Is your brain your mind?
Yes, because...
Side Score: 11
|
 |
No, because...
Side Score: 13
|
|
|
|
|
2
points
I don't know about aliens, but I do agree with the fact that animals show forms of rational thinking. Take dogs or dolphins for example. They can take commands, and have the ability to be trained. If they couldn't think, they would just be like jellyfish. But the thing is that humans can think beyond animals. We can build, make new things, learn things beyond our planet, etc. Side: No, because...
@Mingiwuwu The mind is not exactly the same thing as the brain itself, and it's not independent of it either. Your mind wouldn't exist without the brain, anyone who denies that is an idiot, if you are still "yourself" after you die and your "soul" leaves the body then why can you lose parts of your "soul" bit by bit if the brain is damaged? The mind is definitely dependent on the brain and there is definitely not a soul. The brain is not exactly the mind, the brain is a neural network that creates the mind. The mind is a property of the brain, it's like asking "is the motion of the vehicle and it's engine the same thing." Side: Yes, because...
The brain is responsible for generating (limited) conscious awareness of itself, which makes the mind one of its properties. What we call the mind is merely a reflective neural behavior that engages other neural behavior such that it generally enhances the organism's ability to function. Mind-body dualism (the idea that there is a mind distinct from the brain) is a specious theory. There is nothing to suggest that a mind exists distinctly from the brain, and this proposition raises numerous questions it cannot answer - from whence does the distinct mind come, what supports its existence, where does it reside, how does it engage with the material body, etc. The problems facing the conjecture of mind-body dualism are essentially the same as those which have plagued those who advocate the existence of a soul. Interestingly, though, many people who are comfortable rejecting the idea of the soul are uncomfortable doing so with the mind even though they face the same dilemmas. In a sense, mind-body dualism is a continuation of the same intuition by a different name (and one seemingly more congruent with the "scientific" worldview). Side: Yes, because...
|
2
points
GREAT QUESTION! Near as I can tell, Brain is the collection of cells that take up most of the skull cavity. Mind is what a subsection of that collection of cells does. Analogically, brain is to mind what eye is to sight, more or less. Research consistently demonstrates that we are only conscious/aware of a small percentage of what happens in our own brains. For an excellent and very engaging discussion of this and its ramifications, I recommend Free Will by Sam Harris (ISBN: 978-1-4516-8340-0 or for e-book: 978-1-4516-8347-9) Regarding the question of whether there is some non-neurological mechanism (perhaps a ''soul") that contributes to consciousness, I see no evidence of this. However, there are certainly other physical players than neurons. The endocrine system has a lot to do with brain function. (That is why I think that AI will be very disappointing to many people.) Various physical processes contribute factors to neurological experiences like trust, nervousness, anger, pleasure, and love. The pancreas, for example, is a major player in our mental states because the pancreas regulates blood sugar. Our moods, priorities, and decision-making capabilities are all radically affected by our blood sugar levels. (Have an intimate relationship with a diabetic. You will see what I mean.) For example, parole boards in the US are far more likely to deny parole to prisoners before lunch breaks, when blood sugar is slightly lower, and far more likely to grant parole immediately after lunch, when blood sugar is slightly higher. Similarly, criminal court judges tend to impose stiffer sentences before lunch than they do after lunch. Side: No, because...
I agree with what you say; the mind seems to be purely due to physical things. If the brain (and other physical things) are sufficient for our minds then there is no reason to assume the existence of any non physical element in the absence of evidence. Would you agree that if we had all the necessary skills and technology to replicate a human brain and body (physically identical to a human) it would have a mind just like ours? I have to write an essay on this "mind - brain identity theory" (or some other similar topic), and I thought it would be interesting to get a different perspective from you guys. Side: No, because...
1
point
Would you agree that if we had all the necessary skills and technology to replicate a human brain and body (physically identical to a human) it would have a mind just like ours? We DO have all the necessary skills and technology to replicate a human brain and body (physically identical to a human). It is called sexual reproduction. Side: Yes, because...
1
point
|
