http://bigthink.com/robby-berman/scientists-link-2-genes-to-homosexuality-in-men
Zane Scheepers
In his book, “The illusion of conscious will ” Wegner asks, “Does the fact that thoughts usually proceed actions actually prove that thoughts are the cause of actions? ”. You assume they do.
Wow! That’s exactually what i was thinking. The list is just my idea of how our actions are determined, without the involvement of the conscious mind.
Thanks.
No, I’m not confusing the two. Certain actions are performed by the reptilian brain and others by higher functions. Observing professional sportsmen and women it’s obvious that even these reflex actions can altered. My point is, if muscle memory can allow us to operate on autopilot, how far does the ability of the subconscious extend? Is it possible the subconscious controls all actions and the conscious only becomes aware post facto.
Now that’s what I was looking for. Thanks.
I appreciate your opinion. If you could justify your opinion with supporting evidence I would greatly appreciate it.
The factors are far too complex to predict human behaviour. The list is not perceived consciously. Even if we had the complete list of a person, the situation includes not just external phenomena, but internal variables such as gut bacteria, hormones, etc which combined determines a situation. So a situation which appears the same outwardly could be dramatically different internally.
Like, is detecting light, perceiving light?
The conscious mind can be excluded from thought processes. Only becoming aware, post facto, of the reason an action was performed. I agree it needs work, but is it a line of thought worth pursuing?
Basically because processing information is slow. Generating a list when a situation arrises means the ball hits your head before you can figure out you’d rather not experience the pain. Most of our actions are subconscious, like walking and don’t rely on conscious effort.
The list
Light from a building is dispersed, light from a mirror is reflected. With dispersed light, we see (in our minds ) the object dispersing the light. Light disperced by raindrops, makes the raindrops visible. Light reflected by raindrops makes the sun visible.
Sorry, I’m New here. Thanks.
A rainbow consists of millions of tiny reflections of the sun, off the inner, concave , surface of raindrops, having undergone refraction. You’re seeing multiple reflections of the sun.
About your example, would a reflection from a mirror qualify? How about a rainbow? Isn’t that why the images produced are called virtual images? And don’t we see objects?
Would you care to elaborate?
Going by the first comment, I’ll reserve judgement go now.
Photons don’t interact with photons. A photon only interacts with itself.
Just a comment. I’m used to being down voted by people who don’t understand my views. I’m even used to people down voting my answers because they disagree, but without actual proof that I’m wrong. I’m used to this happening on OTHER sites. I expected better on LW. It’s not that votes mean anything to me directly but it’s an indication of the mentality, openmindedness and intelligence of the people on the site. This site is highly regarded in the intellectual community. It falls way short of its reputation.