thing. You're always busy! tongue.gif

Michael: Oy oy, why were we given these minds? :rolleyes: Perhaps you are right about free will. Have you yourself had an experience that you feel revealed free will to you?

Slow Dancer: Ooo the conservation of energy smile.gif . Does it really effect the orbit of pluto or was that just a random example? I agree though, of course, all things are infinite.

Humming: I dig it, man. I definitely more and more am seeing what Einstein considered to be the true "God" or "Soul" of the universe. Everything is infinite and connected, everything is beautiful.

I've done Conscious/Lucid dreaming. I had the opportunity to smoke some cannabis (would've been my first) during thanksgiving. I was going to, but then I suddenly got this feeling that I was being unfair to my body. I have this weird quark where I imagine that everything has emotions. Well, not everything. It's probably left over from childhood. When I used to use a bandaid, after done- I'd feel so bad about taking the band aid away from it's family, I'd put the bandaid in with the bandaid box (all of the unused ones) and throw the whole box away. I know that one bothered my parents.

Well, my point is, I felt like "My brain just works it's ass off, sacrificing cells, energy, thought- just to keep me going. To give me the experience of life here. How terribly immoral of me if I am to dose it on foreign chemicals, and some how damage or manipulate it in some way?"

Furthermore, I had to ask myself why I was trying it. My answer, I felt, was I wanted the experience. That it would some how at least help me get the gist of altered states of consciousness, without hypnogogic states. I had two other superstitions: 1) Being that I was somehow abusing a very spiritual thing. 2) Being that for some reason, something horrible would happen if I got high.

I know it seems totally absurd, cannabis is a very weak thing, nothing to fear, it makes me sound like an anxious nut. I'll probably try Cannabis in the near future. I just don't know if quite yet. I know the person who was going to do it with me was pretty dissappointed I pulled out. Still though, although philosophically I really wanted to do it, I had this gut reluctance that told me I was doing something wrong (not so much by law, I could handle that). Anyone share these superstitions at one time?

[Slow Dancer]

free will?

to approach the idea first we realize that much of what appears to be our true will, is in fact the agenda of divinities.

we freely allow ourselves to be used by certain factions. in trade they give us feelings of power or well-being or security.

when you are doing your true will, you have the inertia of the universe to assist you, yet the true will is endlessly bound to divinities. (elohim)

[Lowlight]

And to whom are the divinities bound? for there is always the higher.

snoe - depends what type of cannabis and what form, you should be careful. If you end up smoking some very potent skunk and you are not prepared it is so far from being an easy or light experience. It is amazing, but it is a deep experience, remember Buddha ate nothing but cannabis for the weeks before his enlightenment!

Also, although it is not necessarily untrue to say that everything is beautiful, we have to understand what that means. Auschwitz as beautiful? this is beyond our reasoning and beyond our conception of morality.

peace

[michael heany]

I don't believe in free will... but I do believe in Free Willy!

(The movie, that is...)

[Humming]

"Well, my point is, I felt like "My brain just works it's ass off, sacrificing cells, energy, thought- just to keep me going. To give me the experience of life here. How terribly immoral of me if I am to dose it on foreign chemicals, and some how damage or manipulate it in some way?""

Snoe, do some research about marijuana and you will find that your position is false: your brain, from birth, is literally designed to smoke marijuana. Your brain, from birth, even if you've never smoked marijuana, posesses endogenous cannabinoid receptor sites, with which to process THC. Your brain is chemically designed and prepared to smoke marijuana, because humans have been smoking marijuana for thousands of years. The genetics of the plant and our human genetics have formed a symbiosis.

These are not "foreign chemicals". Many of them (including, debatably I think, THC) are produced within your body, all the time. DMT, di-methyl-triptamine, is one of these: an illegal "drug" which is in reality, a chemical produced and circulated naturally within the body.

Your assertion about abusing a spiritual experience might well be true, but only if you approach the experience that way. If you approach the substance with an air of reverence, wonder, and an openess to new possibility, it will be a spiritual experience for you.

Your second feeling, about thinking that something horrible would happen to you, is quite simply your propagandized social conditioning which operates completely independently from the reality of the situation. You have been taught to unquestioningly fear and revile illegal "drugs" and so this is your conditioned mental response.

I can assure you that after three or four bowls of weed and you're not crazy, you're not stupid, and you don't feel like raping women or killing anyone, you would know once and for all that everything you thought you knew about these substances was a lie.....

[ December 01, 2004, 06:28 AM: Message edited by: Humming ]

[Snoe]

Lowlight: The one I had an opportunity towards was said to be considerably weak. However, the people told me after they smoked it, that it was somehow strong. One of them claimed to have visuals of some sort (when eyes closed she saw a "symbol" of some sort, which she drew in her diary later.) Also, is that Buddha comment true, a joke, or speculation??

