Think about it. The more you learned about your brain the more complex it would become. Also I’m not sure we have enough capacity to reflect on ourselves by processing everything. Think about the massive complexity of every connection. Could someone actually process that or are we limited by ourselves?

  • benderbeerman@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    He who truly knows, knows that he knows not

    Or

    The more you know, the more you realize you don’t know.

    But also, understanding that about yourself doesn’t take more knowledge or intelligence than you currently have. As another user (darkdarkhouse)^ posted, you can understand how the brain works and still not have all the knowledge in the world (hard drive with a map/directory of the hard drive on it).

  • silly goose meekah@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    I don’t think brains get more complex because of additional information.

    Also, what I’m not sure you mean with having “enough capacity to reflect ourselves by processing everything”? Do you mean analyzing another brain or analyzing your own brain? Do you mean processing every time a neuron fires, and which neurons get what kind of stimulus from it? Or do you mean looking at all molecules/atoms/fundamental particles and considering their state and following reaction?

    I think we should be capable of understanding the concepts that make our brains work eventually. But I don’t think we have the capacity to monitor everything another brain is doing and understand/interpret it in real time, let alone our own brain. A computer might be able to at some point, when we understand more about neurology.

  • remotelove@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    I have been to some interesting places in my own brain with the help of psychedelics. While I have experienced different levels of self-awareness, the possibility of that “filling up my brain” is likely not possible.

    There is a part of the brain that psychedelics specifically affect that functions as kind of a traffic regulator. It typically only directs signals from one part of the brain to another part. Psychedelics open these pathways up and allow for information to flow to in all kinds of directions. (Synesthesia, sensory confusion, is an example: Feeling colors and seeing sounds.)

    What the experience does for me, is that I seem to gain more awareness into how my brain works. It’s like I can stand back and watch how my brain processes things. My subconscious is pulled into full view and I can almost tinker with it, in a way. Some theories suggest that the colors and geometric patterns people tend to see is our actual brain operations being leaked into the visual cortex and/or the fractal patterns are the result of actual “data loops” caused by psychedelics allowing information to pass around freely. (Not my theories, btw.)

    Now, you may read this and think: That dude is just tripping! (And you would be very much correct.) The thing is, every experience I have and anything that I feel is already in my brain. The data is already there, but how that data is processed is vastly different. Even if I am perceiving parts of my brain that I couldn’t before, it’s still just the same neurons that were always there.

    So, what I am basically saying is, is that my self-awareness temporarily becomes self-aware. It’s a shitty description, but it’s the closest I could get to matching the situation you were asking about.

    I still develop memories, almost as normal. Some memories stick and some fade. All that really happened is that a few neuron weights got shaken up and it all becomes a few new pathways with a similar number of neurons as before. (Neurogenesis and dendritic growth as a result of psychedelics is a different subject and I wouldn’t think it would be part of the recursion-type situation you are asking about.)

    Memories become integrated with existing ones, basically. While vastly different in many ways, our current AI tech has a set number of “neurons” it can work with in any given model. You can train those same bunches of neurons with millions of different patterns, but the actual size of the neural network doesn’t change, no matter how much data you cram into it. With slight changes to when neurons fire, you are using specific pathways of neurons to save data, not necessarily using the neurons themselves.

  • I'm back on my BS 🤪@lemmy.autism.place
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    If whatever learning meant +1 brain complexity then it we would never catch up because it would be the infinite hotel. example: learning one unit of brain complexity adds one unit of brain complexity.

    if learning meant < +1 brain complexity, then the next limiters would be brain space and time. example: learning one unit of brain complexity slightly complicates an already existing complex.

    if learning meant > +1 brain complexity, then the more you learn, the farther you get from understanding the whole thing. example: learning one unit of brain complexity requires the addition of another unit of brain complexity plus its relationship with other complexes.

    • Fubber Nuckin'@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Probably < 1 considering you can pick up on patterns, and learning a pattern generates 1 one structure while allowing you to understand many. The learned pattern itself is likely stored within another pattern. You likely won’t be able to know everything within the brain at once, but you might be able to find anything you want to know.

      It’d be like memorizing every book in a library versus going through a library catalog to get what you need.

  • ddh@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Depends what you mean. If I’m understanding you, then no, you’d be dealing with some kind of metadata recursion problem. On the other hand, on my hard drive I have a file detailing the schematic of the drive.