The Brain Is Not For Knowledge...

Nakosis · May 24, 2019

sealchan said:
...but for ensuring the adaptability of the individual organism to its environment.

I had this thought this morning and it struck me as having some potential gold in it so I thought I would start a forum thread with it.

We might think that the primary purpose of our brains is to obtain knowledge so that we might understand "the truth". But what if that is a side effect of the brain's real purpose...to be able to model reality well enough such that an individual can effectively adapt to as wide a range of conditions as possible and make choices that promote survival?

What would be the effective difference, if any? Would logic or rationality be the primary or sufficient tool needed for the later case?

I the brain's primary purpose is survival of the body. Knowledge is useful in that pursuit. The more knowledge we have the better survival choices we can make.

For the most part I think we run on automatic, basically the unconscious mind taking over. Acting on whatever choice were successful in the past. However when there is no clear choice it's escalated to our consciousness were we try to make the best choice possible, which requires as accurate knowledge as possible.

A lot of the time I suspect the conscious self is just along for the ride. So we entertain ourselves with thoughts when there is not some critical decision we have to make.

Shadow Wolf · May 24, 2019

sealchan said:
...but for ensuring the adaptability of the individual organism to its environment.

Untrue as more organisms lack such a system and organ than those that have them.

icehorse · May 24, 2019

sealchan said:
Yes, a long time ago I was introduced to this simple idea, that our consciousness is like a boat on a vast sea of unconscious activity...and that idea is deeply useful I think. But I have not a clear sense to what extent participants on this forum come with that assumption or find it even sensible. It opens up a wide door for understanding "what it is like..." to have a mind, a human brain and how that impacts our sense of truth and knowledge. And yes I have certainly seen how the brain resists the mind's intent.

BTW, my earlier post was a vetted synthesis of current cognitive science. I've discussed these ideas with several "got PhDs in Cog Sci from Oxford" scientists, and they've agreed that for all practical purposes this is an accurate and useful perspective. For example, the brain's basic design includes a protein called CREB2 whose main function is to SUPPRESS the formation of new long term memory. So when you're studying for that final on a topic you hate, your brain chemistry is actively fighting to resist committing the material to long term memory. In a word, your brain and your mind are in conflict.

sealchan · May 24, 2019

Nakosis said:
I the brain's primary purpose is survival of the body. Knowledge is useful in that pursuit. The more knowledge we have the better survival choices we can make.

For the most part I think we run on automatic, basically the unconscious mind taking over. Acting on whatever choice were successful in the past. However when there is no clear choice it's escalated to our consciousness were we try to make the best choice possible, which requires as accurate knowledge as possible.

A lot of the time I suspect the conscious self is just along for the ride. So we entertain ourselves with thoughts when there is not some critical decision we have to make.

I very much like your phrase "escalated" to our consciousness".

sealchan · May 24, 2019

icehorse said:
BTW, my earlier post was a vetted synthesis of current cognitive science. I've discussed these ideas with several "got PhDs in Cog Sci from Oxford" scientists, and they've agreed that for all practical purposes this is an accurate and useful perspective. For example, the brain's basic design includes a protein called CREB2 whose main function is to SUPPRESS the formation of new long term memory. So when you're studying for that final on a topic you hate, your brain chemistry is actively fighting to resist committing the material to long term memory. In a word, your brain and your mind are in conflict.

Now if this was used to evaluate how effective public school education was for any given individual we might have a very interesting finding...

exchemist · May 24, 2019

sealchan said:
I think that the term "truth" has a common sense usage that is often used or abused to serve the needs of the individual hoping to preferentially possess it.

I was a math and physics major in undergraduate school for two years...then I went to a more interdisciplinary college and studied cognitive science and some more math and physics. I get science very well. If it doesn't seem like I do it is perhaps because I also talk about other things...

Then why do you keep going on about "truth" in the context of science? When did you ever read the word "truth" in your science studies?

Look, I may seem pedantic and irritable about this, but I think it matters. The whole essence of science is modelling, without any claim to ultimate truth. It is well rehearsed on this forum that theories in science can never be proved, only disproved or shown inadequate, and that science deals instead with evidence, for or against, and not proof. Wen you read a write-up of a piece of research you generally read cautious phrases such as the observations being "consistent with" theory or a hypothesis. You do not read about a discovery of "truth".

Applying the tendentious word "truth" creates a strawman impression of what science is all about and sets up false equivalences with the claims of (some) religions.

Maybe we actually could do with a thread on Truth. It is a highly problematic concept, it seems to me, outside mathematics and logic.

It Aint Necessarily So · May 25, 2019

sealchan said:
The Brain Is Not For Knowledge

The use of the word for here is problematic. The naturalist doesn't think in those terms. Nothing exists by intent or for any purpose until minds capable of intention have evolved into existence. The brain is not for anything. Nor the rest of our bodies. Nor anything else that exists. We can only talk in terms of how those things came to be.

As you know, generating the mind is not the brain's only function. The hypothalamus regulates body temperature and various hormone feedback loops. The cerebellum coordinates movements. The medulla regulates heart rate.

Why do we have minds? We can't say, but we can say what they do for us, and how they afford us a competitive advantage. The conscience and emotions motivate us to act. The senses inform us of our immediate environment. Thoughts, beliefs, and memories as well as instincts guide our interpretation of phenomena and suggest optimal courses of action to exploit any situation when possible or recognize and avoid danger. It takes knowledge to do that well.

