⚠ CORRECTION!!! In this video, I said "this video is brought to you by the Diamond Mind Foundation." Well, as of December 2022, that is no longer the case. Sense of Mind is now 100% dependent on viewers like you. So if you value this content, please go to www.patreon.com/senseofmind. For less than $5 a month, you'll get exclusive content and the satisfaction of knowing you're helping to keep Sense of Mind alive! 🧠

New subscriber. Great content. Ill be going back through your catalogue 👍

This is amazing. Thank you Andrew!

The content of this video is real birds-eye-view of feelings. Very very informative. Thanks you for producing and sharing this on you tube.

Thanks for the information.

I haven't finished this one yet but I just wanted to say in general that I really appreciate you making these videos. I'm not a student, I'll probably never go to college, I'm a single mom in my early 30s with nothing but my GED, but I'm really interested in cognitive neuroscience. I don't think I would ever want to do it professionally, but it's a really great hobby. I've always just gone straight to studies, checking and double checking what other studies have to say about results. I don't really have anyone to talk to about this stuff so it's nice to hear another voice discuss it. Mainly though you mention how certain things are connected to one another in ways that I hadn't thought of which leads me down a new path of research. Maybe you could do a video about what makes certain people love to learn, It's something I keep coming back around to But the wanderlust gene seems to be more about travel? Idk. Anyway, I know how hard it is to get all of the information in order, try to figure out how people will absorb it best, the media to put with it to have it make sense and stay entertaining etc. It's all really difficult and I just want to say that I see and appreciate your efforts and what you're doing.

@eugenvataman7726

Жыл бұрын

What makes some people want to do x instead of y? I don't have any studies now to back this up, but I assume part of it is our reward pathway - We are driven by pleasure and reward. Some people's reward system (VTA, NAc, etc) respond differently to different activities. This would be the large overview. The genes associated with it I assume many would be related to dopamine receptors expression - higher densities, lower, etc and their sensitivity. There's more to pleasure and reward than dopamine of course. Early age conditioning may have a big part as well, but that probably shaped the reward pathway

Thank You. Lot of Learning.

@senseofmindshow

Жыл бұрын

Glad to hear it! Thanks for watching!

Where can I ask questions?

How many neurons to generate feeling ? Simplest one ? Pain ? Is there a particular way neurons need to be connected ?

Damn this channel is awesome! Also you look like the prince from the little mermaid

@senseofmindshow

Жыл бұрын

Haha thank you!

Can emotions be based is information theory ?

@PennyTe

5 ай бұрын

Bruh wtf r u saying fuk . Don't comment if u can't spell fukkkk

i guess emotions are not really made in the brain, it is processed in the brain, but it comes from relationships stimulus. even there is no relationship like one from your parents, the brain can only process that there is no emotion. I'm sure the brain cannot produce emotion apart from any human relationships.

I think emotions are chemical energy just like taste and smell

@senseofmindshow

Жыл бұрын

I can definitely agree (at least partially) with you, since emotions are a neurological phenomenon, which is composed of complex chemistry.

