Lets try this another way: if you have faith the brain creates the mind, and that mind depends on brain, can we please see your logic and evidence?

[Twilight Hue]

Claim: the brain creates the mind. The mind depends on the brain. When the brain dies mind dies. Etc.

Evidence: ?????

Actually , the brain has no mind itself.

The mind is dependent and formed through other living organisms to relay information to the brain through its neural networks.

Yet it's true, once the brain dies, that 'thing' called mind is no more once communications are severed.

 

[We Never Know]

And I respect that! But I am curious if there are reasons you hold this opinion.

On the other hand one could argue its the mind that is gone when someone is in a vegetative state, therefore the brain becomes useless.

 

[danieldemol]

I'm posting this thread for reference since it strikes me as disinfomative to post multiple threads essentially asking the same question minus peoples prior attempts at addressing the question;

The faith that the brain is the source of mind doesn't hold up

Updated to highlight the empirical facts. 1. The only evidence for physicalism is that doing things to the brain affects the mind. This is expected by everyone though, dualists for instance don't say the two aren't connected, it isn't exclusive to physicalism. It also forgets that correlation...

www.religiousforums.com

 

[Viker]

The brain doesn't "create" the mind. The mind forms by interaction with external stimuli effecting the body's cells and nerves. The whole of the body and it's experiences "create" the mind. The brain regulates this process and stores information for further interactions. A brain by itself would be incapable of a mind. Therefore, the mind requires a whole host. It's almost like an entity in and of itself. But it's an aspect of a whole body, the self.

This is why I believe in a totality of a self. Mind, body, spirit, soul, ego, superego, etc. are one thing with various inner mechanisms and external appendages, so to speak, extending inward then outward, outside of the body, of/from the body and so on.

As it is above, so it is below. As it is within, so it is outside and all around.

 

[sayak83]

1) insert ice pick into radio.
2) Swish it around thoroughly to mix up all the wires
3) determine if it still plays music
4) no longer there
5) therefore my radio creates all music.

This is your actual argument?

This is not a good argument for the following reasons:-
1) If the brain was just a receiver like a radio, then multiple brains could exist at the same time that "emit" the same mind. This is not observed. This evidence has to be there and is crucial to justify the transmission/receiver argument. For example the same internet page can be accessed from multiple computers at the same time.
2) The mind develops and grows in complexity in a child along with the brain. For example, the ability to think from the point of view of another develops around age 5-6 if I remember correctly. If the brain was just about transmitting information to the mind and receiving information from it, then the growth of the mind would not have been connected to the developmental growth of the brain circuitry.
3) Brain is a collection of atoms only, then why does one collection of atoms get affected by and also affects a nonphysical entity called mind but another collection of atoms (say a banana) does not. Why does a banana not have a mind. That suggests that there must be laws governing the ways in which the non-physical entity interacts with the physical. Then this non-physical entity just becomes another physical entity (like say dark matter) which we perceive indirectly by its effects on physical entities that we do perceive (the brain activity).

For the record, I am not a physicalist here. I believe that either the dual aspect theory or neutral monistic theory has a better chance. But its still up in the air.

 

[RestlessSoul]

What is the first thing you become, when you wake up in the morning? You become conscious; therefore consciousness is primary, it’s the alpha and the omega of human experience.

But you can only see this when you truly inhabit your own consciousness; you have to be truly awake, to be truly aware. And the ego doesn’t want you to do that, it wants to keep you entangled in it’s snares and cares, so you remain focused on it’s base material concerns.

Time for some William Blake I think;

 

[exchemist]

Claim: the brain creates the mind. The mind depends on the brain. When the brain dies mind dies. Etc.

Evidence: ?????

Death, sleep, unconsciousness, brain damage and dementia.

 

[ChristineM]

Claim: the brain creates the mind. The mind depends on the brain. When the brain dies mind dies. Etc.

Evidence: ?????

Ask a neurosurgeon.

Damage to the brain damages the mind.
Dementia damages the mind
On brain death the mind ceases


On the other hand, perhaps you have evidence that the mind is not created by the brain, if so then please present it

 

[LuisDantas]

You called it "The best discussion of the matter that I know of is this." Though I do not blame you if you are walking back on that, it's a huge essay arguing the brain and mind are connected.

I'm no specialist. Nor do you deserve any particular state of the art. Make no mistake.

 

[RestlessSoul]

Ask a neurosurgeon.

Damage to the brain damages the mind.
Dementia damages the mind
On brain death the mind ceases


On the other hand, perhaps you have evidence that the mind is not created by the brain, if so then please present it

What you offer here is evidence of correlation, not causation.

Anyway, let's do as you suggest, and ask a neuroscientist;

A Neuroscientist Explains The Difference Between The Mind & Brain | mindbodygreen

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Claim: the brain creates the mind. The mind depends on the brain. When the brain dies mind dies. Etc.

Evidence: ?????

1. braindamage alters the mind
2. drugs, medicine, ... in short: things that affect brain chemistry balance, alters the mind
3. the mind disappears when the brain dies or shows no more neural activity
4. while under a scanner, putting the mind to work shows on brainscans
5. "mind reading devices": still in baby shoes, but the tech is already in existence where it is able to project images of what a person is think. and it does this by.... "reading" brain activity.



