![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 18 of 18. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by Estella on August 1, 2006, at 9:30:55
If I have a pain in my little finger...
And I anesthetise my leg...
And I cut a little hole in my leg...
And I stick my little finger into the little hole in my leg...
Then...
Do I have a pain in my leg?Or...
(A varient on the theme)
If I have a pain in my little finger...
And I anesthetise your leg...
And I cut a little hole in your leg...
And I stick my little finger into the little hole in your leg...
Then...
Do you have a pain in your leg?(The examples get crasser as I'm sure you can imagine)
Don't ya just love philosophy?
ROFL.
Time for bed methinks...
Posted by Phillipa on August 1, 2006, at 11:46:00
In reply to Poll, posted by Estella on August 1, 2006, at 9:30:55
All I know is that you're not cutting any holes in me. Well maybe my head!!!!! Love Phillipa
Posted by Kath on August 1, 2006, at 14:03:45
In reply to Poll, posted by Estella on August 1, 2006, at 9:30:55
Posted by Estella on August 1, 2006, at 22:23:16
In reply to Re: Poll - eeeeoooooo - not for the squeamish :-) (nm), posted by Kath on August 1, 2006, at 14:03:45
I see what you mean.
I was going to say 'no legs were harmed' but that is begging the question somewhat.a less icky example:
there is a pain in my finger
my finger is in my mouth
____________________________
there is a pain in my mouth(but then people worry about whether holes complicate matters slightly so i went with the leg example)
Posted by Phillipa on August 1, 2006, at 22:51:00
In reply to Re: er... yeah... sorry... » Kath, posted by Estella on August 1, 2006, at 22:23:16
Ask Bob for philosophy board? Love Phillipa
Posted by Estella on August 2, 2006, at 2:02:50
In reply to Re: er... yeah... sorry... » Estella, posted by Phillipa on August 1, 2006, at 22:51:00
> Ask Bob for philosophy board? Love Phillipa
I don't think there is enough general interest... I guess I found the example to be fairly funny. Not funny in a self harm kind of way. I don't know. Maybe I shouldn't have posted it. It was late and after working for however many hours it struck me as strangely amusing, however.
It is part of a more general worry about mental states that goes like this:
After images (as a mental state) can be yellowy orange
Brain states cannot be yellowy orange (because the brain is black and white and blue and grey)
______________________________________________
After images cannot be brain states (by Leibniz law)BUT: Materialists grant that mental processes are brain processes (and materialism is the most widely accepted position in the philosophy of mind). They need to say something about this...
Probably the best way to go (IMHO) is to say that mental processes aren't literally yellowy orange. Rather they represent yellowy orange. Brain processes aren't literally yellowy orange either. Rather they represent yellowy orange. Like how a graph can represent high pitched sound without being high pitched sound.
So... Pains aren't located. When I say 'I have a pain in my toe' That should be translated into 'I am having an experience (which is a brain process) that represents pain (some kind of bodily damage) in my toe'. But then there are problems with
pain 1 (bodily damage)
pain 2 (the experience that represents bodily damage)does 'pain' normally track pain 1 or pain 2 (it is possible for them to come apart when a leg is anethetised or in cases of phantom limb pain or deferred pain). Seems that 'pain' tracks pain 2 and hence... There aren't any such things as pains in toes. In fact... Pain seems to be something like:
The experience that represents bodily damage which is typically caused by certain kinds of bodily damage.
But then we shouldn't say that pains are in toes.
But... Enough already.
And now for the million dollar question...
How does this relate to emotions?
z
zzz
I miss you
z.
Posted by Phillipa on August 2, 2006, at 20:53:25
In reply to Re: pain » Phillipa, posted by Estella on August 2, 2006, at 2:02:50
Estella most of it went over my head but I know of referred pain . Pain where an injury isn't it is just felt there. Like a pain in your shoulder could be a heart attack or gall bladder attack. And when a limb is aputated the person still feels the limb. And there was a theory I forget where if you have a pain lets say in your back and then stub you toe. The pain in your back won't be felt as the body can only deal with pain in one place at a time. Oh I'm sure I'm wrong but what the heck? I miss you too. And that was sweet to say it. Love Jan
Posted by Estella on August 2, 2006, at 22:54:06
In reply to Re: pain » Estella, posted by Phillipa on August 2, 2006, at 20:53:25
> Estella most of it went over my head but I know of referred pain . Pain where an injury isn't it is just felt there. Like a pain in your shoulder could be a heart attack or gall bladder attack. And when a limb is aputated the person still feels the limb. And there was a theory I forget where if you have a pain lets say in your back and then stub you toe. The pain in your back won't be felt as the body can only deal with pain in one place at a time. Oh I'm sure I'm wrong but what the heck? I miss you too. And that was sweet to say it. Love Jan
yes yes yes :-)
hallucination - phantom limb pain
illusion - deferred pain (heart attack and pain in shoulder)those show that pain is representational :-)
yeah... i do ramble on sometimes...
sorry 'bout that.
