Neurological autism Videos

The hat, unbuttoned shirt and gold necklace detracts from his presentation...he looks like a used car salesman.

Your a jerk and probably not smart enough to understand his lecture.

We have a lot to learn

Great Lecture

Thanks !

+SundaysAndCybeleWell, I'm autistic, so using a metaphor of a collective phenomenon is a bit of a loss to me without describing in detail. Sorry for the confusion.

+BlackEpyonI don't disagree with any of that. I don't want to be misunderstood. I don't believe the soul is anything metaphysical or supernatural. When most people think of a person's soul, they think of something like a spirit or ghost. That is not what I mean. It is a little hard to explain. The soul is just what "happens" when a body is living and breathing and functioning normally. Like the way an orchestra produces a symphony. Even with all the parts (conductor, instrumentalists) if they are not behaving in a specific way conducive to creating a symphony then there will be no symphony. If the musicians just stood on stage and told jokes then there would be no symphony. Similarly, the body needs to be functioning properly for a soul to exist. The soul, in this sense, is nothing more than a being's life force. It is an abstract idea that is as real as a symphony. It doesn't "exist" inside a person's body and neither does it "go" anywhere when a person dies. It just "ends" when the body dies. The same way the symphony ends when the orchestra walks off the stage and the same way the mind ceases when the brain stops functioning. The body is something that only exists in space and the soul is something that only exists in time. These probably sound like very strange ideas but it is late and I might just be rambling because I am so tired :(

+SundaysAndCybeleI agree with you, except for the soul part. I have no reason to believe what people call the "soul" is anything other than a misnomer.The brain is largely unaware of it's own processes. We have the sensation of "watching the world through our own eyes" as though we were an observer, yet in control of our own body. We also have a fear of death as any animal - vertebrates anyways, most invertebrates don't have large enough brains to comprehend more than basic logic processes. Humans are unique in that we have this irrational idea that we can survive our own deaths, without the slightest evidence to show for it.Plato, who was mentioned earlier, was an early adopter of the whole "soul" idea, before the Christians came up with it. The Chinese had their own idea - reincarnation - but I'm not as well versed in that theme.We can, in fact, map the neurons in the brain and see which ones fire when a person thinks about something, observes something, does something, and use electrodes in test subjects to make them THINK things, DO things.For instance, there is an experimental procedure called Deep Brain Stumulation //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_brain_stimulation where an area of the brain is targeted with electrodes, like a pacemaker, to stimulate the affected lobes and correct disorders. One trial was even used to cure a woman of treatment-resistant depression. So we can physically effect how we feel emotionally, influencing the thoughts that come from it.In another study, by influencing the temproal and pariatal lobes, one can induce feelings of "spiritual experience" and "enlightenment" respectively. //www.independent.co.uk/news/science/belief-and-the-brains-god-spot-1641022.htmlFascinating stuff. Worth a read.

+LGD FiberOptix"science is physics, it knows absolutely nothing about the topology of the mind."Science can only study tangible physical realities. The brain, science can study. But the mind is intangible. The mind is just what is produced by the brain when it is functioning properly. The mind is to the brain as the soul is to the body."they jump on the science bandwagon like religious people use to jump on the christ bandwagon,"Just because some people believe in science and other people believe in religion that doesn't mean they're comparable. Like I said before, the fact that scientific beliefs are based on evidence and religious beliefs are explicitly based on a lack of evidence (ie. faith) that makes science as different from religion as fantasy is from reality.