Is 5 enough?

Now it's your turn. What evidence do you have that minds exists independently of brains? Can you show us a mind that exists absent a living brain?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

So now instead of simply supporting physicalism you also need to refute theism, paranormal activity, etc. I look forward to this!

There is absolutely no need to "refute" things that are asserted without evidence.
There is nothing there to refute.

What is asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.
If you wish to claim that minds can exists without brains, then it's upto you to demonstrate / support that.

Until you do, there is nothing there to refute and the claim can be simply dismissed at face value.

Again I'm not asking for evidence the two are connected but that one creates the other.

See above.

So your argument is that correlation = causation.

No, that is not at all the argument.
It's not that they are connected. It's that they are one and the same.
What you call the "mind" is mere brain function. It's not so much what the brain produces, it's what the brain does.

Lets test if this is special pleading:

do you blame the decline of pirates for the rise in global temperatures?

How is that analogous in any way?

Another for presuppositionalism.

Says the guy who obviously is presupposing that minds can and do exist absent living brains.

So 3 users with no evidence at all to provide.

Or rather, evidence provided and ignored by you, as expected.
Handwaving and willful ignorance is all you have.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

1) insert ice pick into radio.
2) Swish it around thoroughly to mix up all the wires
3) determine if it still plays music
4) no longer there
5) therefore my radio creates all music.

This is your actual argument?

No, that's just an equivocation fallacy.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

And I respect that! But I am curious if there are reasons you hold this opinion.

You are responding to one such reason.


Your objection here is akin to saying that you have a wooden chair. And when I ask you from what kind of tree it comes, you answer "ow, it's not wood from a tree".
Then I reply with "all wood comes from trees. Trees are wood".
And you then reply with "ow, that's just a correlation".

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Well yes, if you are going to say a widely reported common human experience are all independent delusions you should have reasons to do so.

Delusion in humans isn't exactly a rare phenomenon.
For example, on average 3 in 100 people will go through a psychotic episode at least once in their life.
And that's just one source of delusion.

That, coupled with the fact that none of these experiences have ever been objectively established as real while at the same time MANY are known to be delusional and fraudulent....

You do the maths on what's more probable.

 

[Kathryn]

All I can tell you is that, thru mainly DNA, my brother is schizophrenic. (Our mother had bipolar 1 disorder and I myself have an eleven percent chance of being seriously mentally ill via DNA, vs the usual 2 percent chance, though I think it would have surfaced by now - LOL). Anyway, this is interesting to me because of the whole physical vs. non physical thing, and the effects of medication which often corrects the brain. The BRAIN. When my brother takes his meds, he falls within normal behaviors and standards - when his meds are "off," he is "off" as well. The meds affect his BRAIN which affects his MIND.

 

[Revoltingest]

I despise new-age sounding woowoo uses
of "energy" that feed misconceptions about it.
This triggered me!

What you offer here is evidence of correlation, not causation.

Anyway, let's do as you suggest, and ask a neuroscientist;

A Neuroscientist Explains The Difference Between The Mind & Brain | mindbodygreen

Excerpted....
The mind is energy, and it generates energy through thinking, feeling, and choosing.


Now for my 2 cents based on observation....
The mind is a complex process occurring in the brain.
The mind affects & is affected by the brain.
The environment affects & is affected by the mind.

And finally, never insert crayons into brains.

 

[bobhikes]

Claim: the brain creates the mind. The mind depends on the brain. When the brain dies mind dies. Etc.

Evidence: ?????

The Brain is just an organism for processing and storing data. The mind is the processing and retrieving of data caused by the millions of sensors your body has interacting with the world and the millions of processes needed to do to keep you alive.

 

[RestlessSoul]

All I can tell you is that, thru mainly DNA, my brother is schizophrenic. (Our mother had bipolar 1 disorder and I myself have an eleven percent chance of being seriously mentally ill via DNA, vs the usual 2 percent chance, though I think it would have surfaced by now - LOL). Anyway, this is interesting to me because of the whole physical vs. non physical thing, and the effects of medication which often corrects the brain. The BRAIN. When my brother takes his meds, he falls within normal behaviors and standards - when his meds are "off," he is "off" as well. The meds affect his BRAIN which affects his MIND.

There is a feedback loop here, and it’s a two way process; thus the mind can also affect the brain, enabling the rewiring of neural pathways through therapies such as CBT.

 

[RestlessSoul]

I despise new-age sounding woowoo uses
of "energy" that feed misconceptions about it.
This triggered me!

Excerpted....
The mind is energy, and it generates energy through thinking, feeling, and choosing.


Now for my 2 cents based on observation....
The mind is a complex process occurring in the brain.
The mind affects & is affected by the brain.
The environment affects & is affected by the mind.

And finally, never insert crayons into brains.

You’re easily triggered, I get that. I seem to remember the word entropy having a similar effect on you on at least one occasion. It’s almost as if, by policing the language, you can police your own unconscious and prevent trespass by unwelcome ideas.