Posted by Phillipa on August 2, 2006, at 23:15:58
In reply to Re: pain » Phillipa, posted by Estella on August 2, 2006, at 22:54:06
I remember the Gates Theory!!!!!!Love Jan ps you don't ramble. You're just smarter than me
Posted by Estella on August 3, 2006, at 0:18:02
In reply to Re: pain » Estella, posted by Phillipa on August 2, 2006, at 23:15:58
:-O
Do you mean gate control theory?
(about how top down processes like concentration, anxiety, happiness etc impact on... the experience of pain / the intensity of the experience of pain)
?
Posted by Phillipa on August 3, 2006, at 20:44:05
In reply to Re: pain » Phillipa, posted by Estella on August 3, 2006, at 0:18:02
More like if you're feeling pain in one area the gate closes down and you don't feel pain in other areas. Hard to explain Love Phillipa
Posted by Estella on August 3, 2006, at 22:45:35
In reply to Re: pain » Estella, posted by Phillipa on August 3, 2006, at 20:44:05
> More like if you're feeling pain in one area the gate closes down and you don't feel pain in other areas. Hard to explain Love Phillipa
Ah. Like if you have a sore little finger and then you break your leg you feel your leg alright but not your finger anymore?
That is interesting... Thanks for that :-)
Posted by Phillipa on August 3, 2006, at 22:52:08
In reply to Re: pain » Phillipa, posted by Estella on August 3, 2006, at 22:45:35
Yup good analogy. Love Phillipa
Posted by Estella on August 7, 2006, at 3:49:12
In reply to Re: pain » Estella, posted by Phillipa on August 3, 2006, at 22:52:08
Aaaaaaaaaaaaah.
The Melzack-Wall gate‘The journey begins at the skin, with receptors sometimes called nociceptors that respond with some degree of specificity to a variety of noxious events: mechanical distortion, intensities of heat and cold and chemical changes, for instance. The outputs of these receptors travel brain-ward through at least two very different types of fibres: swiftly through the large myelinated A-fibres, and slowly through the narrow, unmyelinated C-fibres. Both signals arrive at the substantia gelatinosa, the midbrain gateway, where a complicated interaction takes place. A-fibres also send effects inwards via other channels. The A- and C-fibres seem to make two different functional contributions. On the one hand, it seems that the C-fibres are the preponderant transmitters of “slow”, “deep”, “aching”, or “visceral” pains, while A-fibres are implicated in “sharp”, “bright”, “stabbing” pains. Recently Melzack and Wall have suggested a more interesting function for the A-fibres. They act at the substantia gelatinosa to inhibit the effect of the C-fibres, thus closing the gate to pain-impulse transmission, or at least damping the output of that gate. Moreover, the A-fibre channels that bypass the Melzack-Wall gate in the substantia gelatinosa seem to initiate more central activity that sends inhibitory signals back down to the gate, further blocking the transmission of impulses from the C-fibres'.
'Why You Can't Make a Computer that Feels Pain' pp. 199-200 in "Brainstorms: Philosophical Essays on Mind and Psychology"
So...
shart, bright, stabbing pains inhibit slow, deep, aching pains.
I've never heard of 'bright' pain before...
:-)
Posted by Jost on August 7, 2006, at 12:35:32
In reply to Poll, posted by Estella on August 1, 2006, at 9:30:55
> If I have a pain in my little finger...
> And I anesthetise my leg...
> And I cut a little hole in my leg...
> And I stick my little finger into the little hole in my leg...
> Then...
> Do I have a pain in my leg?
>
> Or...
>
> (A varient on the theme)
>
> If I have a pain in my little finger...
> And I anesthetise your leg...
> And I cut a little hole in your leg...
> And I stick my little finger into the little hole in your leg...
> Then...
> Do you have a pain in your leg?
>
> (The examples get crasser as I'm sure you can imagine)
>
> Don't ya just love philosophy?
>
> ROFL.
>
> Time for bed methinks...Dunno, but you're not getting anywhere near my leg!
Jost
Posted by Phillipa on August 7, 2006, at 19:40:14
In reply to Re: pain » Phillipa, posted by Estella on August 7, 2006, at 3:49:12
Estella here's the one I know. Love Phillipa
http://www.holistic-online.com/REMEDIES/Backpain/back_pain_gate_control_theory.htm
Posted by Estella on August 8, 2006, at 6:47:00
In reply to Re: Poll, posted by Jost on August 7, 2006, at 12:35:32
tee hee!
but what happened to the AVERSIVENESS of pain thats what i want to know ;-)
Posted by Estella on August 8, 2006, at 6:57:40
In reply to Re: pain Gate Theory » Estella, posted by Phillipa on August 7, 2006, at 19:40:14
Yes thats the same one that Dennett was talking about. I thought that Dennett would be rather outdated on his neuro-biology about now, but perhaps the story is still essentially correct so far as it goes it is just that more detail has been added. Dunno...
:-)
This is the end of the thread.
Psycho-Babble Social | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.