Michael: I think that's a bold position to take. Personally, I have to question free willy. Consider the following.

A) Was he really free? He was the boys sea slave, and was confined to the ocean.

B) He was named Willy against his will.

C) He ate fish. How this fits in, I do not know. Somehow, I doubt the freedom of anyone named Willy who eats fish.

Humming: Thanks for the update. I tried doing some research on cannabis (erowid, google search, etc.) not much of it was quite as insightful as you had put it. I mean, I got things like charts, first time experiences, side effects, etc.

DMT I know about, it's naturally secreated in the pineal gland, right? I had heard that it was only released at Birth, and at Death. Is this true or bollocks?

Also, I know this is something I could easily pick up a book about and get an entire history, but I was curious if anyone knew why we don't legalize certain drugs? What I mean, is there some secret interest or money oriented scheme behind the "drug war," or are we literally blowing billions of dollars for nothing?

[nanouk]

Snoe:
"Also, I know this is something I could easily pick up a book about and get an entire history, but I was curious if anyone knew why we don't legalize certain drugs? What I mean, is there some secret interest or money oriented scheme behind the "drug war," or are we literally blowing billions of dollars for nothing?"

*lol* what d'u think? (:

last i heard the aid going from the us and probably elsewhere also to afghanistan was used for the farmers to set up new opium fields...low maintenance, high profit. i am sure methadone *and serotonin replacements* is high profit also...

love and respect,
n.

[ December 01, 2004, 10:01 AM: Message edited by: Nanouk ]

[nanouk]

...it makes me wonder if some of the(vaaast clearings of)amazon is set aside for coca plantations also, it has been a bit quiet on that front...and cocaine, crack and heroin keeps that wheel of their's spinning...

[Humming]

Your DMT information is credible, as far as I know. Read Terrence McKenna if you want to explore DMT, self-transforming machine elves and all.

"Also, I know this is something I could easily pick up a book about and get an entire history, but I was curious if anyone knew why we don't legalize certain drugs? What I mean, is there some secret interest or money oriented scheme behind the "drug war," or are we literally blowing billions of dollars for nothing?"

Secret interest or money oriented scheme? Yes, it's called the "criminal justice system". About half of all people in American prisons, over a million people, are imprisoned for non-violent drug offences. The government, specifically the Justice Department and the DEA, wages a selective war against its own populace, putting citizens in prison and ruining their lives, all funded by our very own tax dollars. BILLIONS and BILLIONS of our tax dollars.

Even more disturbing is the fact that these prisons are PRIVATIZED, meaning that individuals can own prisons. This means that for an individual owning a prison, they make profit according to the number of people incarcerated. Ergo, the more people they put into prison, the more profit they make. This is the reality of the War on Drugs, in brief.

Also, the CIA runs drugs internationally. This is well documented. Read people like Noam Chomsky for more information about this.

Nanouk is correct: after we invaded Afghanistan, poppy production increased by %600. Um, tell me again why we invaded Afghanistan....? The sale of drugs is a huge part of the reason why.

Here are your tax dollars, funding the imprisonment of non-violent drug offenders:

http://www.drugsense.org/wodclock.htm

[Lowlight]

hey snoe,

as far as i know the Buddha thing is true. he sat beneath the Bodhi tree, drank water, ate cannabis (not smoked) and continually meditated. It just not that well known (or is surpressed). Also the Shivite naga holy men in india who spend thier whole lives in devotion to siva are continually high on cannabis which they smoke daily.

As for closed eye visuals on cannabis? THATS WHAT ITS ALL ABOUT MY MAN! people dont think of weed as a hallucinogen but it is, and can be very hallucinogenic. Typically after about 20 minutes it is as if a third eye opens and lets you see a rapidly changing multicolored geometric patterned flux version of reality. Also if you open your eyes and focusson something that to can change shape and morph etc. Depends on the strength tho, resin is usually mildler, skunk is usually stronger.

The whole weed sends you insane thing is not true unless you have a history of mental illness or have a family history of such things then it may be best to leave these plants alone as they can bring latent problems to the surface. And the violent thing? Man its like Bill Hicks said, even if you wanted to you could fight on cannabis, i usually cant move never mind get angry.

peace

[nanouk]

:D
that's it Snoe!
put yer books down, get hold of some bill hicks on cd, lie down and then close your eyes...
he'll take you thru the human mind in a couple of hours...

love and respect,
n.