Altogether, these mental capacities and faculties generate a mental map of reality that we use to navigate life. Those that do so most successfully will leave more offspring.

sealchan · May 25, 2019

It Aint Necessarily So said:
The use of the word for here is problematic. The naturalist doesn't think in those terms. Nothing exists by intent or for any purpose until minds capable of intention have evolved into existence. The brain is not for anything. Nor the rest of our bodies. Nor anything else that exists. We can only talk in terms of how those things came to be.

As you know, generating the mind is not the brain's only function. The hypothalamus regulates body temperature and various hormone feedback loops. The cerebellum coordinates movements. The medulla regulates heart rate.

Why do we have minds? We can't say, but we can say what they do for us, and how they afford us a competitive advantage. The conscience and emotions motivate us to act. The senses inform us of our immediate environment. Thoughts, beliefs, and memories as well as instincts guide our interpretation of phenomena and suggest optimal courses of action to exploit any situation when possible or recognize and avoid danger. It takes knowledge to do that well.

Altogether, these mental capacities and faculties generate a mental map of reality that we use to navigate life. Those that do so most successfully will leave more offspring.

Yes this is very interesting...the brain is not just for thinking and it is easy to forget this.

Like most things of and in nature nothing has just one designed purpose but just participates in several systems and sometimes can even be redundant. I never looked into it further but I have heard about how the immune system is a learning system.

Skwim · May 25, 2019

sealchan said:
...but for ensuring the adaptability of the individual organism to its environment.

And the brain can't perform both functions because _______________________________________________ .

.

Valjean · May 25, 2019

sealchan said:
Yes this is very interesting...the brain is not just for thinking and it is easy to forget this.

Like most things of and in nature nothing has just one designed purpose but just participates in several systems and sometimes can even be redundant. I never looked into it further but I have heard about how the immune system is a learning system.

What, in Nature, has any 'designed' purpose (assuming design implies intention)?

Shadow Wolf · May 25, 2019

icehorse said:
or example, the brain's basic design includes a protein called CREB2 whose main function is to SUPPRESS the formation of new long term memory.

I would assume that depends on the individual, as certain conditions and disorders enhance certain aspects of memory and ha e people absorbing information like a sponge. Its also a bit tricky when we consider learning things changes the shape of the brain (neuroplasticity). Memory is also, like many things, we can work to improve (such as warding off cognitive decline in general).

Shadow Wolf · May 25, 2019

Valjean said:
What, in Nature, has any 'designed' purpose (assuming design implies intention)?

I would say symbiotic relationships. By design (purposefully by efforts of the organism or by accidental chance) one has evolved a purpose of needing and being needed by the other.

Shadow Wolf · May 25, 2019

Skwim said:
And the brain can't perform both functions because _______________________________________________ .

.

It also doesnt address how the brainless bacteria adapt and evolve. Obviously our brain did evolve to help us navigate and survive and even alter ohr environment, but so many organisms do it sans brain that it seems doubtful from the start thats what a brain is for.

icehorse · May 25, 2019

Shadow Wolf said:
I would assume that depends on the individual, as certain conditions and disorders enhance certain aspects of memory and ha e people absorbing information like a sponge. Its also a bit tricky when we consider learning things changes the shape of the brain (neuroplasticity). Memory is also, like many things, we can work to improve (such as warding off cognitive decline in general).

I'm talking about how normal brains are designed to work. The normal human brain's default mode is to resist transferring daily, mundane experiences and/or new ideas into long term memory.

Shadow Wolf · May 25, 2019

icehorse said:
The normal human brain's default mode is to resist transferring daily, mundane experiences and/or new ideas into long term memory.

Its probably a great blessing that so much of us is kicked to "autopilot" and not actively taken in. And we don't typically commit new information to long term memory because new information almost always will not really be needed later on. If it's important enough, we have methods to "activate" long term memory. If we had to remember everything we would probably be unable to cope (those with eidetic memory do sometimes claim it a curse). We actually take in tons of stimuli and information. But we cant actively process it all, we cant cognitively evaluate it all, and we just can't take it all in, so the brain heavily filters things and passively (from the perspective of our consciousness, anyways) sorts them for us.

icehorse · May 25, 2019

Shadow Wolf said:
Its probably a great blessing that so much of us is kicked to "autopilot" and not actively taken in. And we don't typically commit new information to long term memory because new information almost always will not really be needed later on. If it's important enough, we have methods to "activate" long term memory. If we had to remember everything we would probably be unable to cope (those with eidetic memory do sometimes claim it a curse). We actually take in tons of stimuli and information. But we cant actively process it all, we cant cognitively evaluate it all, and we just can't take it all in, so the brain heavily filters things and passively (from the perspective of our consciousness, anyways) sorts them for us.

Most cognitive scientists would largely agree with your idea here, fwiw, I do.

The Brain Is Not For Knowledge...

Nakosis

Non-Binary Physicalist

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber

icehorse

......unaffiliated...... anti-dogmatist

sealchan

Well-Known Member

sealchan

Well-Known Member

exchemist

Veteran Member

It Aint Necessarily So

Veteran Member

sealchan

Well-Known Member

Skwim

Veteran Member

Valjean

Veteran Member

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber

icehorse

......unaffiliated...... anti-dogmatist

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber

icehorse

......unaffiliated...... anti-dogmatist