Thoughts?

Studies of mental functions, behaviors and the nervous system.

Moderators: Calilasseia, ADParker

Thoughts?

#1  Postby reno88 » Mar 18, 2014 2:17 am

So i have a few question on my head from a loong time i couldnt find and answers on it and its about thoughts !!!So i heard that human have 50000 average thoughts a day from wake up until sleep so i did some research on the internet and some say thoughts are energy and some same its chemicals and some say its matter so i am really confused about this matter and i need help in finding answers for it here i will post some of the questions here .1: what are thoughts made of ?2: is it an energy as they say in spiritual science and chakra systems ?3:where does it come from and how does it form in the brain ?4: does it get stored in the brain or does it get released?5: if it get released from the body then how ?6: there is homoestasis in everything in biology then how does this apply to thoughts ?This subject is new to me and i couldnt get final answers from spiritual science and philosophies so i hope i can find it in scientific point of view ?
reno88
THREAD STARTER
 
Name: rayan
Posts: 3

Turkey (tr)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Thoughts?

#2  Postby Imza » Mar 20, 2014 6:25 pm

It's hard for me figure out exactly what your asking for here but thoughts or perhaps you cognition in general can be studied in two broad categories in science, basically brain activity and behavior.

Specific thoughts at the brain level are very hard to study with any specificity at current time but neuroscientists have made strides in figuring out various parts of the brains that are responsible for thoughts. So to answer your question, thoughts are made up of brain activity in those areas of the brain that are linked with different types of thoughts. At the behavior level, thoughts are covert behaviors that function largely like many overt behaviors but are distinguished by their inaccessibility to others.

Both of the above are very broad ideas of what "thoughts" are from a scientific perspective but if you have any specifics beyond that, I can see if I can answer those.
Imza
 
Name: Imza
Posts: 219
Male

Country: United States
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Thoughts?

#3  Postby seeker » Mar 24, 2014 5:36 pm

reno88 wrote: 1: what are thoughts made of ?2: is it an energy as they say in spiritual science and chakra systems ?3:where does it come from and how does it form in the brain ?4: does it get stored in the brain or does it get released?5: if it get released from the body then how ?6: there is homoestasis in everything in biology then how does this apply to thoughts ?

According to simulation theory (see http://www.hesslow.com/GHNew/neuroscien ... w%20OP.pdf , http://lup.lub.lu.se/luur/download?func ... Id=2255705 ), thoughts are covert simulations of perception and action, they are not "energy", they come from perception and action, they don't get "stored" (but there are neural changes that alter their probability of occurrence). Regarding the issue of homeostasis, cognitive dissonance theory (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance) proposes that humans strive for internal consistency between beliefs, but this search of consistency is restricted by many limitations of our cognitive abilities (e.g., see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bounded_rationality , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_bias , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arbitrary_inference , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Cognitive_biases , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biases , https://sites.google.com/site/maartenbo ... convenient , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heuristics ... ion-making )

reno88 wrote: This subject is new to me and i couldnt get final answers from spiritual science and philosophies so i hope i can find it in scientific point of view ?

I don't think you'll find "final answers" in science. The goal of science is not finding "final answers". In science you'll find a set of observations and a set of models for those observations. Both sets are open to further changes, so they're not "final answers".

Imza wrote:It's hard for me figure out exactly what your asking for here but thoughts or perhaps you cognition in general can be studied in two broad categories in science, basically brain activity and behavior.

I think there are other categories within which "thoughts" can be studied (without denying the categories that you've proposed so far). Sociology, anthropology and history can study "thoughts" as cultural products that can be transmitted from one person to another through direct and indirect means. Philosophy and logic can study "thoughts" as propositions and constructs, abstracted from their behavioral and neural instantiations.
seeker
 
Posts: 868

Print view this post

Re: Thoughts?

#4  Postby Imza » Mar 24, 2014 10:19 pm

seeker wrote:
Imza wrote:It's hard for me figure out exactly what your asking for here but thoughts or perhaps you cognition in general can be studied in two broad categories in science, basically brain activity and behavior.

I think there are other categories within which "thoughts" can be studied (without denying the categories that you've proposed so far). Sociology, anthropology and history can study "thoughts" as cultural products that can be transmitted from one person to another through direct and indirect means. Philosophy and logic can study "thoughts" as propositions and constructs, abstracted from their behavioral and neural instantiations.

I agree to some extent, I was trying to limit to the strictly natural science perspective as that is what I thought the intent of OP's question was. However, I don't see any problem with sociologists, anthropologists and historians also studying thoughts as behaviors, just not in the same scientific way as a psychologist would. Philosophers on the other hand study more the content of thought so that I can see as a separate category but again not something I'd consider a scientific definition of thoughts.
Imza
 
Name: Imza
Posts: 219
Male

Country: United States
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Thoughts?

#5  Postby kennyc » Apr 07, 2014 4:43 pm

not exactly, but perhaps Memes....
and part of a broader theory of information.
Kenny A. Chaffin
Art Gallery - Photo Gallery - Writing&Poetry
"Strive on with Awareness" - Siddhartha Gautama
User avatar
kennyc
 
Name: Kenny A. Chaffin
Posts: 8698
Male

Country: U.S.A.
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Thoughts?

#6  Postby kennyc » Apr 07, 2014 4:45 pm

Actually a very interesting topic provided we can drop the spiritual energy and chakra krap. :)
Last edited by kennyc on Apr 07, 2014 6:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Kenny A. Chaffin
Art Gallery - Photo Gallery - Writing&Poetry
"Strive on with Awareness" - Siddhartha Gautama
User avatar
kennyc
 
Name: Kenny A. Chaffin
Posts: 8698
Male

Country: U.S.A.
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Thoughts?

#7  Postby Agrippina » Apr 07, 2014 6:30 pm

Try reading an article from Psychology Today.

It seems that, before one experiences a conscious thought, unconscious brain processes work behind the scenes to generate the thought. During this opaque process, unconscious representations and calculations seem to be involved. The great Hermann von Helmholtz referred to these behind-the-scenes processes as "unconscious inferences," and Wilhelm Wundt, the father of experimental psychology, referred to conscious thought as a high-level "apperception," because it involves more unconscious analyses and interpretations than does what he considered to be normal "perception," which, to him, could transpire unconsciously.

Edward Chace Tolman—the great experimentalist and theoretician in psychology, after whom the psychology building at Berkeley is named—was the first to demonstrate that thoughts (e.g., memories about the layout of a maze) influence action. Tolman demonstrated that the maze-solving behavior of the rat could not be due to just external cues but required information that resided only in the rat's mind, information he referred to as a "cognitive map." The fancy term for thoughts in cognitive science and neuroscience is "mental representation," which continues to be a tricky term because some thoughts (e.g., moods, the perception of tinnitus) do not seem to be very concerned with "representing." (There is also debate about whether thoughts are in a perceptual or non-perceptual format.) Tolman was the first to demonstrate systematically that thoughts of some kind are necessary to explain overt behavior.
Illegitimi non carborundum
User avatar
Agrippina
 
Posts: 36690
Age: 110
Female

Country: South Africa
South Africa (za)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Thoughts?

#8  Postby DavidMcC » Apr 16, 2014 2:26 pm

Agrippina wrote:Try reading an article from Psychology Today.

It seems that, before one experiences a conscious thought, unconscious brain processes work behind the scenes to generate the thought. During this opaque process, unconscious representations and calculations seem to be involved. The great Hermann von Helmholtz referred to these behind-the-scenes processes as "unconscious inferences," and Wilhelm Wundt, the father of experimental psychology, referred to conscious thought as a high-level "apperception," because it involves more unconscious analyses and interpretations than does what he considered to be normal "perception," which, to him, could transpire unconsciously.

....

The problem with these unconscious thoughts is that they are only good at producing an appropriate response if the situation is exactly what we evolved to deal with, with no complicating factors that would not have occurred in our evolutionary past, or that we have been trained to deal with by learned habit, to consciously consider before responding.
May The Voice be with you!
DavidMcC
 
Name: David McCulloch
Posts: 14913
Age: 67
Male

Country: United Kigdom
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Thoughts?

