My university Modul features you as “extra reading” under one of our classes. Was really surprised, but happily so, cause I think I’ve watched every video from your channel

@THUNKShow

2 жыл бұрын

AYYY! That's very flattering! Tell your prof I said "Hiya!" :D

@skidaddle492

3 ай бұрын

tilburg uni?

I would recommend Johnson and Lakoff’s book “Philosophy in the Flesh” to anyone interested in philosophical questions from an embodied cognitive linguistics perspective. It isn’t a super quick read, but it’s pretty fascinating. Murleau-Ponty also did some interesting work in the phenomenology of embodied perception, etc. Worth checking out. Now, I’m off to watch Altered Carbon 👍

I have a social psychology midterm tomorrow and this video just saved me! thank you so much!!

i am surprised that so many contemporary thinkers are getting the credit for embodied cognition. i'm not sure where the thought has originated, but Merleau-Ponty's Phenomenology of Perception seems like it was a pretty good argument for embodied cognition

My first happiness euphemism was "over the Moon." I know it's just a coincidence, but jeez, my reaction to your example was "how did you know????"

My favourite metaphores in Brazilian Portuguese: Se toca! (lit. Touch yourself!) = Don't worry, it simply means "Get real!" Eu me toquei (lit. I touched myself) = "I realized it" Se enxerga! (lit. Watch yourself!) = "Look at you! / Seriously?" Pisar na bola (lit. to step on the ball) = "to drop the ball"

@PetersonSilva

6 жыл бұрын

Look at us Thunk-watching Brazilians :)

Just finished Kaiba yesterday, and this brings to mind that part where Warp will mostly change how he acts in another body but keep his main goal the same.

Yep. Birds have bird brains, humans have human brains. Without very similar embodiments, we can't expect an intelligence to have similar experiences and reactions. We wouldn't (viscerally) understand some sentient machine's fear of water any more than something which had no need of sex for reproduction would understand love and sexual attraction.

@drewlaino

3 жыл бұрын

That is a very good point. Our brain and genetics build from our environment and ancestors. There are so many frequencies of sound and light that we cannot perceive simply because we have survived without them. Technology allows us to outsource some of those capabilities and adds to our tool kit. Biology and technology are similar but with a different medium of action.

Always great to find high quality youtubes :) Nicely summarised, thanks.

@Aritul

2 жыл бұрын

So true.

This is fascinating. Thanks for a cogent explanation. All the best.

Important idea. Music was ahead of science. Think OLIVEA NEWTON JOHN: "Let me hear your body talk."

loved it! Thanks for making this video!

@THUNKShow

5 жыл бұрын

Thank you for watching it! :D

Very nice now you put this video together. Now I will have to read links for the curious. We are metaphorical people from my understanding. Religions, philosophies and story telling of other sorts are full of metaphors. When it comes to body positions, I have heard what you showed in the video. The pencil in the teeth makes us smile. Which makes our brains release dopamine,endorphins and serotonin. The crazy thing is it can be a fake smile and the release is the same. There is different ancient Asian beliefs that talk about body position helping our physical and mental health. And from my experience they are correct. Placebo effect, maybe. US Military has a long history in believing in body positions in training. Which brings positive effects in making for a better warfighter. The US Army stop doing drill and ceremony during basic combat training. Now they are bring it back because of the over all lack of discipline, mental toughness and integrity of the new recruits. I know personally if I what to be relaxed when I go on a walk I slouch a little. If I need to be at a high level of self confidence or I feel a little down emotionally, I walk or stand tall not slouched. Placebo effect, could be. In closing most mental and physical health practitioners I know of believe in the holistic approach of healing. Because it works. Placebo effect, who cares if it is, it working!

great topic, thanks from Chile!!

@THUNKShow

3 жыл бұрын

Glad you enjoyed it! Salud! :D

This is brilliantly done!

@THUNKShow

3 жыл бұрын

Thanks! :D

Good stuff. Subscribed!

First time I've felt I disagreed with a Thunk video, and it's awesome. Definitely a lot of food for thunking here. Sidenote, Netflix should drop you a hefty donation, 'coz I've been considering watching Altered carbon but ddecided against it, given how much I figured it would simplify the morality of the "sleeves" thing. Getting a recommendation from yoh, though, has immediately changed my mind

Your video has helped me. Thank you. :)

@THUNKShow

2 жыл бұрын

Awesome! Glad to hear it! :D FYI - a couple of the supporting studies that embodied cognition advocates cite failed to replicate, so y'know, grain of salt. :)

