How materialists know brain produces mind

[The Transcended Omniverse]

Scientific materialists claim that the brain produces our experiences in the first place. They would claim that they have empirical evidence to support this idea. The idea is that since there is an experiencer in the brain, then stimulation of neurons in the brain can be experienced. Since you have information of an experiencer in the brain and since this information is wired to all other neurons in the brain, then that is what allows you to experience stimulation of those neurons.

Therefore, since you have an experiencer in the brain, then that is what makes all the neurons in the brain no longer just physical stuff and what actually allows you to have experience. So all the physical stuff (neurons) in the brain and experience are actually the same thing. But an experiencer is what makes experience possible.

In order for the brain to have experiences, then you need the capacity to have experience in the first place because without the capability of having experiences in the first place, then you cannot have any experience at all in the brain. So what is it that unlocks this capacity? I am quite sure it is something known as 'awareness.'

Only a brain that is aware can have experiences. The experiencer I explained can only be defined as an experiencer if he/she has the capability of having experiences. That is the very definition of an experiencer in the first place. Without the capability of experience, then we cannot call this an experiencer. Therefore, since I explained that it is awareness that is this capacity for experience, then the experiencer would have awareness and this is what makes experience possible in the brain according to modern scientific materialism.

 

[Laika]

Scientific materialists claim that the brain produces our experiences in the first place. They would claim that they have empirical evidence to support this idea. The idea is that since there is an experiencer in the brain, then stimulation of neurons in the brain can be experienced. Since you have information of an experiencer in the brain and since this information is wired to all other neurons in the brain, then that is what allows you to experience stimulation of those neurons.

Therefore, since you have an experiencer in the brain, then that is what makes all the neurons in the brain no longer just physical stuff and what actually allows you to have experience. So all the physical stuff (neurons) in the brain and experience are actually the same thing. But an experiencer is what makes experience possible.

In order for the brain to have experiences, then you need the capacity to have experience in the first place because without the capability of having experiences in the first place, then you cannot have any experience at all in the brain. So what is it that unlocks this capacity? I am quite sure it is something known as 'awareness.'

Only a brain that is aware can have experiences. The experiencer I explained can only be defined as an experiencer if he/she has the capability of having experiences. That is the very definition of an experiencer in the first place. Without the capability of experience, then we cannot call this an experiencer. Therefore, since I explained that it is awareness that is this capacity for experience, then the experiencer would have awareness and this is what makes experience possible in the brain according to modern scientific materialism.

These are just a few thoughts that may help the discussion along. As a materialist I don't pretend to have the answers as the philosophy of mind is not a simple problem because it concerns both the nature of the universe and what can be known- so you can go round in circles.

As a note, materialism is an idea that has been sidelined amongst scientists so "scientific materialism" is something confined to 19th and early 20th century thought. Its been in decline since Einsteins theory of relativity raised questions about the objectivity of time and space as physical phenomena and how the physical properties of matter challange materialism as a philosophy of irreducable atoms with the conversion of matter into energy, etc. So- its "complicated". Anyway- back to your OP:

If awareness precedes experience, wouldn't it logically follow that the state of awareness in dreams means that dreams are experiences as "real" as any waking state?

Also If awareness precedes experience- you are effectivelly assuming that consciousness is a non-physical property. In earlier times it could be considered a soul- so the ability of awareness to seperate from the physical brain would open the possibility of an afterlife (as the non-physical soul" survives the physical death).

If awareness precedes experience, why would the chemical changes in the brain due to psychoactive drugs such as LSD or even alcohol have an effect on our consciousness?

 

[The Transcended Omniverse]

These are just a few thoughts that may help the discussion along. As a materialist I don't pretend to have the answers as the philosophy of mind is not a simple problem because it concerns both the nature of the universe and what can be known- so you can go round in circles.

As a note, materialism is an idea that has been sidelined amongst scientists so "scientific materialism" is something confined to 19th and early 20th century thought. Its been in decline since Einsteins theory of relativity raised questions about the objectivity of time and space as physical phenomena and how the physical properties of matter challange materialism as a philosophy of irreducable atoms with the conversion of matter into energy, etc. So- its "complicated". Anyway- back to your OP:

If awareness precedes experience, wouldn't it logically follow that the state of awareness in dreams means that dreams are experiences as "real" as any waking state?