#9  Postby SpeedOfSound » Apr 16, 2014 11:52 pm

reno88 wrote:So i have a few question on my head from a loong time i couldnt find and answers on it and its about thoughts !!!So i heard that human have 50000 average thoughts a day from wake up until sleep so i did some research on the internet and some say thoughts are energy and some same its chemicals and some say its matter so i am really confused about this matter and i need help in finding answers for it here i will post some of the questions here .1: what are thoughts made of ?2: is it an energy as they say in spiritual science and chakra systems ?3:where does it come from and how does it form in the brain ?4: does it get stored in the brain or does it get released?5: if it get released from the body then how ?6: there is homoestasis in everything in biology then how does this apply to thoughts ?This subject is new to me and i couldnt get final answers from spiritual science and philosophies so i hope i can find it in scientific point of view ?

Thoughts are a movement through a series of phases in your brain. It has a map and stepping mechanism. On some computer modified brain scans you can see them as wisps of color flickering across the cortex. The maps are probably in the hippocampus and the stepping motor is a complex of activity between that, your thalamus, and basal ganglia. If you scan a brain while your body is doing something with muscles like hitting a tennis ball you will see the same patterns.

These patterns certainly are energy and better yet patterns of energy kind of like the northern lights. I'm sure some of the eastern mumbo jumbo is recoverable from the physical reality of what happens in your mind. It's all quite beautiful.
User avatar
SpeedOfSound
RS Donator
 
Posts: 32086
Age: 70
Male

Kyrgyzstan (kg)
Print view this post

Re: Thoughts?

#10  Postby SpeedOfSound » Apr 17, 2014 12:12 am

Agrippina wrote:Try reading an article from Psychology Today.

It seems that, before one experiences a conscious thought, unconscious brain processes work behind the scenes to generate the thought. During this opaque process, unconscious representations and calculations seem to be involved. The great Hermann von Helmholtz referred to these behind-the-scenes processes as "unconscious inferences," and Wilhelm Wundt, the father of experimental psychology, referred to conscious thought as a high-level "apperception," because it involves more unconscious analyses and interpretations than does what he considered to be normal "perception," which, to him, could transpire unconsciously.

Edward Chace Tolman—the great experimentalist and theoretician in psychology, after whom the psychology building at Berkeley is named—was the first to demonstrate that thoughts (e.g., memories about the layout of a maze) influence action. Tolman demonstrated that the maze-solving behavior of the rat could not be due to just external cues but required information that resided only in the rat's mind, information he referred to as a "cognitive map." The fancy term for thoughts in cognitive science and neuroscience is "mental representation," which continues to be a tricky term because some thoughts (e.g., moods, the perception of tinnitus) do not seem to be very concerned with "representing." (There is also debate about whether thoughts are in a perceptual or non-perceptual format.) Tolman was the first to demonstrate systematically that thoughts of some kind are necessary to explain overt behavior.

It can be misleading to make that distinction in my opinion. So called unconscious thoughts are like if you submerged a big tree in dark water, upside down, so just the trunk and a few lower branches was visible. Our cognitive habits have us thinking in terms of a few branches, as concepts, while the complexity of the entire structure falls invisible beneath.
User avatar
SpeedOfSound
RS Donator
 
Posts: 32086
Age: 70
Male

Kyrgyzstan (kg)
Print view this post

Re: Thoughts?

#11  Postby Templeton » Apr 17, 2014 3:35 am

Cognitively, every thought - a collection of associative neuro-pathways. The process is both electrical and chemical.
For every thought, a chemical response from the endocrine system.
Templeton
 
Posts: 473

Country: USA
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Thoughts?

#12  Postby DavidMcC » Apr 17, 2014 5:21 pm

SpeedOfSound wrote:
Agrippina wrote:Try reading an article from Psychology Today.

It seems that, before one experiences a conscious thought, unconscious brain processes work behind the scenes to generate the thought. During this opaque process, unconscious representations and calculations seem to be involved. The great Hermann von Helmholtz referred to these behind-the-scenes processes as "unconscious inferences," and Wilhelm Wundt, the father of experimental psychology, referred to conscious thought as a high-level "apperception," because it involves more unconscious analyses and interpretations than does what he considered to be normal "perception," which, to him, could transpire unconsciously.