+LGD FiberOptixTalk to a neuroscientist. We know a fair bit about the mind already, and we've only scratched the surface. Since Phineas Gage's accident (tamping rod through his skull, 1848) we've been studying the brain, and the mind carefully.I advise you to learn the definition of science. From Wiki: "Science (from Latin scientia, meaning "knowledge") is a systematic enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the universe. In an older and closely related meaning, "science" also refers to a body of knowledge itself, of the type that can be rationally explained and reliably applied."If something can be studied objectively, experimented on, hypothesized on, observed... you can make a science of it.You claim that science is physics, and that it can never understand the topology of the mind? The mind is the product of genetic predisposiitions, enviromental upbringing, hormonal influences, and electrochemical reactions and proceses within the brain, All of these are sciences subservient to, and junior to physics.And we are only getting started.In response to your earlier challenge: "...anyways, theres a quote by plato and he said "I have never known a mathematician capable of reason" so figure that 1 out."Plato was himself a mathematician, as well as a philosopher. Mathematics is a useful profession, philosophy, less so. Thinking about the world doesn't tell you anything useful. Testing the world to find out how it works does. Philosophy often comes up with ideas that science will later test, but coming up with ideas is all I think that philosophy is good for. Once you have an idea, you need to test it to determine if it is true.I will freely admit that he was a great early thinker, but thinking will only get you so far. He was wrong about a great many things. I would take the word of a scientist over the word of a philosopher any day.I stand with +SundaysAndCybele.

+SundaysAndCybelemy original statement is still more true and more scientific than your response. science is physics, it knows absolutely nothing about the topology of the mind. people have yet to learn about the meaning in the history of religion and they jump on the science bandwagon like religious people use to jump on the christ bandwagon, and what a mighty wagon it has become

i wonder how science will explain the experience of dreams, dreams make reality 'divine' if you want to call it that

+BlackEpyonyea sorry i didnt know what you were asking. i live in a different world, the 1 jimi hendrix is from

+LGD FiberOptixAgain I have no idea what you are talking about. Today's culture is shifting towards anti-science and anti-intellectual thinking.

science is amazing, but our culture deifies scientists and people use the word science to mean intelligence. everything is made of language, words are worlds

+LGD FiberOptixI see it the opposite way, so I would like to know why you think so.

and also i never talked about discounting science, never even mentioned it. i said that if you classify yourself as a scientist you will be closing your mind off in a similar way that religious people do

+BlackEpyonculture is not your friend people are, its hard to understand culture and the differentiations between the word meanings but speaking of culture is speaking in terms of consumer and product fetishists and all that lingo. anyways, theres a quote by plato and he said "I have never known a mathematician capable of reason" so figure that 1 out. the world is made of words, we live in words(worlds), we live in constructs of our imagination. you can find higher level constructs in history than by simply following science. because science is not art, science is just a certain type of persons view on the world.(i think the depth of these conversations requires audible speaking over typing, we could actually get our points across clearly)

+LGD FiberOptixCulture is fine, if that's your interest. Don't discount the scientific process though. Even if you never become a molecular biologist or an astrophysicist, you can take the scientific method and apply it to your daily life, turning your perception of reality into an objective based experience rather than a superstition based drama.Science isn't just a profession. It's the tools of critical thinking that prevent you from lying to yourself.

sort of but i look at it as if trying to solve the problem and believing in something does make it true to the average person. the truth resonates and people who speak the truth do so by navigating complex feelings and we call this intelligence. there is this thing that exists called a psychedelic and all of the worlds 'religions' are based off of shamanic intoxication-perturbing the habits of the mundane.(everything interesting in the world is created by psychedelics/dreams) there is a lot more going on than science.. people who preach science today are like people who preach useless religious beliefs before, its like the new ideology I just want people to be open minded and naturally curious about the things that exist in their cultural history

Feelings have nothing to do with science. That's what makes science so accurate. The universe doesn't care how you think or what you feel. It's going to do whatever it does and be whatever it is regardless of what anyone thinks or feels. The sad thing is that people discount science all the time when the things we've learned because of science turn out to be different than long-held, precious beliefs. Many people would prefer to believe a comforting lie than a harsh truth. Believing in something doesn't make it true.

well my original statement is still a more complicated idea, its not just true enough its more true. idk how you would discount science because it doesnt even exist as a thing in the personally felt world of feeling and direct experience

+LGD FiberOptixI'm not sure what you are talking about anymore either but all I'm saying is that you shouldn't disregard the scientific method just because it hasn't answered all questions yet. If it wasn't for science we wouldn't have many of the inventions of the last 300+ years including the devices we are using right now to communicate. It is still the most accurate and efficient method we have ever invented for discovering the truth about reality.

