It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Removal of "Mind" from Human Inquiry

page: 3
5
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 5 2015 @ 09:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: Aphorism
a reply to: BlueMule




Irrelevant. It is causal. It can be observed indirectly, symbolically.


You can observe the effect but not the cause? What if I can observe both the cause and the effect? It sounds as though I have more empirical basis, while you have a guess.


But unless you are feeling the emotions, the motivations, the qualia of another mind, you aren't observing the cause. You're observing a symbolic form and watching it control the brain.

Can you chew your teeth?

Suppose your teeth say to you, 'we have no use for a concept of something we can't chew'

You can construct a model, a symbolic form, of your teeth and chew the hell out of them. Maybe you can convince your teeth that they have the whole tooth concept right where they want it.

👣


edit on 687Thursday000000America/ChicagoMar000000ThursdayAmerica/Chicago by BlueMule because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 5 2015 @ 09:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: Aphorism
The Removal of "Mind" from Human Inquiry

1.

The mind (another word for soul, psyche, ego, consciousness etc.) as a concept is a hurdle to further human understanding. It confuses more than it enlightens. It has zero explanatory power. It is without scope. It cannot be empirically validated. On top of that, it is dangerous to believe in, for it risks giving primacy to a fiction rather than the reality it is meant to explain, leading one to solipsism.

2.

Minds do not exist, due to the simple fact that such an entity or substance is absent from biology. In this case, since we have the domain and finite system in which to look and study, namely, the body, absence of evidence is evidence of absence. It is easy to prove this negative, like it is easy to prove there is not a monster under the bed. Turn on a light and look. To prove mind doesn't exist is a simple matter of looking to see if it is there or not. We've looked; it isn't there.


These scientific-materialistic notions are useful enough in the realm of science, but they make for terrible philosophy!


Regardless, I agree that it is useful to look at the body and all of its functions as a unit or whole, which I prefer to call the body-mind in order to encompass the full scope of the body's functions.

To separate the apparently non-physical functions and call them "mind" is a matter of convenience only. Unfortunately, people make a leap of faith relative to mind, and assume it is beyond the whole body (whatever that is altogether) and that it will not die when the body does.

However, your definition of mind is far greater in scope than what is warranted. Mind and consciousness are not the same - but this needs to be discovered by surrendering to reality altogether, and allowing reality to demonstrate the truth of this. The scientific-materialist will never prove this truth.

Scientific materialism has no say in that great matter, and that is fine - it should simply deal with the body-mind as a whole and continue doing its very useful work in improving mankind's conditions.
edit on 3/5/2015 by bb23108 because:



posted on Mar, 5 2015 @ 09:46 AM
link   
a reply to: Aphorism

In order to deny the existence of 'the mind', you must have some concepts and understandings on what exactly and generally 'the mind' would be if it were to exist.

If you and I in this abstract and hypothetical but hopefully beneficial thought experiment were playing God on earth, and we know everything about particles and atoms and the laws of physics; so lets say we knew that life on earth can evolve naturally, but since we know all the parts and principles we can expedite any process to just create life our selves, which when we are finished will be identical in every way to the life that now exists. However we also have the ability to invent and be creative and add extra to our life projects.

My question is; in our thought experiment, you and I standing over earth, creating our life forms, creating our humans, I turn to you and say; I know you do not believe that these humans have 'the mind'; I ask; what is the bare minimum material, mechanism, and/or concept you must add to our project human, to negate your belief in the non existence of the mind in our project human?
edit on 5-3-2015 by ImaFungi because: (no reason given)

edit on 5-3-2015 by ImaFungi because: (no reason given)

edit on 5-3-2015 by ImaFungi because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 5 2015 @ 11:19 AM
link   
a reply to: Aphorism
It is strange that you do not believe in mind but believe that you are an individual. Mind and ego are what the (illusory) separate person is made of.
Consciousness is not the same as mind or ego. There is an awareness of thoughts arising and the play going on in the head which stars the person you think your self to be.
The mind is where 'there and then' appear. Consciousness is never not here - seeing the play happening in mind of yesterday and tomorrow.
'There and then' do not exist so the separate person in the play of yesterday or tomorrow does not exist either.

