Is it Impossible?

[Fred56]

Any bridge will do, we aren't picky about these things... We just have to keep an eye out for dudes with shiny badges, or glowing swords...

[Eureko]

Depends on what you count as "something" and "previous knowledge". From my knowledge of psychology, what is called priming demonstrates that people form all sorts of random associations with everything they know. Whenever you think of a word, you automatically think of multiple words that sound similar, are spelled similar, are used in sentences together, share some logical connection, etc.

 

If you had a thought but could not associate any previous knowledge with it, you would be unable to remember it or communicate it. Just another bunch of neurons firing and forgotten.

 

I agree with him.

But also I have always herd it is impossible, and it is a lost of time to try to think anything. This is the way we create knowledge, everything comes from our environment by our relationships with it (ecology) and there´s no way to create something new, as he said, we wouln´t have a way to express it or to understand it since we explain to ourselves everything by comparing new knowledge with older one. For example: the atomic model.

[MrSandman]

Wissen gibt Kraft. I just thought of it cause I just read it. I have no previous knowledge of Wissen gibt Kraft. You have to start somewhere? right?

[Mr Skeptic]

Wissen gibt Kraft. I just thought of it cause I just read it. I have no previous knowledge of Wissen gibt Kraft. You have to start somewhere? right?

 

Ever hear of Kraft foods? If I knew what you were talking about, I would probably have a real-world example of related knowledge.

[Eureko]

Don´t use me as an example, please!

[Mr Skeptic]

Don´t use me as an example, please!

 

Why not? Eureko sounds like eureka!, an exclamation of discovery. Discovery is related to knowledge, and knowledge is strength (or at least can prevent people from making a fool of themselves :doh: ). Strength in German is Kraft, which is the name of a cheesy food company. So now I linked your name to cheese

[Eureko]

Why not? Eureko sounds like eureka!, an exclamation of discovery. Discovery is related to knowledge, and knowledge is strength (or at least can prevent people from making a fool of themselves :doh: ). Strength in German is Kraft, which is the name of a cheesy food company. So now I linked your name to cheese

 

Oh, yes, haha, I know. I was just joking. So, you don´t think we can get knowledge from anywhere, right? We can´t create knowledge. It sounds like Thermodynamic First Law: Knowledge can´t be created (destroyed?) only can be transformed. Sounds good.

[Mr Skeptic]

Oh, yes, haha, I know. I was just joking. So, you don´t think we can get knowledge from anywhere, right? We can´t create knowledge. It sounds like Thermodynamic First Law: Knowledge can´t be created (destroyed?) only can be transformed. Sounds good.

 

I do think we can create knowledge, but the way we function seems to require that the knowledge be linked to something. However, this would bring up quite a conundrum, as to do that we need to start with some knowledge.

[Eureko]

I do think we can create knowledge, but the way we function seems to require that the knowledge be linked to something. However, this would bring up quite a conundrum, as to do that we need to start with some knowledge.

 

No, no, so we can´t create, we can GET knowledge, and order it, discover it and formulate it. But never create. Maybe it is a vice of the lenguage that we say it so many times, I believe.

[Fred56]

Knowledge isn't the accumulated facts so much as the accumulation of facts. We expend energy to acquire it (energy or food), just as with any observation. So we, in that sense, are the sum total of the observation we have done since we started to observe, so to speak.

 

This statement is directly true of any individual life, as of the metaphorical sense of the entire group. This kind of explains evolution and teleology, methinks, thinks me. You think?

[iNow]

New facts must be associated with old ones properly in order to form the net we describe as knowledge.

 

If I told you boil at 100, freeze at 0, and refreshing, you'd have three facts about water but no knowledge about it. You would have no "concept" of water. This is why I say that you must associate those facts to the web of existing facts you've acquired in order for it to appropriately be classified as knowledge. Water is the conceptual torso on which the facts (or limbs) get hung.

[MrSandman]

Okay, try this

 

cimbidle giffle serric

[amiya]

What about visionaries such as Leonardo da Vinci or Jules Verne who thought ahead of their time and saw (visualized) what was not there then?