+SundaysAndCybele i feel like were talking about nothing now. i dont see how particle physics relates to the human experience in life and the topology william blake and all philosophers including einstein speak from, they speak for exploring dreams and the recovery of an ancient brain state. we are ignorant of the advances of history and other cultures intellectually, people do not see the way in all things. someone said 'infinity isnt a number its a concept about the nature of the psyche'. in the end science today doesnt explain more than history can gleam

+LGD FiberOptix"if you can tell the truth so as to be understood, it will be believed"That's fine for simple truths but there are features of the universe that are so strange and complicated that most people wouldn't believe them because they are so far removed from normal everyday experience. Most people wouldn't believe that something can exist in two places at once or that time can pass more quickly for one observer than another even though it's true according to Quantum Mechanics and Relativity. It doesn't matter how simply you explain it to people, they will resist those ideas because they are so counter-intuitive. But since our common sense is based on our human experience and our lives are so limited in terms of time and space in relation to the whole universe then common sense becomes completely useless when talking about scales that we are not naturally familiar with such as the microscopic scale or time periods such as millions or billions of years.That is why evidence is so important, because real truth is not subjective."science says the universe sprang out of nothingness for no reason."That's not even true. That's what you might gather if you listened to a creationist's explanation of the Big Bang Theory but they generally don't know what they're talking about when they're talking about science. Like the people who say that if humans descended from apes then there shouldn't be any apes alive today. The Big Bang Theory explains the motions of the galaxies that we see today (and is backed up by tons of evidence) but it doesn't say anything about what caused the Big Bang. That is a question that science hasn't been able to answer yet.

+SundaysAndCybeleand all religion is founded on intoxication if you do the research. so the divine nature of reality is what they call a 'psychedelic' substance. every night you sleep you have a total psychedelic trip, on par with what you would experience by taking the plants

+SundaysAndCybeleits a perspective, an understanding about life-what i mean by truth is self evident is what william blake said "if you can tell the truth so as to be understood, it will be believed". science says the universe sprang out of nothingness for no reason.. thats just an idea. they have no sense of time and history

+LGD FiberOptixIf all truth was self-evident then no two people would ever argue about anything.Reality having a divine nature is a religious belief, hence, not based on fact.To say that a scientist, who is a human being, doesn't know what it's like to be a human being is completely ridiculous even though everyone's human experience is different.

yea. when someone speaks the truth it is self evident but science denies the divine nature of reality, especially its history. these people know nothing about the experience of being a human being

+LGD FiberOptixThe great thing about science is that you don't have to take a scientist's word for what they're saying. No scientist would even expect other people to believe them without proof.

+SundaysAndCybele terence mckenna has a quote i live my life by, he said "verbal facility is no proof that you actually know what youre talking about" which really means that verbal facility IS proof that you know what youre talking about

how demanding and how someone jumps up n down when theyve realized something IS the true nature of reality(and is also the true nature of the history of philosophy and time)

+LGD FiberOptix You can't go by how adamant people are in their beliefs because that is irrelevant. What is important is what their beliefs are based on. And science is still based on evidence and religion is still based on lack of evidence.

it was the polar opposite at one point but now people claim science like religious people claimed their beliefs.. weve barely progressed

Science is the polar opposite of religion. Science is based on evidence whereas religions base their beliefs on faith which is the absence of evidence.

science is the new religion

Science is just the most efficient process that we humans have come up with to distinguish between truth and falsehoods.

science does not mean logic

anyone who discounts science will never live in reality.

+Laura D Jensen​ check out this guy's (David Stoddart) epic response

+David Stoddart Hopefully many people will start understanding Autism through my fantasy novel series I'm currently working on.

I couldn't agree with you more