Not to dredge the topic in philosophy, but this idea of embodied cognition is exactly what twists me up when I think about the afterlife. Without all of the external stimuli informing and adjusting our thoughts, assuming an afterlife means losing your body, I think it would have to be like a dream: a loose consciousness would invent stimuli, like how it invents phantom pain from a lost limb. But either of those examples inevitably resolve in "waking up" or feeling what's "actually there". Without that validation of interpretation, the afterlife of not having a body I think would have to devolve into incomprehensible thoughts. Then again, all envisioning of the afterlife (in art, movies, etc.) present the idea of afterlife as having a body, again, just in some other space. Which I think adds an interesting cultural spin on Embodied Cognition: even in death we assume we have our bodies, to feel pleasure or pain, so tied is our human experience to our form. Suffice to say, I think there's a compelling argument that Cognition is indeed embodied, and it's slice of the pie of ""what comprises human thought" is probably very large.

fantastic video. makes a deal of sense and i think is more compatible with the brain having evolved even if the mind is a function of the brain.

This is great !! Tysm :)

Altered Carbon is a good watch tough, I remember that when you have a new 'sleeve' body you start to have a different personality and temper.

@THUNKShow

4 жыл бұрын

Yeah they played around with it a bit, for sure.

@tomcomposer

3 жыл бұрын

@@THUNKShow They fall prey to the Identity problem, like so many other Sci Fi plots which use this trope. Which is this: what's to say that the personality doesn't actually die along with the body, and all that is taken to the next body is a (digital) replication of the original person, not the actual person? That is to say, as someone about to be replicated, I could take some comfort in imagining that there is a new "me" following the replication, but it's only a replica of my mind, and I have no right to look forward to being that mind. This is kinda factually confirmed in Altered Carbon, as they can die following a backup. The backup is a complete replica, sure, but the original is as dead as they were ever going to be, and the replica ensures no continuation of consciousness, any more than we'd call two photocopied images "a single thing." I'd have no right to look forward to returning to awareness after having died. Every sci fi with this trope is ruined for me, he he he.

@markymarcm

3 жыл бұрын

@@tomcomposer Yep, the old 'teleportation to Mars' conundrum, haha

A lot of what was presented is good food for thought and it implies to me that the endocrine system is highly important to emotion and thought. A brain alone would be psychotic possibly. Good stuff to thunk about.

Of course it’s makes sense. What is like to be a bat is not only about having a bats brain; it’s also about having the periphery sensations coming from a bat sensory systems (sonar), being light, having wings... having a bats body. Body and brain didn’t evolved under entirely different selective pressures, some adaptive pressures were different, but they acted upon the same individual, same team.

our environment shapes who we are as intelligent entities. with a vastly different body, senses, and means of manipulation it would make sense that there would be some differences in how we (and our culture) develop. but given an already trained mind, i find it very implausible that changing ones body would have an immediate impact on our thoughts (other than having to retrain control and understanding of our new body).

Does enactivism/embodied cognition defend either direct realism or indirect realism in the philosophy of perception? Or is it best classified as a middle view between both these positions?

I strongly believe body mind & soul are one. Well, my belief has gotten stronger in last few weeks.

@MrAsp11

Жыл бұрын

You're def being held by a picture

I'm not convinced. What's new about this theory? The evolution of the brain was of course due to relationship with external stimuli. But that evolution coded in our DNA something that can "grow" without the need of the same external stimuli. The building of a virtual mind without external inputs that mimic the body is useless, because the mind would only "accept" those inputs. Building inputs would be the same as doing a complete virtual body. Now the question is, does the brain from a child develop differently if it has a body or not? and the answer is obviously yes! Sensation highly affect the plasticity of neurons and memory. But the premise of the video was digitalizing an already build brain.

Seriously, though, phenomena like this one make me feel weird and out of place. I tend to do things like smile more as alearned behavviour, because people get unnerved by the fact that I don't smile or frown or otherwise emote. So when I'm tired or distracted, people tend to read me as angry or upset rather than just too sleepy to react. Same with laughing, really. In short, I've been engaging in the physical elements involved here for most of my life, and nothing. I've puffed myself up to emulate a more confident posture, but I never end up feeling any more confident or superior. It's not that I don't get happy or sad, it's that I don't outwardly display it. I can be really amused by a good joke and not laugh, rather than somehow being unable to "get" the joke. I suffer from anxiety problems, and people usually don't notice unless I'm having a full-blown meltdown. The kind that might send someone to an ER. I don't feel happier if I smile more at a party or whatever else one might do. I find the performance tiring. Huh. Maybe I am weird and out of place. *totally not robotic smile here*

Thanks

Seems connected to some of the ideas of Douglas Hofstader "Godel, Escher, Bach" from the late 1970's.

Simple: Let's emulate a brain in real time and see if it does something interesting. (And make sure the ethics board is made up off fans of embodied cognition.)

I think altered carbon do a good job at this point, cuz when they replicate your brain in a stack and that is not in a human body, people say they see nothing, or that they are in the dark or in the cold, also they don't think or feel the time passes. Even when you go in virtual you always have a body.