[egret]

"""although philosophically I really wanted to do it, I had this gut reluctance that told me I was doing something wrong (not so much by law, I could handle that). Anyone share these superstitions at one time?"""

hey snoe (and all) ; probably there’s something to listen to in there, in that feeling, but listened to, not believed.
its probably paranoia of some type. meaning not irrational fears (all fears can be rationalized), but unreasonable ones. probably coming from some societal norms deeper than law (which is patently arbitrary).

anyway, I’d really suggest you set it aside before you embark. you want clarity going in, not cloudness.
ultimately it’s the meaninglessness of life that gives it meaning

as for the two problems you began with; I think a lot of the confusion about both is really a matter of the limitations of our language (yep, same old theme; its really encompassing, or totally circular, depending on your point of view). and I mean math is a language too, and shows its contradictions just right there.
you can do that with words too : contradict reality with a formulation of way of seeing (like free will).
in other words, we’ve gotten ‘hypnotized’ and ‘bewitched’ as lw would say;

we’re seeing what were saying; not saying what we’re seeing (the right side up way of doing things).

try not thinking of the universe in analog, but digital terms.
otherwise lots of contradictions, as yuve seen. ‘how do you bridge the gap between space and touching. cant imagine progress as a moving along a line, because, you never get there the more the line becomes definite.
what-when exactly is ‘THE moment before you touch the light switch’. ?
rather imagine a jumping from one number or position to the other. quantum reality really is the better model
a leap from a state to a state
(but the brain, constrained by language to ask, says) what’s ‘between the points?’ well, that’s a question and it isn’t.
it is (a question): there’s a generative force, a force of movement, of ‘state displacement’, a dynamic force back there determining things and the only way we can formulate it is in terms of probabilities (the coin is not determined in the way you relate it), and in some way that something lurking back there off the number line but not really between the points is ‘conscious’, but that’s another story.
but it isn’t (a question): its part of the model where you fill in the spaces between with decimals. but folks, decimals don’t exist, not in the world. that kind of math is good for measuring, but not for counting.

as nanouk said : when you break a stick you got two short ones!!

free will? where’s he imprisoned? I’d give my life for Will if you’d tell me what I can do.

[Snoe]

Hey guys, thanks for all the responses. I'm on the go, perhaps I'll enlong my response later.

Glad you responded Egert, I have a few questions though:

1. I constantly hear quantum mechanics referred to, and logic similar to that that you are using. However, I can't really come across a centralized resource that speaks on it and explains it. Rather, just word of mouth. I have the book "Self Aware Universe" trying to finish Daniels book before I embark on that. Anything else I should check out/look into?

2. I don't understand what you mean by the coin not being determined like I said. It's like what they do with rocketry, by calculating weather conditions, the mechanics, basically everything, they can pretty much figure out everything that's going to happen unless things change or variables that are out of their control.

Hypothetically speaking though- if I were to know the air pressure, gravity, force exerted unto the coin, time in air, impact of landing, speed, etc. etc. all conditions. Don't you think I could figure out, exactly, 100% of the time which side the coin was going to land on? I mean, where in nature do we just see something "act" out of spite, without any apparent cause? If we know all causes then we can know all events. I understood your post, and I know you addressed this issue, but I'm still lost on the possibility of a causeless action.

Hypothetically speaking too, if our decisions are "causeless" which escapes it from being predetermined- then aren't we victims of causeless, random events and decisions?

Thanks,
Theo

[ December 02, 2004, 08:58 PM: Message edited by: Snoe ]

[craazyman]

Dear Theo,

Let's call this quote "A":
{A] Since there is an infinite number of halves (which, once again must have a freeze frame for each one since it is part of the distance), then there was an infinite distance between my beginning and end. How can I cover an infinite amount of distance with a finite amount of movement? And this excerpt, quote "B":
from some source. The mind must already know how to compute, or have a method of computing. Because, if it learns to compute through some way, then it must have the ability to compute how to compute, ad infinitum.

So if there is the information that is granted to me (controlled by my environment and circumstance) and my mind/whatever else is involved (already set up, without my control), then there is nothing there that is "free will." Furthermore, we have to base decision off of SOMETHING. To base it off something, we must be bias in someway- I.E. if we had no bias then we could never choose, out of having no priority. The only way to obtain bias is for it to be granted or learned. And for it to be learned and processed, there must be a bias that allowed that, ad infinitum. Well, well, well. At 16 years old you have independently arrived at A: Zeno's Paradox, (http://mathforum.org/isaac/problems/zeno1.html),

and B: Plato's famous "Third Man" argument in the dialogue "Parmenides" (http://s94176570.onlinehome.us/Philosophy/ThirdMan.htm)

Not bad.

Best regards,
-C

[Snoe]

Ah! Zeno is the name. I had heard about that paradox (was watching a two day series on western philosophy on the History channel) but I did not remember the name. Although the arm/still frame thing is not the exact same, it was based off of the ten step argument (I posted it somewhere here, I think in the psychedelic experience forum? Maybe not.) The free will thing (I speed read through that Plato thing, didn't really see what it was trying to say but I'll take a shot at it again) is something I've thought about a long time. Like most thoughts, it developed with time.

