Ierrellus

In my first post, I presented a theory of mind/matter based on considerable research. The topic fizzled out, hopefully not from my request that contributors be past needs for self-identification in their responses. Unfortunately, my post began with abstractions of physical experience.

In this post I would like opinions from all philosophic minds who have considered the possibility that matter can include mind.

Bill

<a href="http://iidb.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=56&t=000107" target="_blank">As I just got done saying</a>, I am a physicalist. I believe that the human mind is an emergent quality of the human brain. The brain includes both matter and energy relationships, which I hope you implied when you said "... the possibility that matter can include mind." So long as "matter" includes energy (E=mc**2, after all), then I would agree that mind is a property of a particular organization of matter (and energy).

== Bill

Ierrellus

Bill,

Yes! Yes! Yes!

Matter includes energy=mass. Mind, howevever, is a word so often connected with hubris that tracking its genetic origins is a massive task.

Thanks so much for your response.

Ierrellus

Ierrellus

To all,

In my research on reduction of mental content to physical activity I have found many types of evidence that suggest reinterpretation of both what is mental and what is physical. e.g. sea slugs with memory, sensitive plants, apes who do sign language and make jokes, chemical alterations of human thought, etc., etc.

Is there a genetic/evolutionary path from E=Mc2 to I believe. Evidence points to this possibilty.

Ierrellus

John Page

IMO systems of belief are abstract entities that we are (somehow) conscious that we operate under. A system of belief is the transformation of physical experience (individual and cultural) into a code of behavior that improves performance in reality. A system of belief can also be influenced by the communicated beliefs and experiences of others, a method of "second hand" learning. Religious teaching and war stories are two examples of second hand learning.

Yes, it is interesting to consider our current physical brains and our thoughts/behavior with knowledge about that of other beings and then add history as another dimension. I personally shy away from conclusions based on ancient beliefs and non-quantitiative analysis - speculation is interesting but cannot contribute to a strong proof.

Too vague and mystic for me. Maybe some parts of the brain have been surpassed like the appendix. You might want to consider pain/pleasure outside if the brain as in reflexive bahavior - given the complexity and number of individual cells at may be that some functions that we percieve as higher order are in fact widely distrubuted.

I'm having trouble with this one. My mental model (which is unlikely to be correct) is one of brain "sub-units" that operate coherently, acting autonomously without reference to higher 'reason' once their behavior has been 'delegated'. For example, we acquire many skills to drive a car and some of them seem to require conscious effort. After we have learned, however, much of driving happens 'automatically' and our consciousness only gets alerted when an anomalous condition occurs (e.g. accident ahead). Evidence of the existence of such mechanisms can be seen from the above example and when you say to yourself "Now why did I do that?".

The forbidden tree is a good one to throw at biblical fundamentalists. The discovery of the knowledge of good and evil (note: not the actual discovery of good and evil) means that at one time man did not have a moral faculty. The bible therefore implies mental evolution did take place.

At this point in time, myth and coincidence.

I'm not sure what you're saying by "The mind has access to all such physical modifications....", please expand.

Cheers!

Ongoing Lucidity

Well my main challenge to the mind/matter arangement is in the non local arangement of memories.

One particular physicist sliced and diced over 7000 hapless salamanders brains to shreads, dicecting and rearanging them and then replacing them in their heads.

The conclusive finding was that their memory functions were still intact. Removing any particular region of the brain will not remove particular memories.

Regards~

OL

John Page

Interesting but not explanatory. Here are some comments:

1. Salamanders may have "robust" memories that are distributed.
2. Salamanders may have such limited memories that their "learned" behavior is pretty quickly restored.
3. The memories of Salamanders that were tested are likely to be limited. Cut off a chicken's head and still runs around. (P.S. I don't think the boundary of the brain is necessarily the boundary of the brain).
4. The ability to recall and process speech in humans has definitley been tied down to specific areas of the brain.
5. Color recognition in humans has been shown to be "relocatable".
6. The "non-local" memory theory would be a lot stronger if someone could show where or how the memory was actually retained.
7. Salamanders and humans may have more than one mechanism for memory, e.g. electrical, chemical, spatial.

So, while we have incomplete data for a conclusion either way there is a significant body of data that indicates brain activity is associated with higher conscious thought.

Cheers!

Amos

That only shows that particular memories are not that part of the brain. If he would have cut a little further the salemander would have died. This shows that the brain is for survial rather than the ability to live.

Hi John

Chicken don't go very far after you cut their head off, I would think.

[ March 23, 2002: Message edited by: Amos ]</p>

Ierrellus

Although corresponences beween certain mythologies and evolution of the mind is fun, they are not essential to the argument posted here.

John Page, thanks for the clear definition of systems of belief. I thoroughly agree with them.

John Page (quote): "I'm not sure what you're saying by 'The mind has access to all such physical modifications. . .'"

1. There is sufficient evidence to suggest that the mind and the brain share an evolutionary history in which they appear to have evolved at least as complements.
2. If the brain is considered another(but highly specialized} organ in the DNA processes of structuring cell, organ, organism, species, it produces thought just as the liver produces bile.
3. At the current stage of human brain development, we can invest protein synthesis with descriptions of energy, mass and velocity.
4. The evolution of mind is apparent in the human ability to think through manipulation of matter.
5. What mind can conceive, at this stage of its development, is its own changes as corresponding to those of the brain over a period of history.

Ongoing Lucidity (quote} : "Removing any particular region of the brain will not remove particular memories.

Oh, but this happened to Gage, who lived with a bar driven through his head. Probes in the frontal lobe can evoke memories and electro-shock can remove them.

Amos (quote}: ". . . the brain is for survival rather than the ablity to live."

Self-contradictory!


Ierrellus.

Amos

Well I don't think so because survival deals with the future and the ability to live deals with the present moment.