7 of 8
7
The little things in life.
Posted: 11 September 2017 03:47 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 91 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7727
Joined  2009-02-26
Advocatus - 05 September 2017 06:38 AM
Titanomachina - 04 September 2017 08:04 AM

The really is that we don’t feel, share, or understand others emotions. We are just imagining that we do. The only way for empathy to actually be a real phenomenon would be to involve some kind of neuro link or mind reading ability. Anything less isn’t empathy by the definition they propose and is really just humans kidding themselves. It’s a wonder people frequently feel misunderstood.

The point is that we TRY.  I don’t know anything about “mirror neurons” so I’m not even going to get into that argument, but Humans are social animals, and we get along best by trying to understand what makes other people tick, by using our own experiences as a guideline.  True, not everyone’s emotional response is the same, and we often get it wrong.  But we get it right more often than not.  Why?  Because we have a lot of practice.  Have you ever wondered why people even like fiction?  Movies, novels, fairy tales, made-up stories—why would an intelligent person bother with characters who don’t really exist, who are just figments of someone’s imagination?  It’s because they offer us a good training ground, a simplified stage on which we can see other people’s emotional responses play out.  And for human beings, that’s addictive.

I agree. When we watch a good drama performed by great actors, we become immersed in the unfolding events.

The interesting part is the word “actor”.  Acting is the ability to imitate and project a specific mood or thought in a meaningful way to the audience.  The audience identifies and understands the actor’s imaginary world and empathy between actor and audience has been established. And so it is with all the “performing arts”.  Can you “dig” it, man?
Heinlein called it “grokking”....smile

Humans, for all their variety,  have certain common facial and physical traits in common. The bio-chemistry reaction, when triggered, is exactly the same in the observer as it is in the victim. What makes music a universal language because our brains and bodies are responsive to certain melodic progression of sound waves. Or even a single drone can make one feel good or bad, depending on the physical (brain directed) response.

It’s all bio-chemical cells responding to electro-chemical stimulus, leading to the ability of truly sharing someone else’s emotional experience of reality, at least for a few moments. If I can imagine your world and identify with your particular circumstances, I should be able to understand better where “you are coming from”, your perspective on life. Perhaps misunderstanding is a lack of experience and that’s no problem.

The problem here is that there can be no other explanation, other than by bio-chemical processes, which are trigged from
oersonal experience and observed similar experiences in others.

It pertains to common denominators inherited in all living creatures and sociologically refined to be used as a language, even between strangers, by humans..

We watch horror movies because it releases dopamine in the brain and increases the heart rate, a kind of “high”. The same happens when we watch the 2 minute drive toward the winning touchdown in a football game. Or the last second 3 pointer in basketball to win the game.

All you need do is listen to the crowd’s reactions to each play. That’s mass empathy, where everyone who is rooting for the home team is of ONE MIND (experiencing the same mental and physical stimulation), meaning experiencing the same chemical reaction en masse. That’s why they are called “spectator sports”, the shared comradery in support of your Team. Those are just a simple examples.

•As nouns the difference between comradery and camaraderie is that comradery is (rare) camaraderie while camaraderie is close friendship in a group of friends or teammates.} DUPipeline_QISnippet_MetaDescription_Snippet_v1: {},{48|48|32|Comradery is a synonym of camaraderie.

Keep it real, shall we.

[ Edited: 11 September 2017 06:53 AM by Write4U ]
 Signature 

Art is the creation of that which evokes an emotional response, leading to thoughts of the noblest kind.
W4U

Profile
 
 
Posted: 14 September 2017 06:48 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 92 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  912
Joined  2015-12-29

Alas no it’s not. It is not one mass empathy and it’s not one mind. They aren’t experiencing the same thing mentally (and you couldn’t prove it either). It’s simply a mass illusion, an assumption based on biased evidence.

You are also incorrect about music being a universal language. Not only is it subjective as to what “music” is, because someone can call it noise and another won’t, but the same thing can affect everyone differently. There isn’t a formula as to what can affect all minds. Not to mention the fact that music varies by culture the same way language does. What’s noise to some is music to others, which debunks your universal language claim.

It’s impossible to share someone’s experience of reality, because all you are doing is projecting your imagination onto the person. “empathy” is the ultimate act of narcissism. You aren’t feeling with them or feeling what they are feeling, only what YOU THINK they would in the situation. You are essentially lying. Empathy is lying and acting is no exception to the rule.

Unlike other people who delude themselves into thinking they have shared something, I don’t make the mistake of understanding what someone is feeling or knowing what it’s like. Just like no one can understand or share in what I feel. As humans we are each fundamentally alone in our experience of the world and no words could ever breach that gap.

You might as well give up on the mirror neuron theory since there isn’t data to support it.

It’s strange that as someone who isn’t a musician or artist I know more about this than you do. But I guess it’s hard to see the truth when you can’t separate yourself from the subject.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 15 September 2017 12:38 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 93 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7727
Joined  2009-02-26
Titanomachina - 14 September 2017 06:48 PM

Alas no it’s not. It is not one mass empathy and it’s not one mind. They aren’t experiencing the same thing mentally (and you couldn’t prove it either). It’s simply a mass illusion, an assumption based on biased evidence.


a) All of human brainfunctions are illusionary experiences (best guess of what we are experiencing)
b) when our illusions agree, we call it reality. We call that experiencing “empathy”.

You are also incorrect about music being a universal language. Not only is it subjective as to what “music” is, because someone can call it noise and another won’t, but the same thing can affect everyone differently. There isn’t a formula as to what can affect all minds. Not to mention the fact that music varies by culture the same way language does. What’s noise to some is music to others, which debunks your universal language claim.

  Really?
Tell me what Morse code is, noises or a mathematical sound language. The sounds: “duh duh duh daah daah daah duh duh duh” is meaningless to you? If those were meaningless noises, no one would be physically come to help, no?  This is just one example of a musical metric used as specific plea for help. If you heard your neighbor call for help, you’d just sit in your couch and and express “sympathy” for that person’s plight?

In more primitive societies, drums are used to communicate.  Bird of a different feather have specific mating songs, which is recognized only by birds of the same species, because their brains (mirror neural systems) are tuned to that specific sequence of sound.

All humans communicate by sound. Words and sentences are verbally communicated, by sound. How do you understand what another is saying?

It’s impossible to share someone’s experience of reality, because all you are doing is projecting your imagination onto the person. “empathy” is the ultimate act of narcissism. You aren’t feeling with them or feeling what they are feeling, only what YOU THINK they would in the situation. You are essentially lying. Empathy is lying and acting is no exception to the rule.

“That is not even wrong”.  It is the mentally generated bio-chemical responses in the observer that prove empathy.

Unlike other people who delude themselves into thinking they have shared something, I don’t make the mistake of understanding what someone is feeling or knowing what it’s like. Just like no one can understand or share in what I feel. As humans we are each fundamentally alone in our experience of the world and no words could ever breach that gap.

Then why are you typing all these words, which is a mathematical use of the alphabet, which consists of sounds if spoken?

You might as well give up on the mirror neuron theory since there isn’t data to support it.

Tell that to the thousands of scientists in all fields of neuro-science and the role the brain plays in the observation and cognition, and the physical chemical responses which echo the physical chemical responses of the person experiencing the trauma.

There is plenty of data to support the hypothesis. You just haven’t bothered to do some serious study on the subject. But unless you have a mental defect, it makes no difference.  You have a mirror system, just like every sentient being, wether you like it or not. Live with it.

It’s strange that as someone who isn’t a musician or artist I know more about this than you do. But I guess it’s hard to see the truth when you can’t separate yourself from the subject.

I find it strange that someone, who admits they know nothing about the importance of sounds and music in particular, dares to make a definitive statement about its properties and influence on the listener.

If you admit your ignorance on the subject, isn’t it time you do a little studying on the subject before making any definitive statement about a science about which you know nothing at all?

If this is your viewpoint of critical thinking and the scientific method, you may want to brush up on that as well.

[ Edited: 15 September 2017 12:51 AM by Write4U ]
 Signature 

Art is the creation of that which evokes an emotional response, leading to thoughts of the noblest kind.
W4U

Profile
 
 
Posted: 15 September 2017 08:04 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 94 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3995
Joined  2009-10-21
Write4U - 15 September 2017 12:38 AM
Titanomachina - 14 September 2017 06:48 PM

It’s strange that as someone who isn’t a musician or artist I know more about this than you do. But I guess it’s hard to see the truth when you can’t separate yourself from the subject.

I find it strange that someone, who admits they know nothing about the importance of sounds and music in particular, dares to make a definitive statement about its properties and influence on the listener.

If you admit your ignorance on the subject, isn’t it time you do a little studying on the subject before making any definitive statement about a science about which you know nothing at all?

If this is your viewpoint of critical thinking and the scientific method, you may want to brush up on that as well.

