Xixax

Well, if you define mind as only what you are consciously aware of, perhaps not. When I think of mind though, I also think of instinctual behavior that is definitely controlled by the brain subconsciously. There is still no mind outside the brain itself.

Now, when, thanks to our relatively high intelligence, we assign properties to the mind that exceed natural phenomena, I think you're in a different realm. It's like defining beauty. Surely there is a natural and neurological explanation for why we percieve certain pattern/color combinations as beatiful, but beauty as an idea is obviously not physical or a part of our being.

*shrug*

John Galt, Jr.

Corey,

I suspect that we (some of us) are talking past one another. It might be clarifying if you would explain what you understand by the mind/body problem, so that we will all know exactly what you think has been resolved.

John galt, Jr.

Ought Naught

My standard blurb regarding mind/body dualism:

Electrical activity within certain regions of the brain is correlated with, necessary for and sufficient to induce visual subjective phenomena. Therefore purely physical properties of the brain are sufficient to explain at least some aspects of consciousness. These sorts of observations are being extended into other aspects of consciousness as the state of research advances, and, thus far, there is no reason to expect that these other aspects won't be shown to be based in this same electrical activity (albeit perhaps in different brain regions).

Corey Hammer

The Mind-Body duality is typically defined as having force or soul that is separate from the body; what Descartes called the conarium. If you are referring to where consciousness and/or self-awareness directly comes from, then we have different situation. However, it is still a function of the brain.

This is fallacy. The "mind" is a colloquial and nonscientific term for what we consciously experience. Psychologists use because it is convenient and easy to communicate, more properly it is called covert behavior, because we cannot see it. Damage to the brain causes deficits in information processing and other behaviors, covert and overt. Therefore, the brain, a biological organ, is the seat of thinking.

It is still ultimately controlled by the brain...we know this because brain damage impairs bodily functions. Still no mind-body problems.

You seem to be anthropomorphizing the situation unduly. I'm referring to the any duality between physical and non-physical relating to a mind separate from the body.

I downhill ski. I don't have "conversations" with my body. I can analyze after the fact and image my performance from memory, but that is remembering not conversation.

That is possible. That's why I asked Abe if he was referring to the Cartesian duality.

galiel

This is, unfortunately, another area where advances in science's explanatory power have dramatically outpaced the general public's awareness of them. I blame the reluctance of many scientists these days to wade out into the swamp of ignorance and superstition, face the mud pies and farts of fundamentalists and new age mystics and do some popular educating.

There is some excellent work done in the area of documentary television. Most laypeople do not watch them. Unfortunately, our textbooks still largely teach the science's view of the world as it was known in the 60's.

In the area of brain science, I would hazard a guess that more understanding has developed in the past 20 years than in all time before hand. Virtually none of that is public knowledge. I only know what bits of it I know because I have a daughter with Tourette Syndrome and I have become fascinated with the way the brain works.

I recommend that those, who dogmatically and emotionally assert that a "mind" separate from the physical body is still necessary to explain human experience/consciousness/emotions, take the time to learn about modern brain research. I think you will be amazed. Learning about our brains is fascinating, even if you aren't "into" science in general.

Just like every other area of scientific research, more and more of the way our brains function has been explained by natural processes, leaving less and less that requires the existence of mystical or supernatural forces such as "god" or a "soul".

The only way one can, after becoming informed, still believe in a non-material "mind" is if one follows blind religious dogma. I believe that most people are simply ignorant of most scientific developments of the past 20 years.

Marduk

marduck thusly spouted:
Considering that the brain is matter and thoughts/consciousness are energy, I'd also like to know how this has been 'solved"



"This is so much New Age tripe that I feel woozy. I'd like to see your supporting arguments for this. Please, published science journals only"

I don't see what "New Age" has to do with anything. What are those eeg's measuring? electrical activity, brain waves, that IS energy isn't it? How much matter is invoved in reading this, are you saying my thoughts and fantasies have mass? Please explain.

[ October 05, 2002: Message edited by: marduck ]</p>

Ought Naught

Those EEGs are measuring the flux of ions into and out of neurons. This an entirely material phenomenon, so I guess that I would say, yes, your thoughts and fantasies have mass.

Marduk

"Those EEGs are measuring the flux of ions into and out of neurons. This an entirely material phenomenon, so I guess that I would say, yes, your thoughts and fantasies have mass"

That would explain why my head is so much heavier in the daytime than when I'm in a deep non REM sleep at night. I try to avoid thinking about elephants and concentrate on much lighter images like flowers and such.

I dont't think we'd even be having these debates, or religion or philosophy would even exist if there wasn't a mind/body 'problem'.

[ October 05, 2002: Message edited by: marduck ]</p>

Feather

Yes, your thoughts and fantasies have mass. Mass is equivalent to energy. Your thoughts and fantasies are the transfers of energy via electricity and chemical reactions in your brain. So they have mass.

Ought Naught

I'm not sure that I'm getting your drift here. Care to expand that thought a bit for me?