The missing link/intelligent design

[twinc]

How does the material brain communicate with the immaterial mind - exactly what bridges the gap - how does what is material know,suffer,feel,hear and see - twinc

 

[Wiccan_Child]

How does the material brain communicate with the immaterial mind - exactly what bridges the gap - how does what is material know,suffer,feel,hear and see - twinc

The immaterial mind is an emergent phenomenon of the brain's complex neurology. As such, there is no 'gap' to bridge, as the brain's mechanics are the mind.

But if you're assuming mind/body duality, then you need to prove that some mystical 'mind' exists separate and distinct from the physical body.

 

[Jro]

The immaterial mind is an emergent phenomenon of the brain's complex neurology. As such, there is no 'gap' to bridge, as the brain's mechanics are the mind.

But if you're assuming mind/body duality, then you need to prove that some mystical 'mind' exists separate and distinct from the physical body.

If you're so smart explain out of body experiences and the magic of crystals.

 

[Paradoxum]

I don't know, and no one really knows. Perhaps the mind will turn out to be physical in some weird currently inconceivable way.

Or perhaps science in its current form can't explain the mind. Maybe we will have a revolution in our understand of the subjective, comparable to the scientific revolution.

Until then we still need to search for the mind with science and no jump to conclusions too quickly. Until then we can just say that we don't know, but we have theories.

The immaterial mind is an emergent phenomenon of the brain's complex neurology. As such, there is no 'gap' to bridge, as the brain's mechanics are the mind.

You sound quite sure of that.

 

[FrenchyBearpaw]

Mind is the 'fuzzy' word used to describe what the brain does.

 

[AlexBP]

I agree with what Paradoxum wrote. We don't know what causes consciousness and awareness, nor do we even have any promising leads for investigation in that direction. Saying things like "The immaterial mind is an emergent phenomenon of the brain's complex neurology" is merely a fancy way of saying that we don't know.

 

[Jro]

I agree with what Paradoxum wrote. We don't know what causes consciousness and awareness, nor do we even have any promising leads for investigation in that direction. Saying things like "The immaterial mind is an emergent phenomenon of the brain's complex neurology" is merely a fancy way of saying that we don't know.

Yeah, I agree with this too, that's why I don't worry about drinking too much and causing brain damage. I'll still be sarmt cause headbrains ain't involved with thinking.

 

[Loudmouth]

I agree with what Paradoxum wrote. We don't know what causes consciousness and awareness, nor do we even have any promising leads for investigation in that direction. Saying things like "The immaterial mind is an emergent phenomenon of the brain's complex neurology" is merely a fancy way of saying that we don't know.

We have yet to see an immaterial mind that exists independent of the material mind. so there is overwhelming evidence that they are one in the same. Also, damage or alterations of the material mind also affects the conscious mind. Drugs can alter mood and emotions. Strokes can cause the most gentle soul to become uncontrollably violent. Chemical dependencies can have obvious effects on a person's mind.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

I agree with what Paradoxum wrote. We don't know what causes consciousness and awareness, nor do we even have any promising leads for investigation in that direction. Saying things like "The immaterial mind is an emergent phenomenon of the brain's complex neurology" is merely a fancy way of saying that we don't know.

Actually, it says quite a bit. It means we know that the mind is a consequence of neurology, and specifically the complexity of that neurology, and not of some mystical duality. We don't know an awful lot else, true, but it's incorrect to imply my statement is vacuous.

We know that damage to the brain leads to damage to the mind. Stokes rob people of speech, chemicals that damage our neurochemistry damage the mind, developmental disorders in the brain lead to mental retardation.

So the mind is an emergent phenomenon (it's not a single process unto itself), it is emergent from neurology, and it is emergent from complex neurology.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

You sound quite sure of that.

The science of the mind is complex and incomplete, but not as much as people might think. The sheer fact that neurological trauma leads to mental disorders points to a physiological, rather than mystical, origin of the mind.

 

[AlexBP]

We have yet to see an immaterial mind that exists independent of the material mind. so there is overwhelming evidence that they are one in the same. Also, damage or alterations of the material mind also affects the conscious mind. Drugs can alter mood and emotions. Strokes can cause the most gentle soul to become uncontrollably violent. Chemical dependencies can have obvious effects on a person's mind.

The question that twinc posed was, what is the relationship between the material brain and the mental mind. Suppose I take a mental action, such as reciting the words of How the Grinch Stole Christmas mentally. What is the material phenomena that corresponds to this? Or suppose I look across the room and become aware of a poster that says "Teamwork". While we surely know the physical process by which light bounces off the poster and lands on the back of my eyeballs, what's the physical process by which my mind consciously registers this peice of information as opposed to other visual information that it does not register? This, presumably, is what twinc wants to know.

The claim that physical brain damage affects the mind doesn't convince me because it doesn't account for many cases where it doesn't. For instance, there's the French civil servant whose mind functioned naturally despite the fact that he had no brain.

Tiny brain no obstacle to French civil servant | Reuters

In addition, the logic of the argument is simply flawed. I could easily destroy my computer with a sledgehammer, and then I'd no longer be able to connect to Christian Forums, but that would not prove that Christian Forums is an emmergent phenomenon of my computer.

