Professor Noam Chomsky, Massachusetts Institute of Technology: “The machine, the ghost, and the limits of understanding: Newton’s contributions to the study of mind” at the University of Oslo, September 2011. Q&A at 45:33

 

I push back on the limitations inferred by others so as to direct my mode of operation, “in a question form,” so as to move forward and not be stalled in my efforts. I believe I have made clear the difficulties as a logical directed outcome in presentation.

Internet development today asks how evolutionary consequence may be to influence forehead development( ahem……frontal cortex) when thought with regard to full brain used and direction is revealed in the keyboard displayed in the comment box. So while not being a cabby…..your a writer, a journalist. What MRI imaging would actually represent your correlative use of brain research information collection and pathway construction?

Chomsky refers back to this evolutionary inherent trait of human being identification in uteri manifestation. While referencing innate points of discussion it is interesting that such innateness may be limited to block of time or a  frame of reference in the evolutionary development of that consciousness.

Chomsky discusses the euclidean direction of development toward the evoking apparent correlation in of historical development. While there is some difficulty as to pointing out this feature in the Amazon tribe child toward such comprehension. A triangle is used and it’s comprehension as to the lines  of expression is explicit toward the imperfection of that triangle perceived.

See: A Priori Intuition of Space?

Link above brought forward contradictory data in  relation to the subject of innateness discussed by Chomsky.

There are a lot of things discussed that are included in the overall discussions I have had with others about how we perceive consciousness and perspectives shared by others that questions how it is that consciousness can be perceived apart from the body. How difficult it would be to make this measure if possible at all?

The empirical methodis generally taken to mean the approach of using a collection of data to base a theory or derive a conclusion in science. It is part of the scientific method, but is often mistakenly assumed to be synonymous with the experimental method. The empirical method is not sharply defined and is often contrasted with the precision of the experimental method, where data are derived from the systematic manipulation of variables in an experiment. Some of the difficulty in discussing the empirical method is from the ambiguity of the meaning of its linguist root: empiric.

The mind body problem is dismissed in this talk below as to demonstrate that the pathway to empirical methods had been established by Newton. For sake of clarity one would have to refer back to Chomsky video to clarify this issue and how we move forward in today’s world having arrive at a settled perspective about the mind body problem.

Further to this discussion in terms of the evolutionary the status quo of consciousness has not changed for 50000 years and example to help direct that perspective were raised in the contrast of a baby born in a tribe in the Amazon being raised in our modern day society and function quite well and a baby born in this modern society doing equally as well in the tribe.

Bold emphasized in order to provide a move toward this explanation outside of the NDE consideration… to see the theoretical position adopted and the attempts at an empirical method toward the development of that theory.

In the Q&A part of the lecture there is some correspondence in which a question is asked about this correlation of bits. Chomsky’s reference to Wheeler in that context.