Edward Chace Tolman—the great experimentalist and theoretician in psychology, after whom the psychology building at Berkeley is named—was the first to demonstrate that thoughts (e.g., memories about the layout of a maze) influence action. Tolman demonstrated that the maze-solving behavior of the rat could not be due to just external cues but required information that resided only in the rat's mind, information he referred to as a "cognitive map." The fancy term for thoughts in cognitive science and neuroscience is "mental representation," which continues to be a tricky term because some thoughts (e.g., moods, the perception of tinnitus) do not seem to be very concerned with "representing." (There is also debate about whether thoughts are in a perceptual or non-perceptual format.) Tolman was the first to demonstrate systematically that thoughts of some kind are necessary to explain overt behavior.

It can be misleading to make that distinction in my opinion. So called unconscious thoughts are like if you submerged a big tree in dark water, upside down, so just the trunk and a few lower branches was visible. Our cognitive habits have us thinking in terms of a few branches, as concepts, while the complexity of the entire structure falls invisible beneath.

So why, then, is it supposed to be "unhelpful" to think in terms of the big picture (of consciousness) minus the tiresome details as processed by the "zombie agents" of the unconscious mind, if that is the reality of perception?
May The Voice be with you!
DavidMcC
 
Name: David McCulloch
Posts: 14913
Age: 67
Male

Country: United Kigdom
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Thoughts?

#13  Postby SpeedOfSound » Apr 17, 2014 6:16 pm

DavidMcC wrote:
SpeedOfSound wrote:
Agrippina wrote:Try reading an article from Psychology Today.

It seems that, before one experiences a conscious thought, unconscious brain processes work behind the scenes to generate the thought. During this opaque process, unconscious representations and calculations seem to be involved. The great Hermann von Helmholtz referred to these behind-the-scenes processes as "unconscious inferences," and Wilhelm Wundt, the father of experimental psychology, referred to conscious thought as a high-level "apperception," because it involves more unconscious analyses and interpretations than does what he considered to be normal "perception," which, to him, could transpire unconsciously.

Edward Chace Tolman—the great experimentalist and theoretician in psychology, after whom the psychology building at Berkeley is named—was the first to demonstrate that thoughts (e.g., memories about the layout of a maze) influence action. Tolman demonstrated that the maze-solving behavior of the rat could not be due to just external cues but required information that resided only in the rat's mind, information he referred to as a "cognitive map." The fancy term for thoughts in cognitive science and neuroscience is "mental representation," which continues to be a tricky term because some thoughts (e.g., moods, the perception of tinnitus) do not seem to be very concerned with "representing." (There is also debate about whether thoughts are in a perceptual or non-perceptual format.) Tolman was the first to demonstrate systematically that thoughts of some kind are necessary to explain overt behavior.

It can be misleading to make that distinction in my opinion. So called unconscious thoughts are like if you submerged a big tree in dark water, upside down, so just the trunk and a few lower branches was visible. Our cognitive habits have us thinking in terms of a few branches, as concepts, while the complexity of the entire structure falls invisible beneath.

So why, then, is it supposed to be "unhelpful" to think in terms of the big picture (of consciousness) minus the tiresome details as processed by the "zombie agents" of the unconscious mind, if that is the reality of perception?

The reality of perception is that it has as it's domain a physical description. Our hopes about perception is that we will end up illuminating a completely different domain consisting of our folk-psychologic language, which is of course a matter of which language our tribe speaks. Thought is something from the latter domain. Using the term 'unconscious thought' is a category error. Our folk-psych is a bit of human behavior. The thing we want to illuminate.

Now if we started out to illuminate the behavior of gophers by letting the gophers choose our scientific terminology how far do you think we would get?
User avatar
SpeedOfSound
RS Donator
 
Posts: 32086
Age: 70
Male

Kyrgyzstan (kg)
Print view this post

Re: Thoughts?

#14  Postby SpeedOfSound » Apr 17, 2014 6:17 pm

Oh wait! That IS exactly as far as we get with any of these threads. :lol:
User avatar
SpeedOfSound
RS Donator
 
Posts: 32086
Age: 70
Male

Kyrgyzstan (kg)
Print view this post

Re: Thoughts?