 

[Loudmouth]

The question that twinc posed was, what is the relationship between the material brain and the mental mind.

It is the same as the relationship between your car engine and the part of your car that produces horsepower. They are one in the same.

Suppose I take a mental action, such as reciting the words of How the Grinch Stole Christmas mentally. What is the material phenomena that corresponds to this?

The material phenomenon is the movement of neurotransmitters across the synapses in your brain.

Or suppose I look across the room and become aware of a poster that says "Teamwork". While we surely know the physical process by which light bounces off the poster and lands on the back of my eyeballs, what's the physical process by which my mind consciously registers this peice of information as opposed to other visual information that it does not register?

The physical process is the absorption of photons by the photoreceptors in your retina that causes an action potential across the membrane of the photoreceptor. This triggers a travelling nerve impulse which eventually arrives at a synapse. The nerve impulse then causes the firing of neurotransmitters across the synaptic gap to other neurons which then will or will not continue the same process.

The claim that physical brain damage affects the mind doesn't convince me because it doesn't account for many cases where it doesn't. For instance, there's the French civil servant whose mind functioned naturally despite the fact that he had no brain.

He had a brain.

In addition, the logic of the argument is simply flawed. I could easily destroy my computer with a sledgehammer, and then I'd no longer be able to connect to Christian Forums, but that would not prove that Christian Forums is an emmergent phenomenon of my computer.

Christian forums is an emergent phenomenon of networked computers, or were you not aware of this? Do you really think that CF has a soul that will go to heaven if someone turns off the servers?

 

[Paradoxum]

I agree with what Paradoxum wrote. We don't know what causes consciousness and awareness, nor do we even have any promising leads for investigation in that direction. Saying things like "The immaterial mind is an emergent phenomenon of the brain's complex neurology" is merely a fancy way of saying that we don't know.

Yeah, I agree with this too, that's why I don't worry about drinking too much and causing brain damage. I'll still be sarmt cause headbrains ain't involved with thinking.

I'd like to point out that I didn't mean that there is some magical immaterial soul. The mind is very much the brain in some sense, but that may or may not mean the brain as we currently understand the brain (and the physical world).

We have yet to see an immaterial mind that exists independent of the material mind. so there is overwhelming evidence that they are one in the same. Also, damage or alterations of the material mind also affects the conscious mind. Drugs can alter mood and emotions. Strokes can cause the most gentle soul to become uncontrollably violent. Chemical dependencies can have obvious effects on a person's mind.

I agree that the mind is in some way the brain. But what we mean by the brain (and perhaps the physical) could be incorrect. There could be more to the physical than forces and interactions. More than maths and structures.

I don't claim to have any knowledge about that though.

Actually, it says quite a bit. It means we know that the mind is a consequence of neurology, and specifically the complexity of that neurology, and not of some mystical duality. We don't know an awful lot else, true, but it's incorrect to imply my statement is vacuous.

We know that damage to the brain leads to damage to the mind. Stokes rob people of speech, chemicals that damage our neurochemistry damage the mind, developmental disorders in the brain lead to mental retardation.

So the mind is an emergent phenomenon (it's not a single process unto itself), it is emergent from neurology, and it is emergent from complex neurology.

What does it mean to say that the mind is emergent when there is no theory to explain it? Aren't you just saying that somehow something happens, and that you will call that unknown something 'emergence'?

The science of the mind is complex and incomplete, but not as much as people might think. The sheer fact that neurological trauma leads to mental disorders points to a physiological, rather than mystical, origin of the mind.

Well it points out that the mind is in the brain. But what that really means we still don't know. I'm not saying there is a soul, or some magical immaterial mind. I suppose I pointing towards asking what we mean by physical and material. Could blue, or hue, or brightness themselves be physical in some sense?

I'm all for current science finding the answer is it can. It is the greatest hope we have. We just shouldn't be scared to look at other ways of looking at the problem... while accepting we are only speculating.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

What does it mean to say that the mind is emergent when there is no theory to explain it? Aren't you just saying that somehow something happens, and that you will call that unknown something 'emergence'?

'Emergent' means many instances of relatively simple processes are what create it. Ice crystallising is an emergent phenomenon inasmuch as it's many instance of the same fundamental chemical reaction. Likewise, the mind emerges from a multitude of relatively simple phenomena - namely, synapses firing, neurons rewiring, that sort of thing. Complex phenomena arising out of relatively simple processes occurring en masse.

Well it points out that the mind is in the brain. But what that really means we still don't know. I'm not saying there is a soul, or some magical immaterial mind. I suppose I pointing towards asking what we mean by physical and material. Could blue, or hue, or brightness themselves be physical in some sense?

I'm all for current science finding the answer is it can. It is the greatest hope we have. We just shouldn't be scared to look at other ways of looking at the problem... while accepting we are only speculating.

Certainly, and I've never liked the adage that "science is limited to the natural" - if the truth is that the mind is some spiritual component separate and distinct from the physical body, then it's foolish to blind science to that truth. However, asserting a natural explanation doesn't mean we're ignoring supernatural explanations - in this case, the evidence simply points that way (as it invariably does).