That was an odd claim wasn’t it? He is claiming he knows about something because he knows it can’t be known. He doesn’t engage with the terms or the data any of the knowledge of the field he is talking about, he just points how it can’t be true because it hasn’t been proven yet. This is the world from the movie Idiocracy. This is what we have come to after years of “Think Tanks” that spew out fake studies and misinformation. This is taking the philosophy of not knowing anything with 100% certainty and saying we don’t know anything. It’s giving up on the pursuit of knowledge, even just trying to get to know our neighbors or ourselves for that matter. It’s hearing the words of people who are smarter than us, and instead of trying to understand them, mocking them.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 15 September 2017 10:26 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 95 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  912
Joined  2015-12-29
Lausten - 15 September 2017 08:04 AM
Write4U - 15 September 2017 12:38 AM
Titanomachina - 14 September 2017 06:48 PM

It’s strange that as someone who isn’t a musician or artist I know more about this than you do. But I guess it’s hard to see the truth when you can’t separate yourself from the subject.

I find it strange that someone, who admits they know nothing about the importance of sounds and music in particular, dares to make a definitive statement about its properties and influence on the listener.

If you admit your ignorance on the subject, isn’t it time you do a little studying on the subject before making any definitive statement about a science about which you know nothing at all?

If this is your viewpoint of critical thinking and the scientific method, you may want to brush up on that as well.

That was an odd claim wasn’t it? He is claiming he knows about something because he knows it can’t be known. He doesn’t engage with the terms or the data any of the knowledge of the field he is talking about, he just points how it can’t be true because it hasn’t been proven yet. This is the world from the movie Idiocracy. This is what we have come to after years of “Think Tanks” that spew out fake studies and misinformation. This is taking the philosophy of not knowing anything with 100% certainty and saying we don’t know anything. It’s giving up on the pursuit of knowledge, even just trying to get to know our neighbors or ourselves for that matter. It’s hearing the words of people who are smarter than us, and instead of trying to understand them, mocking them.

He hasn’t given any data, and the mirror neuron network he is so sure of amount to little more than “we don’t know” in the fields. As I said, when it comes to music and art it takes an outside perspective to see it for what it is. Those within music and art are blinded by the illusion. There are no “smart people” in such fields, just those who think they are. It’s not like math or science, I don’t claim to know more than my doctor. But given how music and art are entirely subjective, you cannot compare the two.

The people in the matter aren’t necessarily smarter so much as unwilling to acknowledge that they cannot prove the existence of a supposed virtue. In the matter of trying to know your neighbors, you can’t. You aren’t in their shoes, don’t feel what they feel, and haven’t experienced their history. To say you experience any sort of “empathy” towards them is a lie, it’s just your imagination projecting itself upon them and you mistake that for knowledge. As for ourselves, well you cannot know or understand what doesn’t exist. Modern science has essentially said what Buddhists have all this time, that the self doesn’t exist.

[ Edited: 15 September 2017 10:47 AM by Titanomachina ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 15 September 2017 10:45 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 96 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  912
Joined  2015-12-29
Write4U - 15 September 2017 12:38 AM
Titanomachina - 14 September 2017 06:48 PM

Alas no it’s not. It is not one mass empathy and it’s not one mind. They aren’t experiencing the same thing mentally (and you couldn’t prove it either). It’s simply a mass illusion, an assumption based on biased evidence.


a) All of human brainfunctions are illusionary experiences (best guess of what we are experiencing)
b) when our illusions agree, we call it reality. We call that experiencing “empathy”.

You are also incorrect about music being a universal language. Not only is it subjective as to what “music” is, because someone can call it noise and another won’t, but the same thing can affect everyone differently. There isn’t a formula as to what can affect all minds. Not to mention the fact that music varies by culture the same way language does. What’s noise to some is music to others, which debunks your universal language claim.

  Really?
Tell me what Morse code is, noises or a mathematical sound language. The sounds: “duh duh duh daah daah daah duh duh duh” is meaningless to you? If those were meaningless noises, no one would be physically come to help, no?  This is just one example of a musical metric used as specific plea for help. If you heard your neighbor call for help, you’d just sit in your couch and and express “sympathy” for that person’s plight?

In more primitive societies, drums are used to communicate.  Bird of a different feather have specific mating songs, which is recognized only by birds of the same species, because their brains (mirror neural systems) are tuned to that specific sequence of sound.

All humans communicate by sound. Words and sentences are verbally communicated, by sound. How do you understand what another is saying?

It’s impossible to share someone’s experience of reality, because all you are doing is projecting your imagination onto the person. “empathy” is the ultimate act of narcissism. You aren’t feeling with them or feeling what they are feeling, only what YOU THINK they would in the situation. You are essentially lying. Empathy is lying and acting is no exception to the rule.

