Is everything a religion?

[Proteus_MST]

Regarding the Matsuhashi study, it shows that decision making is done subconsciously but of course it can't prove that it's impossible to make a decision consciously. It seems a bit far fetch to me to think that a decision to quit smoking is made subconsciously when your physical body is telling you to smoke. Can you explain that?

Because there are more variables that flow into the calculation ... agonists and antagonists.
For example negative feedback from your environment (which, I guess, nowadays is rather common, considering that the majority of people is non smokers), reports about cancer and other health problems arising from smoking, perhaps the costs of smoking and already manifesting health problems ... and so on.

And, in simple terms, the sum of all those agonists (that want you to keep smoking) and antagonists (that want you to stop smoking) then creates the (subconscious) answer of the system.
If the antagonist factors dominate, the sum answer will be to try to stop smoking, and if the agonist factors dominate the sum answer will be to keep smoking.

Of course the answer is variable over time ... so, if the withdrawal symptomes get stronger, the agonist factors may increase (and the systems answer will be stop with quitting smoking and start a new), similar for example if other factors (not directly related to smoking) come into play (for example stress at work or family problems)

[Kidlicious]

Because there are more variables that flow into the calculation ... agonists and antagonists.
For example negative feedback from your environment (which, I guess, nowadays is rather common, considering that the majority of people is non smokers), reports about cancer and other health problems arising from smoking, perhaps the costs of smoking and already manifesting health problems ... and so on.

And, in simple terms, the sum of all those agonists (that want you to keep smoking) and antagonists (that want you to stop smoking) then creates the (subconscious) answer of the system.
If the antagonist factors dominate, the sum answer will be to try to stop smoking, and if the agonist factors dominate the sum answer will be to keep smoking.

Of course the answer is variable over time ... so, if the withdrawal symptomes get stronger, the agonist factors may increase (and the systems answer will be stop with quitting smoking and start a new), similar for example if other factors (not directly related to smoking) come into play (for example stress at work or family problems)

Of course there is no evidence for that. Recently bacon has been found to be bad for your health and people haven't cut down on consumption, but we know the physiological effects of nicotine addiction are very strong especially after 20 years of smoking. Warning labels and all that have no effect. It was just will to stop. You don't know where that will came from, if it was free will or what.

[Aeson]

The reason AI won't resemble anything like a human ... at least not for very long ... is because at the moment we get a real learning algorithm (say "baby" or chimp level), they will quickly skip past us in intelligence, and understanding what they want and why they do things will be like an ant figuring out what humans are doing.

[Kidlicious]

So how does AI want something?

[Aeson]

How do you want something?

[Kidlicious]

How do you want something?

According to evolutionary psychologists, feelings evolved in animals. Wanting something is a feeling. How can AI want something that it isn't programmed to want?

[giblets]

Not exactly following you guys here, but it's not like various tools haven't been surpassing human capabilities for a very long time. That is the whole reason we have tools, after all; a fairly simple calculator leaves the mathematical abilities of most humans in the dust. But AFAIK we haven't invented anything that shows initiative, unpredictability, emotions, or learning. I don't think we know how to even begin to do such a thing. I suppose it's possible that that could change, but I don't see it happening real soon.

Well, as far as unpredictability is concerned, I think computers might qualify.

[Elok]

Well, in the same sense that a brain-damaged lunatic is unpredictable.

[Kidlicious]

Because there are more variables that flow into the calculation ... agonists and antagonists.
For example negative feedback from your environment (which, I guess, nowadays is rather common, considering that the majority of people is non smokers), reports about cancer and other health problems arising from smoking, perhaps the costs of smoking and already manifesting health problems ... and so on.

And, in simple terms, the sum of all those agonists (that want you to keep smoking) and antagonists (that want you to stop smoking) then creates the (subconscious) answer of the system.
If the antagonist factors dominate, the sum answer will be to try to stop smoking, and if the agonist factors dominate the sum answer will be to keep smoking.

Of course the answer is variable over time ... so, if the withdrawal symptomes get stronger, the agonist factors may increase (and the systems answer will be stop with quitting smoking and start a new), similar for example if other factors (not directly related to smoking) come into play (for example stress at work or family problems)

To put what I said a different way, dopamine and srototine levels are lower when there are cravings.Is decision making dependent on our chemical reactions or not?

[Jon Miller]

I think on the discussion of Free Will this is interesting:

http://backreaction.blogspot.com/2014/01/10-misconceptions-about-free-will.html

http://backreaction.blogspot.com/2016/01/free-will-is-dead-lets-bury-it.html

http://backreaction.blogspot.com/2013/07/you-probably-have-no-free-will-but-dont.html

JM

[Proteus_MST]

To put what I said a different way, dopamine and srototine levels are lower when there are cravings.Is decision making dependent on our chemical reactions or not?

Actually it is a litttlee bit more complex:
It is dependant on the Dopamine levels, but also, for example, on the amount of postsynaptix D2 receptors in neurons in the limbic system.
Kenneth Blum, for example, found out that kids in families whixh had a hereditary lower number of D2 receptors in the neurons of their limbic system were more prone to becoming substance addicted during heir life, than kids from families with a "normal" amout of D2 receptors.
His conclusion was, in simple terms, that the limbic system in people with a density of D2 receptors in the limbic sstem amount of D2 receptors produces less "satisfaction" (at the same Dopamine levels) than the limbic system of people with a "normal" density of D2 receptors in the limbic system.
And that those kids (who have less than normal D2 receptors) due t the fact that hey are less satisfied than "normal kids" at their everydays Dopamine levels therefore are more prone to do drugs in order to increase their satisfaction.

It is actually closely connected to the neuronal regulator mechnisms that cause withdrawal symptomes in regular drug users:
The drug use causes an iincrease in certain neurotransmitters (serotonine and dopamine, as you mentioned, for example) ... as those neurotransmitter-levels stay excessive high in chroonic drug users, the regulatory mechanism in the brain begin to adapt the brain to those high levels, by decreasing the number of postsynaptic receptors for this drug ... as a result, the effect of the drugs gets weaker (as the neuronal effect of the higher neurotansmitter levels is decreases, dueto the decreasing number of postsynaptic receptors for this drug).
This also makes drug addicts often times increase the dose of their drug (in order to keep the drugs effects at the same level), making the rain adapt to even higheer levels of the neurotransmitters ... a circulos vitiosus that often ends with death by overdose.
It also causes the withdrawal symptomes when drug addicts don't do the drug anymore ... their brain has become adapted to the (due to the drugs) artificially increased neurotransmitter levels and therefore, when the drug user just stops the drug, his brain has become really insensitive (the more, the longer the addict did the drug and the higher doses he used) towards the (normal) neurotransmitter levels that people have without doing drugs.

The CNS and PNS consists of lots of such regulatory circuits, whih often also are interdependant of each other.


And yes, our decision making is dependant on the physicochemical reactions in our body and brain.
But (and that makes us individuals) due to our individual genetic setup and also due to alterations of our the neural network (strengthening/weakening of connections between neurons) due to the experiences we made in our lifes (especially those in childhood/youth) we all may react differently to the levels of neurotransmitters in our CNS/PNS ... and even if we would put roughly the same amount of the different neurotransmitters into diferent bran region of 2 persons, each of them may react difffeerently

[Kidlicious]

Actually it is a litttlee bit more complex:
It is dependant on the Dopamine levels, but also, for example, on the amount of postsynaptix D2 receptors in neurons in the limbic system.
Kenneth Blum, for example, found out that kids in families whixh had a hereditary lower number of D2 receptors in the neurons of their limbic system were more prone to becoming substance addicted during heir life, than kids from families with a "normal" amout of D2 receptors.
His conclusion was, in simple terms, that the limbic system in people with a density of D2 receptors in the limbic sstem amount of D2 receptors produces less "satisfaction" (at the same Dopamine levels) than the limbic system of people with a "normal" density of D2 receptors in the limbic system.
And that those kids (who have less than normal D2 receptors) due t the fact that hey are less satisfied than "normal kids" at their everydays Dopamine levels therefore are more prone to do drugs in order to increase their satisfaction.

