Help me brainstorm a thesis for my human philosophy paper.

[fuzzybabybunny]

So here's the train of thought:

1. You've got the environment, which is ALL of existence, all that can be known, etc.
2. You've got our DNA, which translates to genes, which in turn translates to our brain and our senses.
3. Human behavior is a result of stimuli from our environment.

The environment, which is all the information in the universe, passes through a thin pipe, which represents our senses. This pipe is the limiting factor to what we can percieve because our senses are by definition limited, unable to percieve all the information of the universe.

From this thin pipe pops out a small sphere, which represents the information our senses can physically gather, and is only a very small part of all the knowledge in the universe.

From this small sphere arises all of human behavior, that is, behavior as a result of stimuli from the environment that we are actually aware of.

Therefore human behavior is fundamentally limited.

Anyone got any ideas on a thesis that I can attach to this?

 

[fuzzybabybunny]

Original thread topic changed because it was stupid.

 

[DainBramaged]

Thesis: The answer to life is 42.

 

[eits]

you need to add in how thought comes into existence. there's no little guy sitting in your brain giving you thoughts. there's no thought nucleus in the brain.

without thought, there can't be behavior.

 

[fitzov]

Why the bleep is it called "human" philosophy? Is there any other kind?

 

[hjo3]

"Human behavior is limited."

Isn't everything?

 

[dug777]

Originally posted by: fitzov
Why the bleep is it called "human" philosophy? Is there any other kind?

don't forget the camels!

 

[dopcombo]

how about how human philosophies such as the variou religions would have evolved differently if we had the ability to say.... sense what other people are thinking?

 

[Jeff7]

It was unfortunately said already, in The Matrix, or at least I think it was there:
Your perception determines your reality.


Our consciousness depends on data input to form the basis of thoughts. If there is no external input, a conscious mind would likely not even be aware of itself in the sense that we are. That mind would have knowledge of only one concept: nothingness, but with no way to define even that.
Producing a mind like this would be nearly impossible, and simply immoral. It would involve isolating a zygote from all inputs from the time the first nerve fiber is formed. Even if it were possible to create this isolated consciousness, what happens if we try to study it? It's like finding a pocket of matter that is at true absolute zero, magically isolated from the rest of the Universe. As soon as you try to measure it, it would be contaminated with external heat sources, and is no longer at absolute zero, thus removing any need to study this pocket of matter.
Similarly, with this isolated consciousness, studying it would be impossible. Attempting to study it would mean subjecting it to external stimuli. Even if that were done, it would be unable to quantify anything. There would be no frame of reference whatsoever.

All this seemingly off-topic discussion is merely reinforcing the idea that our senses are the only routes for data to take to enter our minds. Any new thoughts we create are based off of information taken in by our senses.
We also have technology which can augment our limited senses, which has expanded our knowledge. Infrared telescopes can see things that our eyes can't, which enhances our understanding of the Universe. Studies show that some birds and insects can see ultraviolet wavelengths, which we can't. A flower that looks bland to us might have several different bandings of color, visible to those animals capable of seeing those wavelengths. This knowledge, obtained through technology, has expanded our understanding of animal and plant behavior.

 

[fuzzybabybunny]

Oh poopy. Any other ideas on how this could be used for a thesis? Or just give me a thesis to prove?