@THUNKShow

4 жыл бұрын

Great pull! I wish I could watch season 2 already...

On a more serious note: My gut feeling is that a mind without a body would develop differently from a mind attached to a body. For example: A truly digital mind doesn't need to fear physical harm to whatever body it's currently using. It also doesn't need to eat or sleep(?), and as a result will have a different experience of the world than a mind in a body with physical needs. But the idea that a completly simulated mind is incapable of certain feelings or any thought at all is just too much for me. Unless there is something "supernatural" going on in humans and animals (a "soul" if you will), I don't see any reason why a digital mind should be incapable of certain aspects of intelligence. And newtons flaming laser-sword tells me that there is no soul. However, the mind in question might need to function slightly differently to our brains. Our brains are quite susceptible to chemical interactions (Caffeine, LSD, THC, alcohol, all hormones, ...) after all - so digital minds need to have to compensate for that missing component somehow. Either by emulating more parts, or by moving these kinds of interactions into the neural network itself or some auxiliary system.

It's crazy that we only realize this now.

I just always assumed that a brain simulation would be default have sensations being fed to it, otherwise it's just another computational machine.

How could a arm or leg transplant be possible without embodied cognition being necessarily true (at least in part)? There's a marine corps veteran who received a double-arm transplant, now he can touch and grab objects with someone else's arms. How could that be explained without embodied cognition?

@THUNKShow

4 жыл бұрын

I mean you need a nervous system driving arms, but that's a different phenomenon - embodied cognition is more about how our thinking is, at a foundational level, built on the experiences of being in a human body.

@riccardo_aquilanti

4 жыл бұрын

@@THUNKShow What about people who were born blind. They cannot think about colors. Isn't that an example of how the body shapes the mind?

I mean, what is the real difference between the neurons that are accumulated in the brain in a big fat blob and the neurons in the body? Salamanders can regrow limbs due to a lesser degree of cephalization. Why are we so brain-overfixated, brainworshipping? Does it make sense from a biological standpoint to distinguish between brain and body? Nowadays there are so many great trauma-therapies that work extremely successful with the body. Even gut massages (gutbrain, enteric nervous system) can be more helpful with releasing trauma than talk-therapy.

I feel you did not make such a strong case for Embodied cognition as you could have. You might want to look at phenomenologist thought, Max Scheler, or Merleau-Ponty, to get the theoretical side. Their idea of perception (which is what a body does) as the basis for knowledge is based on very strong theoretical arguments.

Cognition doesn't seem plausible without embodiment. What exactly would biological organisms, including humans, need awareness and thinking for if not for solving the problems that the body presents, i.e., hunger, reproduction, acquisition of territory etc. it's all bodily problems we are solving. It seems self-evident, no body no cognition.

@THUNKShow

4 жыл бұрын

Sure - I think it's pretty indisputable that intelligence would arise in response to evolutionary forces (which require some sort of embodiment). But I think the EGT goes a step further, saying that if we were to construct a "strong" artificial intelligence, its cognitive properties would be dictated by its embodiment - that's not quite so uncontroversial. Most people working on strong AI aren't focused on building it a body!

As an AI student I have to disagree that every AI'er thinks about cognition like that. (I blame the Neural Network hype for this). In my Bachelor we even have discussed and then experimented with different notions of cognition. But it does further that cognitivist versus embodied intelligence. There is also enactivism which adds the environment in the mix as well.

Sounds like Kantian ideas!

How it was described confidence is arrogance

facial feedback hypothesis has been debunked by the scientist who initially proposed it. surprised people are still quoting it as accepted science.

0:06 아재개그 ㅋㅋㅋ

5:24

I watched a TED talk the other day on the relationship between body and emotion, it was interesting and seemed to lend itself to the argument for embodied cognition: kzread.info/dash/bejne/Ypuf1ZicldSalbQ.html

The experiments related to changing posture or facial expression doesn't replicate. Great vid though!

@THUNKShow

4 жыл бұрын

Totally. There are a lot of the older vids that fell to the replication crisis - it certainly put a dent in embodied cognition, but I think it still has some merit. :) Thanks!

@parsathil4438

4 жыл бұрын

@@THUNKShow Yes it does. The studies that do replicate are evidence enough :)

Your nervous system is not limited to your brain. In fact it runs through your entire body, lining up all of your organs, and reaching the top layers of your skin. The divisions of the peripheral nervous system control different parts of your body, and of course, communicate with your central nervous system - the brain and the spinal cord. When you see someone eating a lemon, you salivate more than usual. When you see an erotic scene, you get aroused. With. Your. Body. Your sympathetic and parasympathetic nervous systems are involved, giving rise to thought, which is processed in your brain. Thought "happens" long before it becomes conscious. By long, I mean in milliseconds. Your consciousness is within your body. Without the life in your body, the "you", there is no you. Sorry.