“That is not even wrong”.  It is the mentally generated bio-chemical responses in the observer that prove empathy.

Unlike other people who delude themselves into thinking they have shared something, I don’t make the mistake of understanding what someone is feeling or knowing what it’s like. Just like no one can understand or share in what I feel. As humans we are each fundamentally alone in our experience of the world and no words could ever breach that gap.

Then why are you typing all these words, which is a mathematical use of the alphabet, which consists of sounds if spoken?

You might as well give up on the mirror neuron theory since there isn’t data to support it.

Tell that to the thousands of scientists in all fields of neuro-science and the role the brain plays in the observation and cognition, and the physical chemical responses which echo the physical chemical responses of the person experiencing the trauma.

There is plenty of data to support the hypothesis. You just haven’t bothered to do some serious study on the subject. But unless you have a mental defect, it makes no difference.  You have a mirror system, just like every sentient being, wether you like it or not. Live with it.

It’s strange that as someone who isn’t a musician or artist I know more about this than you do. But I guess it’s hard to see the truth when you can’t separate yourself from the subject.

I find it strange that someone, who admits they know nothing about the importance of sounds and music in particular, dares to make a definitive statement about its properties and influence on the listener.

If you admit your ignorance on the subject, isn’t it time you do a little studying on the subject before making any definitive statement about a science about which you know nothing at all?

If this is your viewpoint of critical thinking and the scientific method, you may want to brush up on that as well.

I said music isn’t a universal language. Nothing is. If it were then it would not require instruction to interpret it. You can respond because you understand English but not everyone does. Even if the whole world did that would not make it a universal language.

Morse code is a bunch of meaningless noises that we arbitrarily assign values to, which is the only way it makes sense. The same thing applies to words. You can type Morse code to me but without knowing what the sounds correspond to it’s just meaningless beeps to me. Then same thing with words. If one doesn’t know the meaning assigned to them then they are meaningless. Saying something exists in birds doesn’t mean the same thing applies to humans. When it comes to music this is further shown by how the communication one seeks to do gets lost based on culture and other factors. Music and art are terrible ways of communication that suffer the same way speech does. Someone can speak to me in Japanese but it’s meaningless noise to me.

Your “mentally generated bio-chemical responses in the observer that prove empathy” is not even wrong. It doesn’t prove empathy, it just proves our imagination. It proves that we project ourselves onto others.

“Tell that to the thousands of scientists in all fields of neuro-science and the role the brain plays in the observation and cognition, and the physical chemical responses which echo the physical chemical responses of the person experiencing the trauma.

There is plenty of data to support the hypothesis. You just haven’t bothered to do some serious study on the subject. But unless you have a mental defect, it makes no difference.  You have a mirror system, just like every sentient being, wether you like it or not. Live with it.”
There aren’t “thousands” who say that, in fact it’s the same ones who debate it’s very existence or even it’s functions. Face it, there is no data to support it, all the works end with “we don’t know”. All they can say is that we imagine it. The “serious study” (which you haven’t provided and other bits I struck down) leads to the same conclusion.

Our illusions agreeing isn’t reality, it’s just imagination. Even then we cannot truly know their illusions, we just imagine we do. We trick ourselves into thinking we share something when we really aren’t. It’s all our imagination. It isn’t experiencing empathy, it’s just believing we are.

“Then why are you typing all these words, which is a mathematical use of the alphabet, which consists of sounds if spoken?” This statement is unrelated to the quoted line.

Look, it’s clear you are beaten and refuse to accept “empathy” for what it is, nothing more than a narcissistic use of our imagination.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 15 September 2017 12:37 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 97 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3995
Joined  2009-10-21
Titanomachina - 15 September 2017 10:45 AM

I said music isn’t a universal language. Nothing is. If it were then it would not require instruction to interpret it. You can respond because you understand English but not everyone does. Even if the whole world did that would not make it a universal language.

I don’t think you understand the word universal.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 19 September 2017 08:56 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 98 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  912
Joined  2015-12-29
Lausten - 15 September 2017 12:37 PM
Titanomachina - 15 September 2017 10:45 AM

I said music isn’t a universal language. Nothing is. If it were then it would not require instruction to interpret it. You can respond because you understand English but not everyone does. Even if the whole world did that would not make it a universal language.

I don’t think you understand the word universal.

I do and I know it’s correct in this case.