Also If awareness precedes experience- you are effectivelly assuming that consciousness is a non-physical property. In earlier times it could be considered a soul- so the ability of awareness to seperate from the physical brain would open the possibility of an afterlife (as the non-physical soul" survives the physical death).

If awareness precedes experience, why would the chemical changes in the brain due to psychoactive drugs such as LSD or even alcohol have an effect on our consciousness?

First off, awareness would be a physical property of the brain. I never said anything to the effect of awareness, consciousness, and experience being independent of the brain. Also, aren't you less aware in dreams and, therefore, the experiences aren't as real as they are in waking life?

 

[allfoak]

If awareness precedes experience, why would the chemical changes in the brain due to psychoactive drugs such as LSD or even alcohol have an effect on our consciousness?

Because consciousness and the body are intimately connected.
The only thing that separates them is the death of the body.

 

[Brickjectivity]

I think there is some middle ground. Human chemical awareness may simulate another kind of awareness.

 

[Laika]

First off, awareness would be a physical property of the brain. I never said anything to the effect of awareness, consciousness, and experience being independent of the brain. Also, aren't you less aware in dreams and, therefore, the experiences aren't as real as they are in waking life?

Sorry, I mis-read your OP as critical of materialism. Anti-materialism is much more common so its a force of habit. Opps!

Our awareness is dependent on sensation and perception. So awareness doesn't come from the brain but is something that the brain recieves from our senses. Our inner experirnce of the mind may make us think that way, but I would huess the actual physical process of the bervous system is from the senses to the brain.

The dream question I'm not sure about as I would need to look at the science on it. I would say we are less aware of our surronding with confidence. But my understanding is that it is an internal activity of the brain during REM sleep and this can be observed by studying brain activity during sleep (such as eye movement). So its obviously not "real" in so far as it is not external from the brain itself but is a product of consciousness.

 

[Laika]

Because consciousness and the body are intimately connected.
The only thing that separates them is the death of the body.

Is that something that could be proven? Or maybe the better question is how would it be proven?

 

[The Transcended Omniverse]

Sorry, I mis-read your OP as critical of materialism. Anti-materialism is much more common so its a force of habit. Opps!

Our awareness is dependent on sensation and perception. So awareness doesn't come from the brain but is something that the brain recieves from our senses. Our inner experirnce of the mind may make us think that way, but I would huess the actual physical process of the bervous system is from the senses to the brain.

The dream question I'm not sure about as I would need to look at the science on it. I would say we are less aware of our surronding with confidence. But my understanding is that it is an internal activity of the brain during REM sleep and this can be observed by studying brain activity during sleep (such as eye movement). So its obviously not "real" in so far as it is not external from the brain itself but is a product of consciousness.

Then when stimuli reach the brain, that creates awareness which, in turn, creates an experience.

 

[allfoak]

Is that something that could be proven? Or maybe the better question is how would it be proven?

Proof for something called consciousness is still not scientifically proven.
If one accepts the existence of consciousness then understanding that the two are intimately connected is a no-brainer.

 

[Laika]

Then when stimuli reach the brain, that creates awareness which, in turn, creates an experience.

*nods approvingly*

 

[Laika]

Proof for something called consciousness is still not scientifically proven.
If one accepts the existence of consciousness then understanding that the two are intimately connected is a no-brainer.

If consciousness is not identical with the brain, it means they are seperated in someway. I.e. The physical processes of the brain cannot be said to produce as non-physical process in consciousness. The connection between consciousness and the brain would logically rely on consciousness being a physical process.

The reason science hasn't proven the existence of consciousness is because its philosophically so complicated. The issues are somewhere along the lines of: Is the experience of consciousness proof of its existence or a source of knowledge of consciousness? Or should we be studying the physical processes of the brain to identify the causes of the "inner" experience?

 

[allfoak]

If consciousness is not identical with the brain, it means they are seperated in someway. I.e. The physical processes of the brain cannot be said to produce as non-physical process in consciousness. The connection between consciousness and the brain would logically rely on consciousness being a physical process.

