We are different from animals, but we aren't? im not sure what you're trying to say here. animals don't have consciousness but are the same as us with regard to physical characteristics like explained in darwinism? is that is?
Humans are different from animals, but they still share certain characteristics. For example, neither has free will.
I'm sorry to bring up metaphysics and the mind in your thread but its really interesting to discuss. substance dualism is the view that the mind is separate from the body and exists outside of natural law of physics, the body is subject to the laws of physics and nature etc. thats just my view on the relationship of mind body problem and location of the mind.
There are good reasons to believe that the mind is
not separate from the body, hence is not an exception to the rules of nature.
Changes to the regions of your brain that are associated with the mind will always, perfectly correlate with changes to the mind. Therefore, the two must be linked, in some way. There are three options:
(1) The brain causes the mind.
(2) The mind causes the brain.
(3) The two are caused by a third entity.
(3) is easy to disprove. If actions in the brain and in the mind would just correlate because they are simultaneously caused by a third entity, then changes to the brain could not cause changes to the mind. That's not the case. If your amygdalas were extracted, your emotional behavior would change, you would become fearless, among other things. If a third entity caused activity in the amygdala
and fear in the mind, then you would still be capable of experiencing fear, because the entity would still cause this emotion, just without it correlating with activity in the amygdala.
(2) is disproven in the same manner. If actions of the mind would cause activity in the brain, that would mean that it could still work without a problem even after the brain is damaged or changed. We know that's not the case.
We can therefore conclude that (1) must be the true option. Furthermore, we can conclude that the mind is located in the brain, because there is no evidence that it's a separate entity.
I like your points on the mind working by rules could you write more on that.
What she meant, if I understood her correctly, was that even if we accept the notion that the mind is somehow except from the rules of nature (for which we have no reason), there's still no reason to think that it doesn't abide to its own rules, which would ultimately make the mind deterministic without having it abide to the rules of nature.
How do the rules of the mind interact with the body? what are they? who sends the rules to the mind? where would you locate these rules? I just thought then that these rules you talk about, they could be the neuron transmitters, and activities in the brain which would mean that there is no mind and the mind is just a part of the brain which is more of a physical determinism i think
The neurotransmitters aren't the rules, rather the rules of the mind would be determined by the rules of nature, the materials of your brain (which include the neurotransmitters) and the way your brain is built.