@Motive_Tube

Жыл бұрын

Interesting take. I would describe sensations (more specifically, sensory perception, which the science and associated research literature appears to show physically derives from - essentially - the synchronous neuro-synthesization of signals) as perhaps 1) as you describe (or perhaps, a kind of novel 'electro-chemical' energy state), while at the same time consisting of 2) a phenomenologically supervenient integrating function that yields a uniquely "critical" (intrinsically quali-tative) property. I.e., it derives a real axiological source of negative + positive evaluation (with the negative charge decidedly more powerful and aversive than the attractive force of the positive)... Difficult subject matter but anyhow, the aforementioned description corresponds with a critical review of my own interoception (and I would confidently predict for it to with any other neurotypical human) as well as (again, I would confidently argue) with empirically documented human (and other sentient species') externally observable patterns of expression + behavior. Of course the responsibly fallibilist mode of intellectual operation, coupled with the complex nature of the environment we humans exist in - indicate that, i.e., negative utilitarianism alone, is insufficient to navigate life rationally (i.e., in a maximally intellectually honest + most socially and practically functional + optimally effective, way). For instance, the social contract while technically evidentially and logically null *in itself*, is nonetheless critical to a responsible ethical system process. NU is essential though, and it isn't surprising that the "golden rule" (aka "golden law") including more notably (I would argue), its negative injunction (aka, prohibitive) form ("Do not treat others in ways that you would not like to be treated") - has been expressed so universally over such a vast expanse of human history... Basically an intuitive principle of reciprocity, which at its ultimate core is quite obviously rooted in the shared sentient sampling, synthesizing processing and understanding of intrinsically negative qualia which the term "suffering" symbolically represents but which absolutely (and of course self-evidently to any non-zombie or robot reading this) has a real referent. By modern humans particularly (and as opposed to any other known biological species or organism anywhere), this referent can be so clearly mentalized, conceptually modeled and socially co-understood due to 1) our sentience, 2) our sapience, and climactically 3) our highly-transmissible, storable, progressively constructive, denotively + connotatively high-resolution referential system of language)... Actually though, given inevitable (though in most if not all major ways, minimal) idosyncratic variations and/or pre-active uncertainty, more accurately it would make most empathic sense to treat others as _they_ would like to be treated. Of course, that can actually still be understood not to contradict the more original negative injunction 'golden rule' in the fundamental sense of not unnecessarily triggering stimuli that is inherently negative to another (aka, that which generates "suffering" *in another*) just as you wouldn't for them to trigger that end-effect in you...what that stimuli (aka, cause - not end-effect) is may differ, but the negative affect itself, is in itself, that which is prohibitive to (without evidentially and logically sound, overriding justification) impose on said "other". ...Because my mind obsessively searches for discrepancies or exceptions, I thought of an apparent anamoly to this, but the aforementioned point still remains intact: even in the atypical case of masochists, it is a particular pain mode pursued, not "suffering" ultimately. This is not bald assertion: the behaviorally observable evidence as well as much direct self-reported testimony from said individuals indicates that such abberance is actually motivated by a desire to escape a deeper trauma (pain) by imposing another novel source of pain that distracts from the former. Thus, therapeutic catharsis and recovery to help such victims in releasing themselves from such a self-destructive cycle - would arguably be the advised approach to support - over and instead of the alternative route of, say, following a face-value request to inflict physiological, verbal or otherwise pain on such (psychologically distraught) persons... P.S., Some of the many (-) golden rule expressions: "That which you hate to be done to you, do not do to another," "One should never do something to others that one would regard as an injury to one's own self. In brief, this is dharma. Anything else is succumbing to desire," "Do not do to others what you know has hurt yourself," "Why does one hurt others knowing what it is to be hurt?," "Whatever is disagreeable to yourself do not do unto others," "What is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow: this is the whole Torah; the rest is the explanation; go and learn," "Do to no one what you yourself dislike," "Recognize that your neighbor feels as you do, and keep in mind your own dislikes," "Is sorrow or pain desirable to you ?" If you say "yes it is", it would be a lie. If you say, "No, It is not" you will be expressing the truth. Just as sorrow or pain is not desirable to you, so it is to all which breathe, exist, live or have any essence of life. To you and all, it is undesirable, and painful, and repugnant," "What you do not wish for yourself, do not do to others," " never impose on others what you would not choose for yourself," "One who is going to take a pointed stick to pinch a baby bird should first try it on himself to feel how it hurts," "Trying to live according to the Golden Rule means trying to empathise with other people, including those who may be very different from us. Empathy is at the root of kindness, compassion, understanding and respect - qualities that we all appreciate being shown, whoever we are, whatever we think and wherever we come from. And although it isn’t possible to know what it really feels like to be a different person or live in different circumstances and have different life experiences, it isn’t difficult for most of us to imagine what would cause us suffering and to try to avoid causing suffering to others. For this reason many people find the Golden Rule’s corollary - "do not treat people in a way you would not wish to be treated yourself" - more pragmatic," "Do not do to others what you would not want them to do to you. [is] (…) the single greatest, simplest, and most important moral axiom humanity has ever invented, one which reappears in the writings of almost every culture and religion throughout history, the one we know as the Golden Rule. Moral directives do not need to be complex or obscure to be worthwhile, and in fact, it is precisely this rule's simplicity which makes it great. It is easy to come up with, easy to understand, and easy to apply, and these three things are the hallmarks of a strong and healthy moral system. The idea behind it is readily graspable: before performing an action which might harm another person, try to imagine yourself in their position, and consider whether you would want to be the recipient of that action. If you would not want to be in such a position, the other person probably would not either, and so you should not do it. It is the basic and fundamental human trait of empathy, the ability to vicariously experience how another is feeling, that makes this possible, and it is the principle of empathy by which we should live our lives," "Avoid doing what you would blame others for doing," etcetera etcetera

@Brancaalice

Ай бұрын

Well, emotions are energy in motion. That the way body connect itself. How the brain knows what go on when some part of it is upsetting. Fire arise and set things up, so the brain take decision what to do.

🤔 PЯӨMӨƧM

Do you have a partner whom you lecture about feelings?

@senseofmindshow

Жыл бұрын

Yes, but not just about feelings! Every other week, social neuroscientist Taylor Guthrie and I sit down to talk about neuroscience... In fact, we're doing a livestream today at 9:30am PT (12:30pm ET). Here's the link if you're interested: kzread.info/dash/bejne/nqVssrObpbOcYbg.html

@claudiamanta1943

Жыл бұрын

@@senseofmindshow 😄 Thank you.