The reason science hasn't proven the existence of consciousness is because its philosophically so complicated. The issues are somewhere along the lines of: Is the experience of consciousness proof of its existence or a source of knowledge of consciousness? Or should we be studying the physical processes of the brain to identify the causes of the "inner" experience?

I have decided that the fact that i am aware is enough proof that there is something more to me than flesh and bone.
i am not a scientist and i do not need the confirmation of science to know that i am aware.
Once the decision is made to accept consciousness as being separate from the body, there is no limit to understanding what life is all about.

Some are afraid to make that leap.
Once it is made however, everything else falls into place.

 

[allfoak]

@Laika
Do you know if there is any science to backup this statement?

"Under, and back of, the Universe of Time, Space and Change,
is ever to be found The Substantial Reality--the Fundamental
Truth."--The Kybalion.

Under and behind all outward appearances or manifestations, there must always be a Substantial Reality. This is the Law.

 

[bobhikes]

The

Scientific materialists claim that the brain produces our experiences in the first place. They would claim that they have empirical evidence to support this idea. The idea is that since there is an experiencer in the brain, then stimulation of neurons in the brain can be experienced. Since you have information of an experiencer in the brain and since this information is wired to all other neurons in the brain, then that is what allows you to experience stimulation of those neurons.

Therefore, since you have an experiencer in the brain, then that is what makes all the neurons in the brain no longer just physical stuff and what actually allows you to have experience. So all the physical stuff (neurons) in the brain and experience are actually the same thing. But an experiencer is what makes experience possible.

In order for the brain to have experiences, then you need the capacity to have experience in the first place because without the capability of having experiences in the first place, then you cannot have any experience at all in the brain. So what is it that unlocks this capacity? I am quite sure it is something known as 'awareness.'

Only a brain that is aware can have experiences. The experiencer I explained can only be defined as an experiencer if he/she has the capability of having experiences. That is the very definition of an experiencer in the first place. Without the capability of experience, then we cannot call this an experiencer. Therefore, since I explained that it is awareness that is this capacity for experience, then the experiencer would have awareness and this is what makes experience possible in the brain according to modern scientific materialism.

I am not aware of any scientific explanation for the Brain as an experiencer. Most of what I have learned and believe is being thought is that sensory perception is what you would call the experiencer. The brain (mind) is the collection point and assembler. Your sense's experience reality and send signals to the brain. The brain interprets the data for the purpose of action. Action again is experienced by the sensor's in the body. Thoughts are just independent sensory responses that are organized for comprehension.

 

[Aupmanyav]

I think you are missing memory in the discussion. A search on the page gives me 0 result.

 

[allfoak]

I think you are missing memory in the discussion. A search on the page gives me 0 result.

Maybe he forgot?

 

[Laika]

@Laika
Do you know if there is any science to backup this statement?

No. not to my knowledge. But it would involves a large part of the philosophy of science to support or deny that view and I'm not qualified to make that decision.

 

[allfoak]

No. not to my knowledge. But it would involves a large part of the philosophy of science to support or deny that view and I'm not qualified to make that decision.

Thank you.
I can always count on your honesty.

I think we are so opposite in the way that we we think that we have more in common than is recognized.
I have been told that if i travel west for a long enough period of time, i will end up in the east.

 

[Laika]

Thank you.
I can always count on your honesty.

I think we are so opposite in the way that we we think that we have more in common than is recognized.
I have been told that if i travel west for a long enough period of time, i will end up in the east.

Nicely said. I try to look for common ground as its just more pleasant. If you find yourself wondering about something to do with materialism, feel free to PM me and I might be able to answer your question or just help out if need be.

 

[allfoak]

Nicely said. I try to look for common ground as its just more pleasant. If you find yourself wondering about something to do with materialism, feel free to PM me and I might be able to answer your question or just help out if need be.

I am always looking to reconcile the paradoxes.
It is what i do.
Desire is one of my favorite.
Desire is so full of paradox that understanding it may reveal the meaning of life.
I think it may be more revealing than the God or no God argument.