 

[twinc]

The question that twinc posed was, what is the relationship between the material brain and the mental mind. Suppose I take a mental action, such as reciting the words of How the Grinch Stole Christmas mentally. What is the material phenomena that corresponds to this? Or suppose I look across the room and become aware of a poster that says "Teamwork". While we surely know the physical process by which light bounces off the poster and lands on the back of my eyeballs, what's the physical process by which my mind consciously registers this peice of information as opposed to other visual information that it does not register? This, presumably, is what twinc wants to know.

The claim that physical brain damage affects the mind doesn't convince me because it doesn't account for many cases where it doesn't. For instance, there's the French civil servant whose mind functioned naturally despite the fact that he had no brain.

Tiny brain no obstacle to French civil servant | Reuters

In addition, the logic of the argument is simply flawed. I could easily destroy my computer with a sledgehammer, and then I'd no longer be able to connect to Christian Forums, but that would not prove that Christian Forums is an emmergent phenomenon of my computer.

Alex - again and again I have repeated base over apex/vice versa for it is those who are so certain who have it exactly wrong and those who doubt have it more right for there is more truth in an honest doubt than in most of the certainties - one of the greatest achievements of science,if not the greatest was the dematerialisation of matter but yet this spell and enchantment holds fast - and now even humpty dumpty science in the guise of true science is trying to put it together again no matter what - twinc

 

[Wiccan_Child]

The question that twinc posed was, what is the relationship between the material brain and the mental mind. Suppose I take a mental action, such as reciting the words of How the Grinch Stole Christmas mentally. What is the material phenomena that corresponds to this? Or suppose I look across the room and become aware of a poster that says "Teamwork". While we surely know the physical process by which light bounces off the poster and lands on the back of my eyeballs, what's the physical process by which my mind consciously registers this peice of information as opposed to other visual information that it does not register? This, presumably, is what twinc wants to know.

The claim that physical brain damage affects the mind doesn't convince me because it doesn't account for many cases where it doesn't. For instance, there's the French civil servant whose mind functioned naturally despite the fact that he had no brain.

Tiny brain no obstacle to French civil servant | Reuters

In addition, the logic of the argument is simply flawed. I could easily destroy my computer with a sledgehammer, and then I'd no longer be able to connect to Christian Forums, but that would not prove that Christian Forums is an emmergent phenomenon of my computer.

But if you damage your computer, while your reception might be poor, it'd be obvious that CF itself was working as well as it ever was. Likewise, if damage to the brain merely damaged the 'conduit' to the undamaged mind, then it'd be readily apparent that the mind was undamaged.

As it stands, those with physical trauma really do experience mental trauma - family members are forgotten, speech is lost, etc. Disease or damage can render the individual genuinely confused and disorientated - if the mind isn't held in the brain, then why is the mind damaged when the brain is?

 

[twinc]

But if you damage your computer, while your reception might be poor, it'd be obvious that CF itself was working as well as it ever was. Likewise, if damage to the brain merely damaged the 'conduit' to the undamaged mind, then it'd be readily apparent that the mind was undamaged.

As it stands, those with physical trauma really do experience mental trauma - family members are forgotten, speech is lost, etc. Disease or damage can render the individual genuinely confused and disorientated - if the mind isn't held in the brain, then why is the mind damaged when the brain is?

man in his ingenuity and intelligence like his creator has installed into aeroplanes that journey through life a blackbox that survives even when the plane destructs - his black box records what it is programmed to record - so take care what you record or say or see or do - your black box will survive too - twinc

 

[FrenchyBearpaw]

man in his ingenuity and intelligence like his creator has installed into aeroplanes that journey through life a blackbox that survives even when the plane destructs - his black box records what it is programmed to record - so take care what you record or say or see or do - your black box will survive too - twinc

There is no evidence to support this assertion.

 

[Paradoxum]

'Emergent' means many instances of relatively simple processes are what create it. Ice crystallising is an emergent phenomenon inasmuch as it's many instance of the same fundamental chemical reaction. Likewise, the mind emerges from a multitude of relatively simple phenomena - namely, synapses firing, neurons rewiring, that sort of thing. Complex phenomena arising out of relatively simple processes occurring en masse.

You may be correct, but so far you don't seem to be justified in claiming that to be true. We have no evidence that the mind can be explained fully just like that.

We still need a theory of how you get from synapses to experience. Until them all we can say is that something happens, and that the mind is the brain in some currently unexplainable way.

Certainly, and I've never liked the adage that "science is limited to the natural" - if the truth is that the mind is some spiritual component separate and distinct from the physical body, then it's foolish to blind science to that truth. However, asserting a natural explanation doesn't mean we're ignoring supernatural explanations - in this case, the evidence simply points that way (as it invariably does).

I'm not claiming that the mind is spiritual by the way.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

man in his ingenuity and intelligence like his creator has installed into aeroplanes that journey through life a blackbox that survives even when the plane destructs - his black box records what it is programmed to record - so take care what you record or say or see or do - your black box will survive too - twinc

That sentence gave me semantic whiplash.