Either way his point is moot because there is no self and no “other” to have empathy for.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 20 September 2017 06:31 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 99 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1279
Joined  2016-12-24
Titanomachina - 15 September 2017 10:45 AM

I said music isn’t a universal language. Nothing is. If it were then it would not require instruction to interpret it.

Tell that to the baby being soothed by mom’s lullaby.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 20 September 2017 10:58 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 100 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3995
Joined  2009-10-21
Titanomachina - 19 September 2017 08:56 PM
Lausten - 15 September 2017 12:37 PM
Titanomachina - 15 September 2017 10:45 AM

I said music isn’t a universal language. Nothing is. If it were then it would not require instruction to interpret it. You can respond because you understand English but not everyone does. Even if the whole world did that would not make it a universal language.

I don’t think you understand the word universal.

I do and I know it’s correct in this case.

Either way his point is moot because there is no self and no “other” to have empathy for.

Then define “universal”. And explain how you used it correctly.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 20 September 2017 07:09 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 101 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  912
Joined  2015-12-29
Lausten - 20 September 2017 10:58 AM
Titanomachina - 19 September 2017 08:56 PM
Lausten - 15 September 2017 12:37 PM
Titanomachina - 15 September 2017 10:45 AM

I said music isn’t a universal language. Nothing is. If it were then it would not require instruction to interpret it. You can respond because you understand English but not everyone does. Even if the whole world did that would not make it a universal language.

I don’t think you understand the word universal.

I do and I know it’s correct in this case.

Either way his point is moot because there is no self and no “other” to have empathy for.

Then define “universal”. And explain how you used it correctly.

Universal means understood and affecting everyone. In the case I used it is correct, music is not a universal language (further supported by the arbitrary definition of music and how noise and music are hard to define).

Profile
 
 
Posted: 20 September 2017 07:14 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 102 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  912
Joined  2015-12-29
Citizenschallenge-v.3 - 20 September 2017 06:31 AM
Titanomachina - 15 September 2017 10:45 AM

I said music isn’t a universal language. Nothing is. If it were then it would not require instruction to interpret it.

Tell that to the baby being soothed by mom’s lullaby.

And the baby that is agitated by the same music? Your example fails.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 20 September 2017 07:50 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 103 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3995
Joined  2009-10-21
Titanomachina - 20 September 2017 07:09 PM
Lausten - 20 September 2017 10:58 AM
Titanomachina - 19 September 2017 08:56 PM
Lausten - 15 September 2017 12:37 PM
Titanomachina - 15 September 2017 10:45 AM

I said music isn’t a universal language. Nothing is. If it were then it would not require instruction to interpret it. You can respond because you understand English but not everyone does. Even if the whole world did that would not make it a universal language.

I don’t think you understand the word universal.

I do and I know it’s correct in this case.

Either way his point is moot because there is no self and no “other” to have empathy for.

Then define “universal”. And explain how you used it correctly.

Universal means understood and affecting everyone. In the case I used it is correct, music is not a universal language (further supported by the arbitrary definition of music and how noise and music are hard to define).

You said,  “even if the whole world did”, that’s the same as “everyone”.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 20 September 2017 08:09 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 104 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  912
Joined  2015-12-29
Lausten - 20 September 2017 07:50 PM
Titanomachina - 20 September 2017 07:09 PM
Lausten - 20 September 2017 10:58 AM
Titanomachina - 19 September 2017 08:56 PM
Lausten - 15 September 2017 12:37 PM
Titanomachina - 15 September 2017 10:45 AM

I said music isn’t a universal language. Nothing is. If it were then it would not require instruction to interpret it. You can respond because you understand English but not everyone does. Even if the whole world did that would not make it a universal language.

I don’t think you understand the word universal.

I do and I know it’s correct in this case.

Either way his point is moot because there is no self and no “other” to have empathy for.

Then define “universal”. And explain how you used it correctly.

Universal means understood and affecting everyone. In the case I used it is correct, music is not a universal language (further supported by the arbitrary definition of music and how noise and music are hard to define).

You said,  “even if the whole world did”, that’s the same as “everyone”.

Still would not make it universal.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 September 2017 06:22 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 105 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3995
Joined  2009-10-21
Titanomachina - 20 September 2017 08:09 PM
Lausten - 20 September 2017 07:50 PM

You said,  “even if the whole world did”, that’s the same as “everyone”.

Still would not make it universal.

I’m just quoting what you said. So, what you said “would not make it universal”. You are saying that what you said universal is, is not what universal is. You’re going downhill my friend.

Profile
 
 
   
7 of 8
7