John Mazziotta - How Do Human Brains Think and Feel? 

One thing I’ve always wondered is whether plants, which have no brains, think. They do respond to their environments, tracking the sun and so forth, and they do share resources with one another. But how do they decide to do this? I don’t know, but I think this would be a fascinating thing to investigate.

Fascinating. Regarding the mirroring aspect, the first time I consumed cannabis, I watched a movie and I literally couldn't stop myself from repeating what the characters said and acting out their movements.

Imaging seems to be giving much needed clarity to the role of physiology in explaining brain function and possibly the underpinning of mind.

Great

memory of past, feeling / emotion in present, thought about future?

15) The Paradoxes of Quantum Non-Locality Contradictory: - Violations of Bell's Inequalities - The EPR "Spooky Action at a Distance" Paradox - Quantum Entanglement and Measurement Paradoxes Quantum phenomena appear to paradoxically allow for non-local influences and action-at-a-distance which conflict with relativistic locality. Non-Contradictory Possibility: Monadic Quantum Geometrodynamics |Ψ> = Σn cn |Un> (Universal wavefunction) |Un> = ⊗i |qn,i> (Monadic factorizations) < Un|Um> ≠ 0 (Holographic correlation between perspectives) Treating the universal wavefunction as a coherent superposition over monadic perspectives |Un> allows for holographic pluralistic correlations resolving non-locality paradoxes. 16) The Primordial Cosmic Singularity Contradictory: Classical Big Bang Cosmology As t → 0, classical solutions become transcendentally ill-defined at an initial singularity where all known laws of physics break down. This inevitably paradoxical breakdown of deterministic geometric description represents an impassable limit. Non-Contradictory Possibility: Infinitesimal Fractal Geometrogenesis M0 = Σn |Un(t = 0)⟩ (Primordial fracted state) |Un(t)⟩ = Un(t) |Un(0)⟩ (Evolution fractal operator) ds2 = Σn,m cn,m Γn,m (Metric from mnadic correlations) Treating the primordial geometric inception M0 as a superposition of infinitesimal fractal-evolving monadic perspectives avoids singular infinities from the start. 17) The Paradox of the Circular Plane Contradictory: In Euclidean Plane Geometry, defining a circle as the set of points equidistant from a center point is paradoxically circular: C = {(x,y) : sqrt((x-a)^2 + (y-b)^2) = r} (Circle of radius r) This defines C using the algebraic distance function invoking C itself. Non-Contradictory Possibility: Infinitesimal Pluritopic Homotopy Theory C = {p : ∃q ∈ S1, p =r q} (Circle as monadic group quotient) Tπ = ⨀p ⨂q Γp,q(r) (Winding homotopy over relations) Defining circles C topologically as quotients of the monadic group S1 by pluralistic infinitesimal monadic relations Γp,q avoids circularity using homotopic methods. 18) Paradoxes of Subjective Experience Contradictory: - The Explanatory Gap and Hard Problem of Consciousness - Integrating First/Third-Person Accounts of Mental States - The Binding Problem of Unified Perceptual Experience Classical theories struggle to coherently model the existence of subjective first-person experience from their third-person formalisms. Non-Contradictory Possibility: Monadic Idionamic Phenomenology |ωn⟩ = Rn|Ψ⟩ (Witnessed State from Universal Wavefunction) |Ωn⟩ = ⊗i |ωn,i⟩ (Bound Unified Perceptual State) Qualia(|Ωn⟩) = Feel(|Ωn⟩) (Qualitative Experience) Grounding subjective experience in witnessed monadic perspectives |ωn⟩ on the universal wavefunction, with unified percepts |Ωn⟩ as bound tensor factorizations, allows modeling qualia phenomenology. 19) The Epoch Philosophy Problem Contradictory: Given a succession of philosophical epochs/paradigms, the following paradox arises: 1) Any paradigm is conceivably subject to revision/rejection 2) So all current paradigms are open to revision 3) But (2) is self-undermining, suggesting all knowledge is revisable This formulation paradoxically renders all knowledge, including the above, radically unstable. Non-Contradictory Possibility: Stratified Reflection Metaparadigms Let L be a paradigmatic language/logic Let T = {φ | L ⊨ φ} be its paradigm theory Define M = {φ | φ ∈ T & ¬Prov_T(φ)} (The Metalogic of T's Unprovability) Representing paradigms as stratified metaparadigms, with self-revisions accounted for in irreducible metalogical propositions M, resolves the paradox of universal revisability. 20) The Epimenides Liar's Paradox Contradictory: The statement "This statement is false" is paradoxical: If true, it's false. If false, it's true. This simple self-referential statement undermines the very notion of bivalent truth from within classical logic. Non-Contradictory Possibility: Idempotent-Separated Algebraic Logic Let A be the proposition algebra Define A+ = {a + a | a ∈ A} (Idempotent subspace) Vall : A → {0,1} (Bivalent valuation map) Define Vall(a + b) = Vall(a) ⊕ Vall(b) for a,b ∈ A+ (Separated valuation) By valuating paradoxical self-referential propositions in an idempotent-separated subalgebra A+, the liar's paradox can be rendered consistent and dissolve the threat posed to classical bivalent logic itself. In all of these examples, the classical formulations encountered paradoxes or inconsistent self-contradictions because they depended on flawed premises like: - Absolute separability of observables rather than relational pluralisms - Mathematical and geometricover-idealizations - Undue bivalence and binary truth valuations - Neglecting or inability to represent first-person subjectivity The proposed non-contradictory infinitesimal/monadological alternatives resolve the paradoxes by: - Treating observations/geometry as relative between interacting monadic perspectives - Using infinitesimals, realizability relations rather than over-precise continua - Adopting pluralistically-valued paralogics and metalogical stratifications - Explicitly representing and grounding phenomenal subjective experience By systematically upgrading our descriptive formalisms to accurately reflect the primordial unified pluralities and first-personal facts underlying reality, these paradox-free frameworks promise to extend our knowledge into new fully self-coherent analytic regimes. The vision is an entire Renaissance - reconceiving mathematics and physics from infinitesimal monadological roots, thereby extinguishing paradox by restoring unfractured symbolic resonance with experiential metaphysical truth. An audacious ambition, but nothing less can achieve humanity's aspiration for a universal unified coherence encompassing physical and conscious reality.

