Can the mind be physical?

[Cephus]

I understand what you are saying but there is more to it than that...for there is a universal mind which manifests the very physical universe which science involves itself in..

The so called emergent property you call mind is in fact temporary brain consciousness that indeed ceases to exist when the brain is dead. The universal mind otoh is eternal and the human body is its manifestation as is all else that exists..

Be sure to let us know when you produce any actual, objective evidence for any of that nonsense.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Be sure to let us know when you produce any actual, objective evidence for any of that nonsense.

Haha...the myopic viewpoint of materialism at its finest...you want objective evidence about that which is beyond the physical senses?

Physical science has no authority, nor can it ever have any, with regards to what may, or may not exist outside of the physical universe because it limits itself to the physical. On the other hand, religious study and practice has all to do with that on the other side of the physical, so try devoting your life to meditation and religious practice for a few decades and get back to me....

Be warned, I an not fond of arrogance, if you try and come back to me right away with lame brain derived conceptual argument, let me explain that concepts are of little value in mystical studies, and then only at the beginning when they are only used as a means if conveying to the spiritual aspirant the need to go beyond all mental representation of reality in order to apprehend directly the real.

 

[MD]

The mind can never be purely physical

 

[Cephus]

The mind can never be purely physical

How do you know that? Where is your evidence of anything else?

 

[MD]

How do you know that? Where is your evidence of anything else?

Where is your evidence that the mind is PURELY physical?

Mind you I said purely, because the brain is obviously involved with the mind. Strong emergence is equal to magic. This is a topic that has been exhaustively debated and the physicalists lost. One of the strongest new theories on consciousness is IIT by Koch and Tononi and it postulates that consciousness is a property of the universe. There's no other way to explain qualia physically and there never will be.

 

[Cephus]

Where is your evidence that the mind is PURELY physical?

Mind you I said purely, because the brain is obviously involved with the mind. Strong emergence is equal to magic. This is a topic that has been exhaustively debated and the physicalists lost. One of the strongest new theories on consciousness is IIT by Koch and Tononi and it postulates that consciousness is a property of the universe. There's no other way to explain qualia physically and there never will be.

There is no evidence of anything else. Given that every shred of evidence we have shows that the mind is purely and completely an emergent property of the physical brain, the burden of proof rests on you, who claims otherwise.

So go ahead, prove your case or stop making claims that you can't back up.

 

[Maldini]

What is mind? If it's not physical, then it's undefinable and a mere hypothesis.

 

[Brickjectivity]

My mind is definitely tied to my brain. I view that as a problem. When I hit my head hard I lose all sense.

 

[MD]

There is no evidence of anything else. Given that every shred of evidence we have shows that the mind is purely and completely an emergent property of the physical brain, the burden of proof rests on you, who claims otherwise.

So go ahead, prove your case or stop making claims that you can't back up.

You do realize that your claim of physicalism that strong emergence exists is a form of dualism, it's property dualism.

The mental properties of our inner subjective experience are totally different from the physical strata which give rise to them. If you can explain how we see color or smell things or have emotions, you will win the nobel prize. So I dare you to explain them, if you have the guts. Because then I will want to shut you down.

 

[Revoltingest]

No brain, never mind!

Is the mind itself physical and does this question make any sense?

The mind is the brain's function, ie, the result of something physical, so I'd say it's a physical phenomenon.

 

[Cephus]

The mental properties of our inner subjective experience are totally different from the physical strata which give rise to them.

Says who? You just keep making claims without any evidence to back them up. Here, you do it again. Put up or shut up.

 

[DayRaven]

My mind is definitely tied to my brain. I view that as a problem.

I'm reminded of something CS Lewis once wrote on this likening mind to the voice your hear from a radio. If the radio is damaged you may not be able to hear the voice from it well (or at all) does that mean the voice is coming from the radio?

I'm not personally convinced by material naturalism but does that mean that supernaturalism is the only other option? What about naturalistic dualism?

 

[Brickjectivity]

Consider mortality for a moment. In its definition death is the opposite of life. A dead thing is unchanging, but we are always changing. When we stop changing we stop being, but consider people who have visions and out of body experiences and what that means. Is there an external form for the mind, something without attachment? These visions could represent a mind apart from the body, but we also can observe other explanations for those visions and experiences. What does that mean? In fact we can cause visions by applying electrical and chemical stimuli, fooling people into seeing things that they shouldn't. Sleep deprivation or extreme tension can cause them, too. We can give them false memories and give them evil behavioral problems with hypnosis! We don't have fine control over this, but we can do it. So if the mind is like a radio, sending and receiving messages to a disconnected part of our mind then we have by manipulating the body, affected the remote mind, too. We have marred the spirit by marring the flesh. Therefore whatever the remote mind is, it can be manipulated by us using the subject's body. Visions are not consistent, dreams are chaotic and the remotest parts of our minds can be harmed or improved by the nearest and most physical parts. So a remote part of thought might explain some psychic phenomena, but it is not really remote. It doesn't have that 'Non physical' aspect we're looking for and is connected somehow to the body.

Conjecture: perhaps to achieve a non-physical mind we would have to stop being alive and become more like a picture.

 

[DayRaven]

We can give them false memories and give them evil behavioral problems with hypnosis!

Here I would argue that if you know a memory to be false then you would know what the subjects actual memories are (if that makes sense?). In that way you're not really affecting anything about his non-physical mind as much as you are, perhaps, blocking the subjects process of recall.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Here I would argue that if you know a memory to be false then you would know what the subjects actual memories are (if that makes sense?). In that way you're not really affecting anything about his non-physical mind as much as you are, perhaps, blocking the subjects process of recall.

Partly agree. If it is non physical, then that means it is not connected. Very likely the Physical mind and the non-physical mind would not be related at all, merely co-dimensional. A smart person with a strong physical mind could have the non physical mind of a chicken or a rock.

 

[Willamena]

What is mind? If it's not physical, then it's undefinable and a mere hypothesis.

Physicality doesn't preclude defining things.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Tangentially related but interesting: BBC News - Scientists develop thought-controlled gene switch

 

[Paradox22]

The mind is an emergent property of the brain. It takes place within the physical brain. Without the brain, there is no mind. It's like cyberspace. It might feel like a huge thing but in reality, it just takes place inside of millions of computers. If you turn those computers off, cyberspace goes away

I tend to agree with Cephus. I think the mind is simply the manifestation of the brain. Our mind is a series of mental events or experiences including perceptions and thoughts. It is not only tied to the brain, it is the direct manifestation of changes in the brain. Of course, not all changes in the brain result in a mental event. For example, the hypothalamus does it's thing without causing a mental experience.
That is what I would have said awhile ago. It occurs to me now that the idea that mind is a 'series' of event suggest linearity. However, why can't two mental events happen at the same time when different parts of the brain are changing in such a way that each would be sufficient to create a thought independent of what other parts of the brain are doing. Can we have multiple mental experiences at the same time? If so, how is that manifested in our mind. If not, how does that work?

 

[Straw Dog]

We know about reality in terms of objects, but the actual nature of reality is not objectifiable. We know about the mind in terms of the objects of mind, but the actual nature of the mind is not objectifiable. Down the rabbit hole we go...