It is actually closely connected to the neuronal regulator mechnisms that cause withdrawal symptomes in regular drug users:
The drug use causes an iincrease in certain neurotransmitters (serotonine and dopamine, as you mentioned, for example) ... as those neurotransmitter-levels stay excessive high in chroonic drug users, the regulatory mechanism in the brain begin to adapt the brain to those high levels, by decreasing the number of postsynaptic receptors for this drug ... as a result, the effect of the drugs gets weaker (as the neuronal effect of the higher neurotansmitter levels is decreases, dueto the decreasing number of postsynaptic receptors for this drug).
This also makes drug addicts often times increase the dose of their drug (in order to keep the drugs effects at the same level), making the rain adapt to even higheer levels of the neurotransmitters ... a circulos vitiosus that often ends with death by overdose.
It also causes the withdrawal symptomes when drug addicts don't do the drug anymore ... their brain has become adapted to the (due to the drugs) artificially increased neurotransmitter levels and therefore, when the drug user just stops the drug, his brain has become really insensitive (the more, the longer the addict did the drug and the higher doses he used) towards the (normal) neurotransmitter levels that people have without doing drugs.

The CNS and PNS consists of lots of such regulatory circuits, whih often also are interdependant of each other.


And yes, our decision making is dependant on the physicochemical reactions in our body and brain.
But (and that makes us individuals) due to our individual genetic setup and also due to alterations of our the neural network (strengthening/weakening of connections between neurons) due to the experiences we made in our lifes (especially those in childhood/youth) we all may react differently to the levels of neurotransmitters in our CNS/PNS ... and even if we would put roughly the same amount of the different neurotransmitters into diferent bran region of 2 persons, each of them may react difffeerently

What do you mean by "genetic set up" and "alterations of our the neural network?" You are saying that my chemical reactions don't determine my decision making because I have a "genetic set up" and "alteration of my neural network???"

So you are saying that only other people make decisions dependent on chemical reactions, not people like me.

edit: Sorry, I guess you already answered my inquiries. But I was addicted to nicotine. Very addicted. Now I don't consider myself to have an "addictive personality" as some people say. I think you described that as physical traits in the body. I think you are saying that you can determine which people can quit addictions based on their genetic make up. Do you have any evidence for that? What would you say about an addict with a predisposition for addiction that quit. I promise you they exist. Go to any addicts meeting. We have AA here and they have open meetings. There you will find people with predispositions for addiction that have quit drinking.

[Kidlicious]

I suppose the point is that humans aren't like computers. Computers need to be given instructions. No one will ever say that a computer didn't respond to the input because of the way it is made. Such a computer is suitable for the trash. But when a human can resist physical stimulus we say they have a good genetic make up.

[Proteus_MST]

What do you mean by "genetic set up" and "alterations of our the neural network?" You are saying that my chemical reactions don't determine my decision making because I have a "genetic set up" and "alteration of my neural network???"

So you are saying that only other people make decisions dependent on chemical reactions, not people like me.

Tht means the following:
The initial setup of your neural network (i.e. the intrconnectivity oof neurons) is determind by your genes, also certain characteristics (for example the density of D2 recepors, as I said)
But due to experiences (= learning) the strength of your neural connection get altered ... for example by increasing the amount of postsynaptic receptors or by a neurons and an axon forming more synapses.

Everyones decisions (including yours) are made due to the chemical reactions in his PNS and CNS (or, simpler put, due to the internal state of his state machine (current neural activity and current neurohormonal levels) and the external input from his sensors (i.e. eyes, ears, nose and so on). But due to the invivisual setup of his brain everyones reactions to the same stimuli may be different.
(example: Some persons reation to mild levels of pain may be sexual arousal ... most persons level to pain may be an avoidance reaction)

[Kidlicious]

I think on the discussion of Free Will this is interesting:

http://backreaction.blogspot.com/2014/01/10-misconceptions-about-free-will.html

http://backreaction.blogspot.com/2016/01/free-will-is-dead-lets-bury-it.html

http://backreaction.blogspot.com/2013/07/you-probably-have-no-free-will-but-dont.html

JM

I started thinking about free will when you and Proteus seemed to agree that subjective decisions were made in the subconscious. It's just interesting that consciousness and decision making can be separate like that. Why do AI experts think that AI will think like we do if it achieves consciousness if our subjective decisions can be made in the subconscious. Consciousness isn't all that human thinking is about, either is intelligence.