Mind Body Dualism

A long time ago, philosophers like Plato(among others) presented the philosophical proposition of mind body dualism. The proposition was simple: There are two fundamentally different aspects of the human body. The physical(body) and the nonphysical(the Mind).

Here's my opinion. I'm sort of on the side of Thomas Hobbes.

You have a mind, and a body...now...under Dualism, how exactly do these things interact?

If all there is, is the brain and physical body, there are still some mysteries, but not teribly profound ones. I can explain how one gets drunk, and what happens when they get drunk. It's not a perfectly clear and easy explanation, but it's a working model.

But if there's an addition to the body and the brain, which would be The Mind, this ppresents a problem. I mean, it goes Alcohol to mouth, mouth to stomach, stomach to blood, blood to brain...and then...somehow it gets to this Mind thing...and how does it do that? How does that work?

Renee Descartes figured future scientists would be able to figure this problem out. He even dissected some corpses and looked at brains, and found what HE felt might be the answer. the Penea gland. It's a small walnut sized gland that straddles both hemispheres. He proposed that the peneal gland controls consciousness, and the Mind stems from it. Of course, the gland does not do any such thing, which we know today, as one can REMOVE the gland and be perfectly fine, aside from slight alterations to body chemistry.

The question still remains though...why is my consciousness tied to this body? Why is it I can only see out of my eyes? I mean, if there's just a brain, there's no mystery. My eyes are connected to my brain through nerves, and yes, that's all I can see from. If therer's a seperate Mind though, wouldn't it be possible to just...disconnect? Go around and Astrally View things?

Ultimately, there have never been a satisfactory explanation of these things, mainly because everyone it, comes completely from the imagination, people are making shit up.

Imagination is a great place to start, don't get me wrong, but ultimately imagination has to connect with reality in order for it to have any sort of explanatory power.

In my opinion, modern neuroscience has shot mind body dualism all to hell.

We can do damage to people's heads and completely warp their personality, we can explain memories, we can explain senses, emotions, all of these things are now explicabe in terms of the central nervous system.

Now don't get me wrong, I understand our understandings of the brain still are in its relative infancy, while we can explain most of these things, we can't explain them 100%, however i am of the volition that since these things are backed up by research and data...there's no reason to accept that the Mind is this seperate nonphysical thing.

As an added question, to anyone who answers yes, you do believe, can you define for me what a nonphysical thing is?

It would be nice to take the concept of the Mind and the consciousness to be a seperate thing from our physical selves seriously. But as you said, neuroscience shot the idea all to hell and it's merely a pipedream.

To be honest, I'm not even sure what you're discussing if you've pretty much answered your own thread.

Well Gravity, all I'm rely trying to do is spark up conversation. Fakku has people of all kinds, christians, muslims, atheists, militant atheists...it's not like I'm believing my original post is the end all be all, and ends the whole conversation before it starts. I even ended it with a question.

*read the post*
*finished reading*

Okay, so... am I wrong to say that actually you have pretty much answered the question yourself? It seems like that to me.

I didn't even have to look to know this was a biglundi thread.

Here are some of my ideas:

In reality, the "mind" is technically the brain, where all of its association areas and parts (thalamus, all of the brain-stem, Hypothalamus, etc) work together to create an organism's behaviors and regulate it's body systems and chemistry which affect these behaviors.

If we think of the "mind" as a nonexistent/nonphysical thing, we can say that the "mind" is something like God. Whether we believe in God or not, that very decision decides whether he is an anomaly or just nothingness. In this sense, the "mind" is like something that is there but actually isn't. This topic is seemingly confusing at first, but once you think of about it for a while, you can gain an understanding of what the "mind" truly is. Then again, it may be that our brains are not able to process such abstract concepts. Another view I would like to make about how I said the "mind" is like something that is there but actually isn't is that the "mind" can also be something like a feeling. You feel that something is there, and thus take initiative to follow up on that feeling and allow it to control your decisions and behaviors (hard to explain).

I believe that the "mind" is something between the two ideas above. As for what that is, I don't feel like thinking of something up at the moment (since I'm tired). Maybe later.

As for what a nonphysical thing is, the answer can either be extremely complex or simple. I'll put it in simple terms: A nonphysical thing is something that does not exist physically. It's existence is there, but it has no form or shape.

What you're proposing has no explanatory power either, you're basically saying the mind is both a part of the brain and not. But you can't really explain how you GET to the not part.

As to your definition of what a nonphysical thing is...you didn't define it, you just said it's not physical. Can you give an example of a nonphysical thing?

A nonphysical thing is something we cannot perceive, such as God, angels, demons, and other spiritual beings. If we are capable of perceiving it, then it exists physically.


