Freethought & Rationalism Archive

John Page · 06-09-2002, 07:20 PM

Definition and description sought for the border between the Mind and the Body.

Body = Physical structure of a person
Mind = Non-physical or abstract aspect of a person comprising their mental activity viz. thoughts, emotions, consciousness.

Cheers, John

Adrian Selby · 06-09-2002, 11:03 PM

If this is aimed at the dualists, I'm keen to find this out as well.

I'm an identity theory kind of guy, one and the same thing.

Adrian

excreationist · 06-10-2002, 04:29 AM

I prefer saying that the mind, emotions, thoughts, etc, are processes involving physical systems. The term "non-physical" sounds like it could be taken in a supernatural sense.
The body is the physical system itself, which can be static... the processes are dynamic (or continuous). As far as emotions go, I separate them into two kinds - seeking and avoiding. These things can't be static - there is "movement" or change. Thoughts are streams of information that have emotions as their goals or initiator (seeking/avoiding things). (something like that)
And I think the "mind" contains those things (which aren't static, remember) as well as other parts such as short term memory and probably long-term memory.

[ June 10, 2002: Message edited by: excreationist ]</p>

NialScorva · 06-10-2002, 04:41 AM

The body is the noun me.

The mind is the verb me.

Mr. Sammi · 06-10-2002, 06:17 AM

John Page,

I disagree with your definition of the mind as non-physical or abstract. There is nothing non-physical in this world otherwise it must be some sort of magic. (An idea may be non-physical, but it is works by the physical).

The mind is a real physical entity, that works and aids in the sensing of existence. It is part of the brain, but it may be the adaptive controllable part of the brain.

Sammi Na Boodie ()

06-10-2002, 06:56 AM

Good question.

It is, after all, the absence of anything like a border between mind and body that stands as Dualism's more resounding failure.

WJ · 06-10-2002, 07:32 AM

I kinda like Nial's reply. Along those lines, and perhaps as Dennett left off with kind of the same mystery as where he started-consciousness, love hate and all other sentient 'border' products from the mind still seem to represent the universal stumbling blocks...

As a side note(gnosticism), if certain phenomena consists of 'physical entities comprising elictricity', how is it that the mind should have a need for the very act of *expression* or expressing itself? Perhaps we are back why/how 'consciousness' (or the question of what does it mean for something to exist) from inert matter.

Sammi?

cookookachoo,
Walrus

Jamie_L · 06-10-2002, 07:59 AM

The body comprises all the physical "stuff" in a person. The mind is a function produced by some parts of the body - most notably significant real estate in the brain. This mind function comprises all of the person's thoughts, emotions, feelings, etc.

That's my take, anyway.

Jamie

Ierrellus · 06-10-2002, 08:23 AM

John!

Welcome back to the head-banger's ball.

Body=Physical structure of a human.
Mind=Physical structure of a human, unless we are talking about the mind's of Alex the parrot or Nim Chimpsky.

Border? Organic dynamics has no such animal.

Ierrellus

John Page · 06-10-2002, 08:34 AM

Thanks for all the responses. I do not discount that the mind is a phenomenon of the human body.

Part of my problem is that when we observe our bodies directly it appears that there are pretty well defined edges. But, for example, the mind employs electrical phenomena that can be detected beyond the skin surface. So, two people touching will have "mind phenomena" that appear to occupy the same physical space.

Of course, one could say that the electromagnetic field surrounding the body is merely a side effect. Is this field part of the body or not? Obviously, since I don't actually know how the mind comes about I am unable to define "mind" in terms of its physical aspects.

The above is why I tried to focus on Mind as having an abstract qualities. If our minds contain representations of reality then it seems to me that a strong Mind/Body Border definition could be a v. useful baseline to distinguish mental activity from external reality.

I'd also like to throw in the issue of perception. This was my orginal concept of the Mind/Body Border but I concluded that there can be "inner" or "secondary" perception - the mind detecting its own activity as a precondition to one or more levels of consciousness.

Make sense? Or is there a better way of nailing this down?