I disagree, i suspect the associative alignment of happy and sad to up and down are just remnants of the fact we evolved from light sensitive organisms in the ocean where down is dark (and dangerous) and up is light (and safer if you have a means to see a predator attacking before it nabs you).

@lennardw.9841

6 жыл бұрын

It's not the entire argument you know

@THUNKShow

6 жыл бұрын

That hypothesis is aligned with embodied cognition - your association necessitates an evolutionary history of (embodied) physical predation, & implies that an intelligence without an embodied evolutionary history would be different in some meaningful way.

@landspide

6 жыл бұрын

THUNK yes that is exactly what I am saying! AI will likely not reach sentience until it is coded from an evolutionary perspective. Take a look at this -> www.damninteresting.com/on-the-origin-of-circuits/.

@landspide

6 жыл бұрын

Lennard W. Of course, I will do some reading. My exposure is only this video... Which was great BTW!

@TPGNATURAL

6 жыл бұрын

David Thornley You could be right in what you say. The way I see and feel is we have a brain where these organisms did not have brains. Our brains are the most complex on planet earth. We are emotional and rational thinkers. When I feel happy life seems lighter to me. I am willing and ready to get up and get going. When I feel sad, life feels heavier to me. That's why when someone says to me they feel down I understand what they mean by my personal experience. I maybe wrong. And as far as I know we have no idea if dark or light was or was not safer. I would like to know your experiences of when you where happy or sad what did that feel like for you emotionally and physically.

seems like the quality is lower than usual in this one!

@THUNKShow

6 жыл бұрын

It just got uploaded, so your local KZread server hasn't downloaded a hi-res copy yet. Just wait a bit, & check the quality in your settings. :)

@theuglyhat8718

6 жыл бұрын

okay, thx!

@krisztianiszak

6 жыл бұрын

I meant its content, lmao

@theuglyhat8718

6 жыл бұрын

Also, on the subject of the video. I would say that its reasonable to assume that all human thought is based on experience. After all without any input how can a thought appear to begin with? What information causes the thought to appear and what context makes the thought understandable? Some philosophers would say that humans are born with knowledge that causes human thought without any other stimuli but i personally believe that the human brain cant create a thought or even be called intelligence without having some sort of input for it to base that thought upon. A new brain can certainly respond to stimuli but without any stimuli to respond to how can you even call that intelligence? Do you have a different way of seeing it?

@konstantinbelyshev2514

6 жыл бұрын

it's an old debate. empiricists versus rationalists. so far, no one has won. and it seems that a good combination of the two is the only option. i also think he has a video on the channel that addresses this topic

What is the evidence for and against it?

lawls

The notion that human mind is "just the brain" is wrong on so many levels. It is not exactly hard to demonstrate how heavily processes in the body affect cognitive abilities. For example, the composition of gut bacteria has massive psychological consequences. Also, nearly all motivation for thought and action comes fro sensations within the body, not the brain.

Information is quantitative but consciousness is qualitative therefore you cannot upload your mind. That is an incoherent proposition.

@Jesse__H

6 жыл бұрын

At the final limits of science and understanding, we may come to discover that you are right, but doesn't it feel a little early to be calling off the whole thing, just yet?

@J.T.Stillwell3

6 жыл бұрын

Jesse H. No.

@wcropp1

6 жыл бұрын

I-Theist well, this gets into some strange philosophical territory. Neuronal firing doesn’t radically differ from logic gates in a computer, and computers can produce qualitative experiences, but only for some observer with subjectivity. This leaves out all of the other complicated chemistry going on in the human brain/body, but that can be described quantitatively, though it would be extremely complex to do, in practical terms. The question is, can you make the “computer” experience its own “display,” so to speak. If we could replicate all the synaptic connections and neuro-chemistry, the body, etc., and “upload” all your memories, it should essentially be your clone. Whether it would be “you” or not is another matter. We essentially create qualitative impressions out of quantitative data, so it can be done. Whether or not we can create something different from ourselves and still integrate that representation into a self-experiencing subjective entity, much less transfer a lifetime of experiences into a new body/brain, is an open question. It will, at the very least, require some serious progress in our understanding of how consciousness works, and some extremely powerful computers. Who knows how sensitive consciousness is to our exact biological makeup. To what extent dolphins or cyborgs and robots can be considered conscious is hard to say. It seems as though we could say, at minimum, that animals are conscious in a different way than we are, or to a lesser degree perhaps. At the same time, I don’t consider someone with an artificial limb that is wired into their nervous system any less conscious. It may not just be the connections or function of our nervous system, though-the “wetware” we are made out of may matter as well, to some degree or another.

@ismael1957

6 жыл бұрын

No, information is by definition meaningful, so not only quantitative