There is only what is happening. Energy is moving and no one is doing it.


edit on 5-3-2015 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 5 2015 @ 11:48 AM
link   
a reply to: Aphorism

only you could turn "mindless" into a compliment.

and what a load of waffles you have brought for brunch.
edit on 5-3-2015 by TzarChasm because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 5 2015 @ 06:03 PM
link   
a reply to: theabsolutetruth

Yes people study the brain. I am not saying people do not study the brain or that processes within the brain do not occur, all of which are parts and activities of the body. I am saying they are not studying anything called a mind, that there is no element besides the body involved in perception, consciousness etc.

As I said for about the 4th time now, there is no such thing as mind. I don’t care if the term is non-scientific or not. It is not an assumption to say there isn't one, because there is no such thing (remember the dictionary here) when we look.

Math is physical; No one studies math from thin air.



posted on Mar, 5 2015 @ 06:12 PM
link   
a reply to: fabritecht


That's like saying water is another word for ocean, river, lake, puddle, etc. Sounds wise and almost right, but not quite. They certainly are all bodies OF water, but there are major different qualities and functions amongst all those bodies of water. I don't think the ego comprises all of consciousness, it may only be a small part of it. So to equate all those above, to me, seems like you don't really understand what those are in the first place. I don't think soul and consciousness can be equated. Where does that leave spirit? Is that also the same as the mind in your opinion? Yea, all these concepts and ideas are super ahead of our time, like relativity and quantum mechanics was to a 17th century physicist. It doesn't mean they don't exist.


I am well aware of the dictionary meaning of those words. But I am concerned with what it is they are attempting to define. Take an ego, consciousness, a mind, a soul and put each of them under a microscope. They are indeed all the same. They all describe a misunderstanding of the human body. Nothing more.


We just feel it's presence, and no this isn't a spiritual metaphor. The brain scans and the neuroscience and all that, are indirectly measuring the presence of the mind. Maybe even of the ego, psyche, soul, consciousness etc... too. The mind has control of the body, not the other way around. The Ghost inside the machine if you will. Again, what is it made of and what are its properties? You got me there. Maybe in 300 years somebody will figure it out. I think they'll find its made of love and curiosity :p


We also felt that the earth stood still, or that the sun revolved around the earth. I understand that the “there is no mind” concept is counterintuitive, and difficult to shake, but the evidence , the logic, is all pointing to an opposite conclusion.

The ghost in the machine idea doesn’t work, unfortunately, and has no place in human inquiry.



posted on Mar, 5 2015 @ 06:13 PM
link   
a reply to: ImaFungi


My question is; in our thought experiment, you and I standing over earth, creating our life forms, creating our humans, I turn to you and say; I know you do not believe that these humans have 'the mind'; I ask; what is the bare minimum material, mechanism, and/or concept you must add to our project human, to negate your belief in the non existence of the mind in our project human?


I would ask for the element that allows a person to think, to feel, etc. as per the dictionary definition of mind. If this element thinks, or is conscious, or is able to learn, I would believe minds exist.

While we're building people, allow me to ask you. What systems of the body can be removed from a person before a mind begins to disappear?



posted on Mar, 5 2015 @ 08:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Aphorism

Does this paragraph you wrote really exist?

Where does it exist?

There really only exist high voltages and low voltages on an array of registers on semiconductor chips or polarized magnetic matter on a harddisk. So I guess your paragraph does not exist.



edit on 5-3-2015 by nOraKat because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 6 2015 @ 02:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: Aphorism


As I said for about the 4th time now, there is no such thing as mind.

There are no things at all.
There is only what is.
Is 'what actually is' a thing?
Energy is moving - is energy a thing?
The energy patterns but there is nothing separate doing the moving - it is one (without a second).


edit on 6-3-2015 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 6 2015 @ 07:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: Aphorism
a reply to: ImaFungi


My question is; in our thought experiment, you and I standing over earth, creating our life forms, creating our humans, I turn to you and say; I know you do not believe that these humans have 'the mind'; I ask; what is the bare minimum material, mechanism, and/or concept you must add to our project human, to negate your belief in the non existence of the mind in our project human?


I would ask for the element that allows a person to think, to feel, etc. as per the dictionary definition of mind. If this element thinks, or is conscious, or is able to learn, I would believe minds exist.

While we're building people, allow me to ask you. What systems of the body can be removed from a person before a mind begins to disappear?


You're probably thinking, no brain = no mind.


The French Nobel laureate philosopher, Henri Bergson, made the argument that the brain filters consciousness to one’s bodily requirements, but that the brain does not create consciousness. This would imply that decreased brain activity could actually mean increased, raw unfiltered, consciousness. Recently, such an inverse correlation has been observed.[2]

Bergson drew the analogy between a radio and the program it was playing with a brain and the consciousness linked thereto: damage the radio or brain, and one can have correlated programmatic or mental damage, but this does not logically imply that the radio produces the program or that the brain produces the fundamental essence of consciousness. Bergson’s contention that memory, as an aspect of consciousness, was not dependent on a brain has recently been corroborated by the discovery that slime-mould – cousin to the fungi – has a memory despite, of course, not having a brain.[3]


realitysandwich.com...

👣


edit on 619FridayuAmerica/ChicagoMaruFridayAmerica/Chicago by BlueMule because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 6 2015 @ 11:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: Aphorism
a reply to: ImaFungi


My question is; in our thought experiment, you and I standing over earth, creating our life forms, creating our humans, I turn to you and say; I know you do not believe that these humans have 'the mind'; I ask; what is the bare minimum material, mechanism, and/or concept you must add to our project human, to negate your belief in the non existence of the mind in our project human?


I would ask for the element that allows a person to think, to feel, etc. as per the dictionary definition of mind. If this element thinks, or is conscious, or is able to learn, I would believe minds exist.



Does a heart exist? What is the element that allows a heart to exist?

Does a heart beat? does a beating heart exist? I dont think a heart beats, show me this 'beat' you speak of. What is the element of beatness?


While we're building people, allow me to ask you. What systems of the body can be removed from a person before a mind begins to disappear?


Arms, legs, a kidney, appendix, tonsils, people have brain surgery, breasts, parts of stomach, im sure other stuff, whats your point?

We have had this argument before, I wrote you a lengthy response and you never answered. It boils down to you refusing to acknowledge that the body is not 1 solitary intrinsic particle, but a unitary system composed of varying complex parts, which perform differing functions.

That is all you have to acknowledge, then you will acknowledge that the word mind, is a term used to describe processes associated with certain sectors of parts within the system that is the body.

Lets eliminate the term mind from existence, to you and I the word has never existed on earth, and it is meaningless etc.

Where in the body does thinking take place? Where in the body does seeing take place? I hope you can answer, in the brain. Ok so we dont even need the word mind, there is only the brain, that weird looking pink thing, and that is it. You are right, there is no need to use the term mind; the brain exists, the brain does all the thinking and seeing; it is like there is no need for the word car, because the word automobile exists. I always assumed the word mind separated from the word brain, to denote the difference between willful acts of thought and auto biological acts of the brain.
edit on 6-3-2015 by ImaFungi because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 6 2015 @ 11:15 AM
link   
a reply to: Aphorism




are you willing to place that element on a chair


What chair?

Answer. A piece of furniture called a chair by convention that serves a useful purpose.
What is it to be human a lump of "organs only" that you can place on a chair?
I think therefore I am.
I have the free choice to dabble in the rational and the irrational. Its great being a human rather than an animal. To escape suffering they say you must lose the mind. Thats great, but I am not suffering all the time, therefore I enjoy my minds company. I also enjoy my memories even though I cant put them on a chair. I know Dark Side of the moon by Pink Floyd will still sound good when i replay it for the 500th time sometime in the future.


From Simple Minds – "Someone Somewhere In Summertime Lyrics"
"Stay, I'm burning slow
With me in the rain, walking in the soft rain
Calling out my name
See me burning slow

Brilliant days, wake up on brilliant days
Shadows of brilliant ways will change all the time
Memories, burning gold memories
Gold of day memories change me in these times

Somewhere there is some place, that one million eyes can't see
And somewhere there is someone, who can see what I can see

Someone, Somewhere In Summertime
Someone, Somewhere In Summertime
Someone, Somewhere In Summertime

Moments burn, slow burning golden nights
Once more see city lights, holding candles to the flame
Brilliant days, wake up on brilliant days
Shadows of brilliant ways will change me all the time

Somewhere there is some place, that one million eyes can't see
And somewhere there is someone, who can see what I can see

Someone, Somewhere In Summertime
Someone, Somewhere In Summertime
Someone, Somewhere In Summertime
Someone, Somewhere In Summertime
Someone, Somewhere In Summertime"



posted on Mar, 6 2015 @ 11:17 AM
link   
a reply to: Aphorism




Only observation could parse such a mess


But you're still cheating, what is observing other than light entering your eye and context being applied by your mind.



posted on Mar, 6 2015 @ 11:27 AM
link   
a reply to: Aphorism




Math is physical; No one studies math from thin air.