I don't see any reason for this thread; you've seemingly answered your own question, and anyone else who posts anything will just be rejected by you. If your going to start a discussion, you'll need to be more open to discussion.

You're like the 4th person to say I've answered my own question.

What question? Have I already decided dualism isn't accurate? Yes, but I'm starting a conversation here. I wonder why it's so hard for people to see this...

In any case, you still didn't give a definition. But you did give examples, unfortunately you didn't give any examples that are in any way demonstrable. See, I asked the question specifically too those that accept mind body dualism because I'm wondering how one takes on the idea that the mind is indeed a fundamentally seperate thing from the body? If it's not percievable, how in the world can you decide it's true in any way?

I still have no clue what exactly constitutes as a non physical thing.

I'm starting to lose my patience with you...



...

That's...not a definition. It's strange that you think it is. At least, it's not a GOOD definitino, if any definition at all. Like most people when they trry to define it you're not telling me what the nonphysical thing IS, you're telling me what it's NOT. That's not a definition.

I mean, can you give me a single thing that we can confirm exists in any way, that's nonphysical? that we cannot percieve? If not what's the difference between a nonphysical thing, and a nonexistent thing?

I read the title, was going to say something about Steven Pinker, but then realized you answered your own question.
Now for post count.

please, just stop talking. I will try to go through this very slowly for you.



The word non-physical means it's NOT physical. This means that the definition of the word nonphysical is:


examples of nonphysical things are

Ok, you're not getting the problem with what you're saying.

I appreciate that you can go to a merriam webster's dictionary and define a nonphysical substance as something that doesn't have the properties of a physical substance. I really do.

But you see, and I'm going to say this very slwoly so that you'll understand:

You're still not telling me what a nonphysical substance IS, you're just telling me what it's NOT.

And what you fail to understand about THAT, is that that's the same problem philosophers have had for centuries when trying to argue the case for mind body dualism. This isn't a simple matter of "What is a nonphysical substance?" and going to a dictionary. This is a philosophical PROBLEM that still ha never been adequately defined.

The definition you've given me is no better than saying, "A nonphysical substance is something that does not exist." or, and here would be a definition telling me what it IS, "A nonphysical substance is an imaginary thing nobody has any way of knowing is real." And if THAT'S what a nonphysical substance is, that defeats the entire idea of mind body dualism, as the mind is simply an imaginary concept, or even, nonexistent.

There go you go. By you saying that, we can conclude that if the mind is "simply an imaginary concept, or even, nonexistent", then it has to be something physical (the brain) and therefore, the concept of mind-body dualism fails.

Also, if this is a topic that even very smart philosophers failed to find an answer for, then let's just say that our minds cannot conceive an acceptable answer for this concept because our intelligence is limited.

What your asking me would be like asking this:

what is the definition non-yellow? Don't tell me what it's not, don't give me examples of colors that aren't yellow, just tell me what it is.

All I gotta say...
the universe is a mysterious place filled with unlimited knowledge....
I believe just because he dissected a corpse doesn't mean that his research was a success in explaining how the mind and body works together....

"Some questions are better left unanswered since we have no desperate need of obtaining such knowledge"...

This body is tied with the 5 senses of the brain and thus can't really evolve any further unless a person strengthens his 5 senses to the point of seeing invisible things or seeing through walls ( example of eyes)...
"Spiritual" senses is something that not even scientists can prove or even research on since it has NO shape or form ( so I agree on that) but it exists....


Some questions can never be answered regardless how much effort and time we put into it..... sometimes it's just the way it is.

I understand what is frustrating you, but please isten when I tell you this analogy fails.

I'm not asking you to define nonphysical. I get that nonphysical is quite simply, nonphysical, not a physical thing.

I get it. I really do.

What I'm asking you to do, is define what a nonphysical SUBSTANCE is.

And, if your definition is no more informative than saying, "Magic", "I don't know" or "It's nonexistent" Then WHY is there any reason to accept it in the first place? And THAT, by the way, is why I aimed the question at thos rthat ACCEPT Mind Body duality.

@Big Lundi (what up) the only example of nonphysical(mind) I can think of is astral projection.

There isn't a single thing that is 'just the way it is'. I firmly believe everything that is objectively true about the universe, can be demonstrated in some manner. I've yet to find a single thing that exists, that can't be demonstrated. Even THOUGHTS can be demonstrated to exist.

Also, I feel it necessary to point out that when you say "Scientists can't prove or even research on 'spiritual senses' as it has NO shape or form, but it exists" I have to ask. HOW DO YOU KNOW THAT?