 

It is indeed tough, but never impossible.

[foodchain]

That’s the thing though, anything you think about you already know about, even if through association.

 

I cannot think of anything 100% novel. For as long as I have been using this question at social gatherings of any type I have never been able to see someone beat it, in thinking of something truly novel. The thing then to me is of course the aspect of learning, which means of course like the bronze age to the computer age, or that its environmental really I think, which would make perfect sense I guess in how the neuron would work, even if its weird to think chemical/physical bonds leading to some structure like a brain cell would allow the existence of a Twinkie.

[christiannnna]

What about if you were reading some crazy random book about something you have never ever hear dof before in your whole entire life.

As your reading it, dont you think that your thinking of it aswell??

 

so.. er im confused. but i think its possible.

[Kyrisch]

What about if you were reading some crazy random book about something you have never ever hear dof before in your whole entire life.

As your reading it, dont you think that your thinking of it aswell??

 

so.. er im confused. but i think its possible.

 

 

But in order to understand it, you have to tie it to something that you already know. Otherwise it would not be able to be processed at all. It's like asking the question of whether you can fathom something that is truly unfathomable. The answer is no.

[CaptainPanic]

I probably came closest to thinking about unassociated things when I was very ill, with high fever. My dreams were very abstract and didn't seem to make any sense.

 

But I don't think I can claim that they were unassociated thoughts, because I don't believe that is possible. You will automatically search for associations with anything you see, smell, hear, feel, taste.

[hemantc007]

dreams are non sense because they just show non- sense .....

 

have you ever thought about your dreams .........when you try to make sense out of that ,it just can't you can not link events in you dream. For eg i saw is dream in which , i was in a house (not mine) but still , it was as if in you data base it is fixed that it is you home ...in second i open the door and there is a cow , she ran behind me i went to a big storie building , and the non sense part is that the coww also came there......

 

it all is just none sense........

[iNow]

No. That is not correct, hemantc007.

[hemantc007]

no. That is not correct, hemantc007.

indeed it is correct .

Try it for you own self ........

And still you find that , you are able to make sense of you dream then ,it might be that might be that my dream are none sense able and yours are are sense able

"or you and me are quite different"

[iNow]

No, again, you are mistaken, and I encourage you to study more on dreams before making further comments about them.

 

Our neural architecture is incredibly plastic, and dreams server an important function in consolidating experience and memory. They are a lot like a disk defrag program on your computer, where they help to sort information and maximize capacity. They are powerful parts of our ability to learn and remember, and our emotional state plays largely into which experiences we remember more profoundly. Dreams help bring together those emotions with our experiences so we remember the important ones better later. a

 

Dreams actually make a lot of sense when you have studied why we have them, and if you have a good enough understanding of the context in which you are having the dream. Your understanding of the dream content will significantly improve if you pay better attention to what is happening in your waking life, since that's the primary driver of our dream content... Our conscious experience. What have you been thinking and doing? What has been stressing you out? What have you been learning? ... That type of thing.

 

The only reason you say it's nonsense is because you don't understand them. However, that just shows one thing... Your inability to describe or understand your dream scenarios with your conscious mind... not that your dreams are nonsense or meaningless.

 

In other words, your comments are not correct, hemantc007.

[cosmaximus]

A common phrase used by those suffering from depression, and/or academic retardation.

 

haha i give u a high five i love the word choice you used

 

never say impossible you might be sitting there one day when something brand new comes to ur mind where u never thought of it before anything can happen in life everything is unpredictable

[hemantc007]

might be .........i still think they are not much of use . and most of the time we don't see dreams (or we don't remember them) ........

on the other side it might be true that it act like defrag program then it is good ....

but you must admit that dreams make no sense if we think about them , there logic .......

 

 

thanks.........!!!!!!!!!!!

[iNow]

but you must admit that dreams make no sense if we think about them , there logic .......

No. I don't have to admit any such thing since it's plainly untrue, hemantc007.

[hemantc007]

I mean to say that in the dream sequence are not logical , in the dream first scene mostly does not match up with its later scene .

 

I accept that it act as refresher for our memory and brain.