It got sparked up again when recently I took a walk and stopped at this spot I like to read down my block. There were 5 coins there, and only one was heads up. I tossed it 4 times, trying to find some pattern, for the jokes of things. The first four times it landed on heads. Hence, I thought about probability, and then somehow that reminded me of free will and everything being "controlled."

I remember getting in an argument with my sister about it, who thinks of a lot of the same things. I told her it would be impossible for her to think of something totally irrelevant. Point being, that like Daniel said in his book, our thoughts are like scenery passing the window of a bus. We have no control over them. Even if you think of something off topic, it was sparked for a reason.

My sister said that when she cleared her mind, she saw this small bowl that we used to eat Hungarian Goulash (sp) out of, and that it was totally irrelevant. I still argued that theres a reason why she thought that, and not something else. That there was a cause for that thought, and that, it was impossible for her "will" to be that cause. Even if for example, you concentrate and control your thoughts (I.E. meditation) the thought and intent to do that was out of your control. The more I think about it, the more I feel like a fleshy, self aware robot that can't understand itself or it's function. I think she started ignoring me after that tongue.gif .

But, the day I found the 5 pennies, I found 3 more on the way home! All of them, tails, except for one. I have them ontop of my desk right now. Well, it's early, but at 16 I think I've already become a paid philosopher. Woohoo, contemplate the probability/free will problem for 8 cents an hour.

[craazyman]

Theo, you crack me up! When you're ready to get serious about this stuff, the ancient Greek philopsophers were there/done that. You'll be engaged. The third man argument isn't so much about free will as it is about the infinite loop of logic created when one perceives similarities amongst multiple things and seeks a first cause, if you will, for those similarities. Closer to the upper part of quote B. For a plausible theory of free will think of yourself as a fleshy robot with a bizarre pattern recognition program that not even the best computer scientists in your universe can figure out. That's free will.

[Snoe]

Theo, you crack me up!Sure, people find out you make the big money and everyone thinks you're funny. :D

When you're ready to get serious about this stuff, the ancient Greek philopsophers were there/done that. You'll be engaged.Hey, I'm looking forward to it. Almost done with Daniels book, then I plan to read "The Self Aware Universe" then I'm going to read a book my dad got me for my birthday, "Master Pieces of World Philosophy." Near 100 classics analyzed and explained. Everything from the Republic to the teachings of Confucius. I figure I'll read the whole thing, which will give me a fair insight into quite a bit of philosophy, then from there I'll pursue longer study into the philosophers that I "resonated" with, or enjoyed.

The third man argument isn't so much about free will as it is about the infinite loop of logic created when one perceives similarities amongst multiple things and seeks a first cause, if you will, for those similarities. Closer to the upper part of quote B.I see. So it's like the creation of the universe, if we search for a first cause, then we get caught in the infinity of a cause for that cause, and so on. Likewise, as far as the "computational" abilites, it infinitely goes in loops.

For a plausible theory of free will think of yourself as a fleshy robot with a bizarre pattern recognition program that not even the best computer scientists in your universe can figure out. That's free will.Well, I live with many illusions. The illusions of security, tommorrow, yesterday, my model wife who is hand cleaning each book in my library, whilst thinking about our 5 children who are all in economics and business in college, with their only desire being that of repaying their father for raising them. Wait, maybe the latter of the four qualifies more as a fantasy.

Even so, I think I can add free will to the list tongue.gif .

[egret]

hey snoe sorry I didn’t back to you about the questions. busynes. and the discussion’s kinda passed on. not that I could answer much. don’t know much about quanta, except they jump, don’t slide (from level to level, like in electron shells, something like that). they appear and disappear.
but anyway, its not at all against causality!!!! just linearly-conceived interpretation of causality. which is, you know, what we do.

read something on chaos theory, like the book by james gleick , which I all I’ve read. it’ll give you a totally different notion of causality (make you understand Hume’s dilemma). show you how, yes, it is determined, but it might as well not be. so you and your sister are both right, in different ways (‘complex systems’ develop in patterned un-predictability; you see the pattern after the fact, but cannot ‘predict’ it, cannot see where it is going, because the ‘cause’ is totally out of scope.)

or your other example, about the coin flip, if you could know air pressure, force of the flip, heat of the coin, whatever, you could ‘determine’ whether heads or tails. the whole point is that you cannot, not even theoretically, you can never know the extent of the systems feeding into the thing. you don’t even have ways of devising categories for these things to investigate. (don’t mean you, mean humankind).