The absence of proof is not proof. The inability to reduce mind to material processes means that we cannot assert that mind is material. It is reasonable, therefore, to consider other options.
What is 'proof?' The fact remains that an absence of evidence to support a belief or a proposition is evidence against the validity of that belief or proposition. Without evidential support, you have no case. You not only have no case, you have no justification for your belief. Without evidence, what you are left with is
faith. All you have is faith in the reality of an undefinable entity you call non material mind.
I have answered your last question numerous times already. If you can't figure it out, that is your problem.
Your 'answer' explains nothing whatsoever about non material mind. Certainly nothing whatsoever on the nature of non material things. You simply repeat the same assertions.
The mind is the most obvious thing in the world. It appears to be non-material. The fact that we cannot explain as material makes it reasonable to assume that it is not even though we can't be certain that we never will.
It ''appears to be non material?' How the hell would you know how it appears? Have you thoroughly examined mind at work, and came to that conclusion based on your observational evidence? Have you submitted a paper on your discovery?
No it is NOT! I have responded to this before, and all you do is repeat your logical errors.
The logical error here is yours. Don't you understand the logical error of making unfounded assertions and claiming they are facts? Neuroscience does not support non material mind. Do some homework in a field other than new age philosophy and religion.
The visual cortex, for example, provides a stream of visual images representing the data it receives via the optic nerve, simularly auditory thalamus, superior temporal gyrus, etc, provide an auditory representation of pressure waves, hearing... other structures represent tactile information, emotions, feelings, thoughts, etc...all of these and more are the aspects and facets of consciousness, inputs from various regions of the brain.
1) Not all neural processes produce consciousness
2) The neural process of consciousness is the physical process of neurotransmitters, chemical bonding, nerve impulses.
3) Consciousness is a representation of neural activity.
The correlation between brain activity and subjective states may indicate that the brain activity causes those mental states (though it doesn't necessarily prove that they do. Correlation does not prove causation). But even if physical processes cause mental states, it doesn't prove that they ARE mental states.
There is no evidence for anything else. There is no evidence to support or even suggest a non material entity at work in the brain. Therefore your proposal remains completely unfounded.
Now, I suppose you can go on denying this, but you will be wrong because, logically speaking, a cannot be not a. You denying that fact does not change it.
There is nothing there to deny. Without evidence to support non material mind, it is you who is pushing an unfounded belief. A faith based belief.
Again: what is this ''non material?'' How does it interact with material processes? It's not an explanation to ''thoughts are non material'' as this is an assertion that tells us nothing about the nature ''non material'' or how it is supposed to interact with the physical world, which is material. Can you see your problem?
When you've asked for an example of a non-material substance I have responded with examples such as "your own thoughts," and you had the temerity to deny it! It is impossible to argue with someone who simply denies the obvious.
That's not evidence to support your proposition. Thoughts are formed by the electrochemical activity of a brain, as imaged by fMRI and reported by the subject. Thoughts have not been established to be non material. That is your claim. You are using your own claim as evidence to support your claim.
That is a logical fallacy. You are using a circular argument in an attempt to justify your perceived case.
Sorry, but you have no case.