I wish we would move away from using terms like “normal” when discussing such a wide spectrum.

Our emotions and behaviour patterns are evolving and they have perhaps become so evolutionary complex that to perhaps aberrant mirror neurons can be somewhat evolutionarily advantageous leading to rise in the cases of autism. #A_hypothesis

Abbott and Costello

We could be part of one zero dimensional point where one second seems like one second. A physical system like a hurricane or falling line of dominos could be an intelligent being and be part of another zero dimensional point where one week feels like one second. The zero dimensional points we are part of and the zero dimensional point the physical system are part of can be two seperate zero dimensional points both separated by time, but both still existing simultaneously. If we are a zero dimensional point where one second feels like one second, and another intelligence is part of another zero dimensional point separated by time, where one week feels like one second, it makes sense for both points to be separated by time but still both exist simultaneously.

It is totally Perspective-confusion, Kuhn is obsessed with brains. but forgot to ask his brain, how it thinks and feel.

Dude still uses Windows XP!?

How old is this? Look at the size old that laptop!

...Gentlemen, it is just marvelous how you can determine the functions of the brain, as well as what areas are stimulated during responses. The actual mechanical process. I am reminded that every person will respond a little differently as well. Life style, nutrition, bodily chemical balance. So many variables. Even identical twins have different fingerprints. Remembering that each person is special and individual. Also the wonderful concepts of Time/Space, reality, social behaviors, conscienceless. So much knowledge, and yet so many more discoveries. Each person is so wonderfully created. Thank you GOD, respectfully, Chuck...captivus brevis...you tube...Blessings...

Does all of this social BUSINESS mean that it is just less cost effective to communicate with autistic people or are they genuinely lacking wisdom? And what do we call those people that strictly reason by social vibes, irregardless of the definitions of statements.

I am here for the comments. 🤣

Researchers and brain scientists have first to answer the fundamental question: how does a conscious self arise from the working of the neurons? And if such is really the case. Only after tackling this fundamental question should they proceed to solve the other problems. This only is the most logical and sensible approach to take.

Brain and the mind is not the same thing

You’re asking me?

Brains don't think. People do. Mr. Kuhn's guest commits the mereological fallacy. He says a part of an object does something that the whole object does instead.

Its not the brain that thinks, feels, smells, hears, sees.....it is consciousness that does, & the latter is neither the brain nor is it the product of brain activity. Its brain correlates are just its mediums through which it functions. The brain is just a trans-receiver (transmitter-receiver) of consciousness. In other words, Its about time to let go of the false materialistic "scientific world view." Nont only a paradigm-shift is needed to do just that, but also & mainly a META-paradigm-shift, in order to send materialism to Alice's wonderland where it belongs, to liberate science from its bigotry & to let the scientific free inquiry take its course...

RLK for president!

Because of God...jk

I have the mind of Jesus Christ of Nazareth...

Guys says about Alzheimer It in brains is NOT difficulte to understand . Guys It is stupid sentences. He definies consciousness though reality but keep out how figure out consciousness inside brains activities he consciousness definitions is nil evidence . Again he shows important question about brains It is wortheless because he arrogances keep him out of serious neurosience.

"How Do Human Brains Think and Feel?" How you think and feel rely on the choice of belief that your free immortal soul made : If you had chosen to believe in a loving God, this can inspire you to love and care for all God's children to live in peace, harmony, and genuine happiness.. ...but, if you are Godless, there is nothing to hold you to do anything to fulfill all your desires regardless who gets hurt.. you'll likely become the deadly cancer of any civilized society driving this world down into the abyss of no return...