Cheers, John

06-09-2002, 07:20 PM	#1
John Page Veteran Member Join Date: May 2001 Location: US Posts: 5,495	Mind/Body Border Definition and description sought for the border between the Mind and the Body. Body = Physical structure of a person Mind = Non-physical or abstract aspect of a person comprising their mental activity viz. thoughts, emotions, consciousness. Cheers, John

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

06-09-2002, 11:03 PM	#2
Adrian Selby Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Farnham, UK Posts: 859	If this is aimed at the dualists, I'm keen to find this out as well. I'm an identity theory kind of guy, one and the same thing. Adrian

06-10-2002, 04:29 AM	#3
excreationist Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Australia Posts: 4,886	I prefer saying that the mind, emotions, thoughts, etc, are processes involving physical systems. The term "non-physical" sounds like it could be taken in a supernatural sense. The body is the physical system itself, which can be static... the processes are dynamic (or continuous). As far as emotions go, I separate them into two kinds - seeking and avoiding. These things can't be static - there is "movement" or change. Thoughts are streams of information that have emotions as their goals or initiator (seeking/avoiding things). (something like that) And I think the "mind" contains those things (which aren't static, remember) as well as other parts such as short term memory and probably long-term memory. [ June 10, 2002: Message edited by: excreationist ]</p>

06-10-2002, 04:41 AM	#4
NialScorva Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Median strip of DC beltway Posts: 1,888	The body is the noun me. The mind is the verb me.

06-10-2002, 06:17 AM	#5
Mr. Sammi Banned Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Montr�al Posts: 367	John Page, I disagree with your definition of the mind as non-physical or abstract. There is nothing non-physical in this world otherwise it must be some sort of magic. (An idea may be non-physical, but it is works by the physical). The mind is a real physical entity, that works and aids in the sensing of existence. It is part of the brain, but it may be the adaptive controllable part of the brain. Sammi Na Boodie ()

06-10-2002, 06:56 AM	#6
Synaesthesia Guest Posts: n/a	Good question. It is, after all, the absence of anything like a border between mind and body that stands as Dualism's more resounding failure.

06-10-2002, 07:32 AM	#7
WJ Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 812	I kinda like Nial's reply. Along those lines, and perhaps as Dennett left off with kind of the same mystery as where he started-consciousness, love hate and all other sentient 'border' products from the mind still seem to represent the universal stumbling blocks... As a side note(gnosticism), if certain phenomena consists of 'physical entities comprising elictricity', how is it that the mind should have a need for the very act of expression or expressing itself? Perhaps we are back why/how 'consciousness' (or the question of what does it mean for something to exist) from inert matter. Sammi? cookookachoo, Walrus

06-10-2002, 07:59 AM	#8
Jamie_L Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: U.S. Posts: 2,565	The body comprises all the physical "stuff" in a person. The mind is a function produced by some parts of the body - most notably significant real estate in the brain. This mind function comprises all of the person's thoughts, emotions, feelings, etc. That's my take, anyway. Jamie

06-10-2002, 08:23 AM	#9
Ierrellus Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Canton, Ohio Posts: 2,082	John! Welcome back to the head-banger's ball. Body=Physical structure of a human. Mind=Physical structure of a human, unless we are talking about the mind's of Alex the parrot or Nim Chimpsky. Border? Organic dynamics has no such animal. Ierrellus

06-10-2002, 08:34 AM	#10
John Page Veteran Member Join Date: May 2001 Location: US Posts: 5,495	Thanks for all the responses. I do not discount that the mind is a phenomenon of the human body. Part of my problem is that when we observe our bodies directly it appears that there are pretty well defined edges. But, for example, the mind employs electrical phenomena that can be detected beyond the skin surface. So, two people touching will have "mind phenomena" that appear to occupy the same physical space. Of course, one could say that the electromagnetic field surrounding the body is merely a side effect. Is this field part of the body or not? Obviously, since I don't actually know how the mind comes about I am unable to define "mind" in terms of its physical aspects. The above is why I tried to focus on Mind as having an abstract qualities. If our minds contain representations of reality then it seems to me that a strong Mind/Body Border definition could be a v. useful baseline to distinguish mental activity from external reality. I'd also like to throw in the issue of perception. This was my orginal concept of the Mind/Body Border but I concluded that there can be "inner" or "secondary" perception - the mind detecting its own activity as a precondition to one or more levels of consciousness. Make sense? Or is there a better way of nailing this down? Cheers, John

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.