#15  Postby Cito di Pense » Apr 17, 2014 6:48 pm

There are several ways to go with this question:

The first assumes that your thoughts are being controlled from outside your body, and simply wants to regain control; another is not the result of such paranoia but emerges from a genuine desire to accomplish something by just thinking, like bending a spoon. Beyond that, the sense that there's anything intellectual in simply thinking about thinking is an old, old dodge.
Хлопнут без некролога. -- Серге́й Па́влович Королёв

Translation by Elbert Hubbard: Do not take life too seriously. You're not going to get out of it alive.
User avatar
Cito di Pense
 
Name: Al Forno, LLD,LDL,PPM
Posts: 29554
Age: 23
Male

Country: The Heartland
Mongolia (mn)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Thoughts?

#16  Postby SpeedOfSound » Apr 17, 2014 9:24 pm

I just now had an unconscious thought about that but I can't remember what it was. :oops:
User avatar
SpeedOfSound
RS Donator
 
Posts: 32086
Age: 70
Male

Kyrgyzstan (kg)
Print view this post

Re: Thoughts?

#17  Postby kennyc » Apr 17, 2014 9:33 pm

SpeedOfSound wrote:I just now had an unconscious thought about that but I can't remember what it was. :oops:


Meh, that was just a subjective experience of shit. :lol: :lol: :lol:
Kenny A. Chaffin
Art Gallery - Photo Gallery - Writing&Poetry
"Strive on with Awareness" - Siddhartha Gautama
User avatar
kennyc
 
Name: Kenny A. Chaffin
Posts: 8698
Male

Country: U.S.A.
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Thoughts?

#18  Postby DavidMcC » Apr 18, 2014 10:23 am

SpeedOfSound wrote:
DavidMcC wrote:
SpeedOfSound wrote:
Agrippina wrote:Try reading an article from Psychology Today.


It can be misleading to make that distinction in my opinion. So called unconscious thoughts are like if you submerged a big tree in dark water, upside down, so just the trunk and a few lower branches was visible. Our cognitive habits have us thinking in terms of a few branches, as concepts, while the complexity of the entire structure falls invisible beneath.

So why, then, is it supposed to be "unhelpful" to think in terms of the big picture (of consciousness) minus the tiresome details as processed by the "zombie agents" of the unconscious mind, if that is the reality of perception?

The reality of perception is that it has as it's domain a physical description. Our hopes about perception is that we will end up illuminating a completely different domain consisting of our folk-psychologic language, which is of course a matter of which language our tribe speaks. Thought is something from the latter domain.

If we don't use the right language, we won't be understood correctly. Are you still using the term, "folk-psyche" to mean anything that Baars et al. have told you that you've got to discard, in their quest for self-publicity?
Using the term 'unconscious thought' is a category error. Our folk-psych is a bit of human behavior. The thing we want to illuminate.

I was playing to GrahamH.In this context, a "thought" is any neural activity that doesn't directly lead to movement. Thus, möst "thoughts" would be unconscious. I normally use the word to mean "conscious mental activity".
Now if we started out to illuminate the behavior of gophers by letting the gophers choose our scientific terminology how far do you think we would get?

:scratch:
When in a hole, stop digging, unless you're a gopher, of course.
May The Voice be with you!
DavidMcC
 
Name: David McCulloch
Posts: 14913
Age: 67
Male

Country: United Kigdom
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Thoughts?

#19  Postby cavarka9 » Jun 22, 2014 5:54 pm

From an evolutionary point of view.Thoughts have to exist probably for 2 reasons,both for the survival of species and the individual. One external motivation, the other internal motivation. It must be to either convince the others in ones own species about some food, mating opportunities etc. The other could be for internal consumption, to better ones chances by uniting the entire brain to a certain action which is beneficial to an individual and thereby the species. The fact that we have a variety of thoughts, not all useful, most irrelevant could mean that they are just broadcasts for the entire brain while originating at the instance of one particular part or the other.
Now, as for meditation, its use is in quieting the irrelevant thoughts. There by improving the signal to noise ratio. let the useful thoughts reverberate and let the worthless one leave.
Every moment is a choice.Choices you make now determine your destiny.free yourself of old choices made. Success is a journey,not a destination.
User avatar
cavarka9
 
Name: prajna
Posts: 3256

Country: 21.0000° N, 78.0000° E
India (in)
Print view this post


Return to Psychology & Neuroscience

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest