abe smith

As it hasn't been solved jet that I know of, and as many of the brightlights here at EyeEye may not have been aound reading science stuff in the '70s & '80s, I'd just like to call the squad's attention to Thomas Nagel's now-classic paper (of October 1974) titled "WHAT IS IT LIKE TO BE A BAT?" You can find it complete on-line, probably just by typing in the title/author to Google or Jeeves... It's surely worth the halfhour or less to read it. I don't think that for me there IZZ any mind/body problem.... but I suppose we can fight that out later... Abe

Corey Hammer

What are you talking about?

If you are referring to the Cartesian duality, it was resolved long ago. There is no duality. The body and mind are one.

abe smith

You & I see it that way, Corey; but the question of HOW the mind/body is ONE remains interestingly unsolved, I'm pretty sure. The mechanism of (individual/--ated) *consciousness*
is what seems to be in question.
As you are persuaded that the (mind/body) problem HAS been solved, will you please provide me w/ the sources, recent, wherein this resolution is asserted & made-clear? Fer sher, my request to you is serious and not in any way sarcastic. Waiting eagerly for your response. I know that for me/not too caught-up
w/ current thinking, There're Great Gaps Here.
Abe

John Galt, Jr.

Corey,

Will you please provide a reference (or more than one, if necessary). I would like to read about the solution. I am especially interested in finding out what 'The mind and body are one' means.

John Galt, Jr.

Marduk

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

MBR

While I realize my ignorance about the subject, but I can report that in my own experience, I can't see how mind and body can be one. My body performs a lot of things that I am not in control of. Take a game of tennis for instance. My movements, minute shifts of balance, footwork, timing, and the precision of my stroke are actions that I am doing, but can't take complete credit for. Something besides my conscious mind is following through with these actions. The extent of my involvement is to provide the direction and the desire which my body responds to. In fact, I find myself and most people I play with having a dialogue between the conscious mind and the body that usually involves some sort of criticism after a bad shot and praise after a good one.

Xixax

Thoughts are results of chemical and electrical reactions in your brain. Not energy.

As far as tennis is concerned, your body has done some of the motions you are just modifying to play tennis so many times, that it's already wired to perform them. When you were a child, you had to think extremely hard to get the same leg to move in a similar manner. Now that those neural pathways are set, you can focus more on other issues, your brain can take care of some of the details because you say: "Go from A to F", and the pathways you constructed long ago force it along B,C,D, and E.

So go ahead, take credit, you earned it long ago.

There is no mind/body problem. Unless you're already inclined to believe we have some 'mind stuff' that has yet to be discovered. It's not necessary.

Corey Hammer

Your post indicates otherwise.

So? This is startingly close to the same faulty logic creationists use about the theory of evolution.

Considering that I'm a doctoral candidate in the field, yes. I'll edit this when I get home to give you the reference to my history of psychology text.

Where? Please elaborate.

See above when available...the "solution" is simple. It's based on testability and logic. When the brain is damaged, our ability to process information is impaired. Therefore, the brain, an organ in the body is the source of all forms of cognition.

<img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" /> <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" /> <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" />

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.

Fallacy #1: Appeal to Incredulity: Just because you can't think of why does not mean it is how you believe. This is Behe's whole argument.

Fallacy #2: again an argument from incredulity.

Have you ever heard of the cerebellum? That what controls voluntary muscle movement. Secondly, most of what we do is nonconscious.

In fact, you are correct, but not in the way you think. Most human behavior is nonconscious. In fact, we could get along quite nicely without consciousness. Several theories abound as to why we have consciousness to begin with, including that it is useful for social interaction.

You're imagining things.

Thanks....

There is still lots of stuff to be examined. To the Abe, John, marduck, and MBR, I recommend an intro psych course or shelling out the cash for "Psychology" by Bernnstein...I believe it is on the 5th or 6th edition by now. I also recommend, if you want to take the time, to read journal articles by an psychologist named John Bargh who focuses much of his research on nonconscious processing.

MBR

What are you calling the mind?

Your bodies functions are beyond the realm of your awareness. So how can you that the mind and body are one?

Remember Data from Star Trek TNG? I would consider his mind and body one. He was aware of every action in his body and had complete control of them. But when your bodies function is beyond your understanding, control, or even awareness, I don't think you deserve the credit.

Perhaps the distinction is that I don't consider the events that take place after my conscious mind chooses an action as a part of my consciousness. I am completely unaware of the neurotransmitters firing my muscles in the exact proportions that are necessary. I couldn't tell you all the muscles that I would need to accomplish this task. It just happens. If you wan't to take credit for it, go ahead.
If you've ever played tennis, or any competitive sport, you would know that that is not my imagination. And this isn't just from my own experience.

Jesse

My position is not a very popular one, but I agree with David Chalmers' idea that probably all our behavior can be explained physically (the physical universe is a closed system with all physical events having physical causes, with no immaterial souls influencing the brain), but that this still does not resolve the mind/body problem. In other words, even if you have a complete physical explanation for the fact that I say "I am conscious" or "I don't think the mind/body problem can be resolved," you still have not explained why I actually experience things--why all these physical processes don't go on "in the dark", why I am not a "zombie" who acts conscious but really isn't. I also like Chalmers' idea of a "theory of consciousness" which would bridge the world of mind with that of matter, perhaps describing a one-to-one relationship between computations and experiences (so that a perfect simulation of my brain would have the same experience as me).

Incidentally, I'm wondering if this might not be more on-topic in the philosophy forum--I'll wait and see if the discussion turns out to be more philosophy-focused or more neuroscience-focused.