/eris/ -Philosophy Thread

Name
Email
Subject	REC STOP
Comment *
File	Select/drop/paste files here
Password	(Randomized for file and post deletion; you may also set your own.)
Archive	Archive [500 char limit]
* = required field	[▶Show post options & limits] Confused? See the FAQ.

File: 1448255363134.jpg (27.52 KB,400x398,200:199,1421_Sensory_Homunculus.jpg)

Philosophy Thread Cabbage 11/23/15 (Mon) 05:09:22 No.940

Hi /eris/. Let's talk philosophy. The first thing I'd like to talk about involves the Cortical Homunculus.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cortical_homunculus

The brain is responsible for managing input from the body, but not all body parts are equally represented. The Cortical/ Sensory Homunculus is a visual representation of how sensitive each body part is to stimulation (how many nerves it has) and, as shown, the face and hands are disproportionately sensitive. Interestingly enough, our unique opposable thumb is one of the most over-represented parts of the body.

Because of this high sensitivity, we pay a large amount of conscious attention to these areas of the body. Much time is spend screwing up the face just so, or trying to figure out what to do with our hands when we're just standing around doing nothing. Our hands and faces are highly sensitive and we pay a high amount of attention to them.

What I would like to discuss is this: How are sensitivity and consciousness related? Why are we so sensitive and so conscious of these two very small regions?

Furthermore, is it beneficial for these areas to be so small and, likewise, for the physical "spread" of our consciousness to be small? Or is this merely because of the ease of physical defense of our sensitive faces with our adept hands? Would a human with a mouth on his chest, eyes nearer the top of head, and ears on his shoulders be less capable NOT because of physical effects, but because of the increased physical "spread" of his consciousness required? (Although consolidation of senses near the brain allows for high bandwidth and low response time, which is clearly beneficial)

What are your thoughts?

____________________________

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

Cabbage 11/23/15 (Mon) 05:21:56 No.941

I would also like to introduce some language discussion.

Let's take for example the prefix "in-", generally meaning "not-" or "non-". It is present in the words "ineffectual", "ineffable", "incompetent", "include", "inform", and "incredible", to name a few. Reader be warned: I am not a linguist, and the inclusion of "in" might not be equal to the prefix "in-".

"Ineffectual", "ineffable", and "incompetent" are easy enough. These mean "not effective", "not effable" (not able to be wrong), and "not competent".

"Include" is interesting, because it could be argued to be equivalent to "not occlude". To occlude is to block from view, and to include is to put into view. Even "into" itself can be considered: "into" implying something inside, with "to" implying something outside. Into = "not to".

"Inform" is a great one. "Not form". Is the significance immediately clear to you? When you "inform" someone of something, you take something that IS form, such as an event or a thing, and turn it into language, which is NOT form. Then, of course, you communicate this "information".

Language sure is incredible, isn't it?

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

Cabbage 01/01/16 (Fri) 10:20:25 No.970

>>941

your etymology for into, include and inform are incorrect, which is why you're having confusion with them.

in- means literally "in/into" rather than "not" in these cases.

inform = into+forma; that is, to put a form/shape/memetic construct into your mind.

include = into+claudere, the Latin word for "to shut". that is, when you include something, you're "shutting it into" some grouping.

into is simply a weird contraction that exists because of how many different language groups English has played with. it's literally in+to.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

λάχανο!fnord/Hwv. 01/19/16 (Tue) 19:15:43 No.984

File: 1453230943775.png (369.71 KB,4000x4397,4000:4397,Sensory_Homunculus.png)

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

Cabbage 12/27/18 (Thu) 22:12:53 No.1868

>>940

>How are sensitivity and consciousness related?

Are they related? Consciousness appears to be a function of the claustrum, perhaps acting as a sort of real-time interpreter of sensory data. Sensitivity, then, would be simply the proportionate volume of each data source the interpreter has to sort through in a given moment.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

Cabbage 12/30/18 (Sun) 12:34:31 No.1870

>>970

>>941

We can really bullshit anything and its contrary, can't we?

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

Cabbage 12/30/18 (Sun) 17:24:39 No.1871

>>1870

Yes, but getting enough people to swallow that bullshit that it catches on is a different story.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.