Gee, all my high school teachers were liars. At least in the 70's they were honest in calling maths "abstract"



posted on Mar, 6 2015 @ 11:33 AM
link   
The OP can't answer what a thought is because he only sees the physical aspect of himself. The irony here is that he is using his mind to deny the mind exists.

I think the OP is so against anything that can't be seen because he automatically associates it with religious dogma and a god that he doesn't believe in.

He has yet to answer where a brick wall that is thought of resides. Is it a physical thing to think of a brick wall? Will I find a tiny brick wall inside the brain if I dissect it? What about anything else that can be thought of? Will I find that in there as well? Or will I find a pink mass with none of those things in it? If I do not fine those things that are thought of, WHERE ARE THEY?

He cannot answer this question because his worldview does not account for it. We are more than just a body Aphorism, your immaterial thoughts are undeniable proof of this. You ask what material constitutes thoughts yet you fail to realize that immaterial things aren't made of anything, so the question is flawed.



posted on Mar, 6 2015 @ 11:39 AM
link   
Phantom pains are a great example of the power of the mind. People who have lost a limb yet still feel pain in the area that no longer exists, if the body is the thing that feels then how does one account for a missing body part that still "feels" pain?



posted on Mar, 6 2015 @ 12:24 PM
link   
a reply to: ImaFungi


Does a heart exist? What is the element that allows a heart to exist?


The body.


Does a heart beat? does a beating heart exist? I dont think a heart beats, show me this 'beat' you speak of. What is the element of beatness?


A heart does beat when it is with he rest of the body. It doesn't when it is not. We can not only feel the heart beat, but we can watch it do so through intrusive means.

Hands do not grasp when removed from the body; eyes do not see when removed from the body; legs do not run when removed from the body. If you were not born with these parts, the notions of grasp, running and seeing would be foreign to you.


Arms, legs, a kidney, appendix, tonsils, people have brain surgery, breasts, parts of stomach, im sure other stuff, whats your point?


I specifically said system. The removal of one leg does not imply the removal of the whole muscular, skeletal or vascular system it is a part of. Those systems do not require the leg. Yet the body map, and thus the mind, is severely affected. Which system can be removed from the human body, and thus eliminated as a candidate for the property of the mind?


We have had this argument before, I wrote you a lengthy response and you never answered. It boils down to you refusing to acknowledge that the body is not 1 solitary intrinsic particle, but a unitary system composed of varying complex parts, which perform differing functions.


No where have I said the opposite.


That is all you have to acknowledge, then you will acknowledge that the word mind, is a term used to describe processes associated with certain sectors of parts within the system that is the body.

Where in the body does thinking take place? Where in the body does seeing take place? I hope you can answer, in the brain. Ok so we dont even need the word mind, there is only the brain, that weird looking pink thing, and that is it. You are right, there is no need to use the term mind; the brain exists, the brain does all the thinking and seeing; it is like there is no need for the word car, because the word automobile exists. I always assumed the word mind separated from the word brain, to denote the difference between willful acts of thought and auto biological acts of the brain.


Thinking takes place throughout the whole body. There isn't "only the brain" invloved in thinking. I'm not here saying the nervous system isn't coninuously involved and contributing to thought, be every other system is also. This is why I ask you to remove a system from the body, and prove you have not brought the mind with it.

Every system of the body is required to produce one single thought.

Like I said: take "only the brain", put it on a chair, and tell me it is thinking. You cannot. Yet I could take a human body, place it on a chair, and prove it is thinking and conscious. The evidence is not on your side. Your notion that "only the brain" is required for thinking is untenable, impossible, and proven wrong the moment we try to observe "only the brain" thinking.

Thinking does not begin nor end at the brain. Not only does it require the whole body, but it requires a rich environment in which to produce thought and consciousness.



posted on Mar, 6 2015 @ 12:25 PM
link   
a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight


But you're still cheating, what is observing other than light entering your eye and context being applied by your mind.


Context is provided by the body, which is continuously situated in context.


Gee, all my high school teachers were liars. At least in the 70's they were honest in calling maths "abstract"


Did you learn math before or after you read a very heavy textbook?



posted on Mar, 6 2015 @ 12:26 PM
link   
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1


He has yet to answer where a brick wall that is thought of resides.


Thinking about a brick wall is the same as seeing one. The same parts of the brain light up. Basically your brain is mimicking what it experienced every time the body comes across a brick wall.

Speaking of brick walls, we've argued this before; it was like pulling teeth the first time, so I will refrain from doing it again.




top topics



 
5
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join