Mind the great pyramid

Started Apr 19, 2012 | Discussions thread
NZ Scott
Senior MemberPosts: 2,967Gear list
Like?
Re: It seems to me
In reply to gibigb, Apr 29, 2012

gibigb wrote:

NZ Scott wrote:

gibigb wrote:

NZ Scott wrote:

gibigb wrote:

Chato wrote:

gibigb wrote:

Chato wrote:

I know this because there was a lizard living in his head....

True, a cute little guy. Is that your point?

Probably my point -or maybe I should call it semi colon, out of modesty- would be tha just because you saw a lizard and it is the brain which does the seeing, it doesn't necessarily mean that the lizard is in your brain or that your brain created it.

That you are playing both sides against the middle. On the one hand assigning "mind" a non material basis, and on the other attacking anyone who says that "mind" has a material basis.

The only suggestion I've tossed aroun is that there is no mind, so haven't assigned a thing.

On the other hand, you seem to have considerable difficults to come up with some scientific evidence of physical reality. You know that is what science is about, right? Physical realities whether material or not?

There's plenty of scientific data available in regards to brain function. Surgeons and scientists have explored various regions of the brain and discovered that Broca's area and Wernicke's area control language, that hand preference is related to hemisphere lateralization, that linear reasoning functions are associated with the left hemisphere of the brain and that holistic reasoning functions are associated with the right hemisphere.

Etc.

Scientists and surgeons have also explored the brain under microscopes and discovered synapses and cells - roughly 100 billion of them - that carry electrical and chemical currents to other cells and synapses, and they have shown that this activity is related to brain function.

What is a chemical current?

The flow of a chemical from one point to another point.

Scientifically, there is no longer much doubt that thought processes and emotional states are functions of the brain.

Just so you know, it's been the age of internet for a while. Therefore appeals to what imaginary anoymous scientists allegedly said or to what IYHO is known without relevant links will certainly cause your correspondant to disengage abruptly.

However, I will indulge you because you don't seem very versed in netiquette.

I realise that English is your second language, and I don't want to sound patronising,

It appears that that ship already sailed. But don't feel to bad about it.

but I would respectfully ask that you try to exress yourself using simple language, as some of your comments are a bit garbled.

So if thoughts and emotions are functions of physical brain processes, then what is the mind?

You have to establish that yet. You state that electrical activity is related to brain function, which is really a tautology.

You might want to read further before making this comment.

No- Claiming that if the brain is functioning, there is activity in the brain is a tautology.

Activity is not the same as function.

Then without further elaboration you conclude that there is no doubt that thought processes are a function of the brain (whatever it may mean, I take that you mean that variations of electrical activity in the brain causes thoughts and emotions).

Exactly.

What you need to establish this is simply to name an article/book reporting a experiment where by generating electrical changes in the brain of several subjects, they can cause them to declare that they have had a specific thought or emotion. It should be pretty easy given there's no doubt about that.

Otherwise, you need a bunch of ad hoc hypothesis. And I don't need to tell you we don't really like them, do I?

So no links nor references.

Well, clearly the "mind" is not something that exists independently of the brain, and it is not something that "thinks" independently of the brain.

"Mind" is merely a word that people use to describe brain function,

Oh, so it's a naming convention? Then, if I used the words "soul" or "spirit" instead, I could use your argument to claim that their existence is scientifically undoubted, no?

Yes.

and specifically the personalised experience of brain function, which is kind of a tautology.

I don't see a tautology here. Mind experiencing the mind would inevitably lead us to solipsism which is not falsifiable, therefore not scientific, and I don't think you want that.

Maybe you want to propose a separate brain function to experience the functions of thoughts and emotions?

I don't see how you reached this conclusion.

You said that mind is the personal experience of brain function. What entity is having that experience?

The person who has the brain.

There are lots of theories and arguments about the nature of the mind. The definition of "Mind" that I have given above is the type that would be suggested by a reductive physicalist. These are people who assert that all mental states and properties can be explained by scientific accounts of physiological processes and states

Now this is a convenient Win/Win strategy. But of course it's kind of self defeating.

Just what is your mind thinking?

 NZ Scott's gear list:NZ Scott's gear list
Olympus PEN E-P3 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G II Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 14-42mm 1:3.5-5.6 II R Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm 1:1.8 +8 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow