The human mind

[DBT]

The mind does not make decisions without a brain. A brain is needed to generate the mind.

That is an interesting question for science to answer after it discovers what the mind is.

A decision is something different from a sensation or perception or emotion.

Those are all experienced.

A decision is made.

Well, that explains everything! No need for further research. All done and dusted.

 

[untermensche]

The mind does not make decisions without a brain. A brain is needed to generate the mind.

That is an interesting question for science to answer after it discovers what the mind is.

A decision is something different from a sensation or perception or emotion.

Those are all experienced.

A decision is made.

Well, that explains everything! No need for further research. All done and dusted.

So when I say it is an interesting question for science to answer you conclude with your mind it means no further research is needed?

You do not make very good conclusions with YOUR mind.

YOUR freely made conclusions are suspect.

 

[DBT]

Do you realize that none of that actually explains your contention of autonomy of mind, a mind operating a brain, or in any way supports it?

 

[untermensche]

If something requires autonomy to accomplish then to claim autonomy is not there is just blind stupidity.

To decide which idea is true and which is not requires the autonomy to do it.

 

[DBT]

If the experience of conscious mind is the activity of a brain, how is it possible for the experience of conscious mind - as it is being generated by the brain - to achieve autonomy from the brain?

Can you explain?

 

[untermensche]

If the experience of conscious mind is the activity of a brain, how is it possible for the experience of conscious mind - as it is being generated by the brain - to achieve autonomy from the brain?

Can you explain?

First we must fully accept that autonomy is necessary for the mind to do what it does.

We must understand that it takes autonomy of mind to doubt there is autonomy of mind.

And I will not be able to explain how the mind achieves autonomy until somebody discovers what it is.

 

[DBT]

If the experience of conscious mind is the activity of a brain, how is it possible for the experience of conscious mind - as it is being generated by the brain - to achieve autonomy from the brain?

Can you explain?

First we must fully accept that autonomy is necessary for the mind to do what it does.

We must understand that it takes autonomy of mind to doubt there is autonomy of mind.

And I will not be able to explain how the mind achieves autonomy until somebody discovers what it is.

You are assuming your conclusion without explanation.

 

[untermensche]

If the experience of conscious mind is the activity of a brain, how is it possible for the experience of conscious mind - as it is being generated by the brain - to achieve autonomy from the brain?

Can you explain?

First we must fully accept that autonomy is necessary for the mind to do what it does.

We must understand that it takes autonomy of mind to doubt there is autonomy of mind.

And I will not be able to explain how the mind achieves autonomy until somebody discovers what it is.

You are assuming your conclusion without explanation.

Again, if autonomy is necessary to accomplish something, like decide which idea is good and which is not good, to conclude autonomy is not there is just stupidity.

If something must be there then of course it is there.

How would a mind decide that some idea was good unless the mind had the autonomy to do it?

Are you saying you are unable to decide which ideas are good and which are not?

That I believe.

 

[fromderinside]

And things like ideas exist in minds and nowhere else.

The difference between a specululation, an idea, and a neurally directed physical action expressing the idea is lost on me.

Perhaps you are up to explaining the differences?

Probably not.

 

[DBT]

How would a mind decide that some idea was good unless the mind had the autonomy to do it?
.

There is no mind, be it conscious or unconscious, without mind forming brain activity. Which is nothing like autonomy of mind. Not at all.

 

[Testy Calibrate]

We tend to see our conscious mind, i.e. the part of our mind that's capable of proper reasoning, i.e. thinking using a formal language, as properly "us". This is the "I" in Descartes' Cogito, I think, therefore I am. We also see it as the part that's really intelligent compared to our more brutish, instinctive, "intuitive", and essentially apparently non-conscious mind. Many people think of this as a two-system set-up. The second system, the conscious part of our mind, is assumed as having evolved at some point in our more recent history well after the first system was already in place, system which is seen therefore as much closer in terms of evolution to that of our closest animal relatives. Basically, we tend to think that all the intelligent ideas we have when awake are produced by the second system, typically through a sort of "verbal", or formal, thinking. The first system is usually understood as providing us with emotions, sensations, perceptions etc. and also intuitions.

What do you think of this view?

Do you have any alternative view?
EB

I think models are ways of understanding and it's important not to confuse them with the things they represent. Or, this a map-territory error.

 

[untermensche]

How would a mind decide that some idea was good unless the mind had the autonomy to do it?
.

There is no mind, be it conscious or unconscious, without mind forming brain activity. Which is nothing like autonomy of mind. Not at all.

Totally worthless dodge.

How did you decide the brain forms the mind unless your mind has the autonomy to make such decisions?

Do you think the idea of a brain forming a mind is something encoded in your genes?

You offer no mechanism where a meaningful real world decision can be made.

If the brain is making decisions, not the mind, there is no reason to believe them. All belief and disbelief would be a delusion. All opinion would be a delusion.

Either the mind makes decisions based on ideas and these decisions have meaning or the brain just makes a decision as a reflex and the decision is totally meaningless. All knowledge and our feelings about it are meaningless.

 

[DBT]

It's not a dodge.

It's an indisputable fact that there is no mind, be it conscious or unconscious, without mind forming brain activity.

Which is why your assertions about autonomy of mind fails.

Your assertions fail because mind is a form of brain activity....and brain activity does not have autonomy from the brain that is generating that activity.

Which makes your assertion not only wrong, but absurd.

 

[untermensche]

It's not a dodge.

It's an indisputable fact that there is no mind, be it conscious or unconscious, without mind forming brain activity.

Which is why your assertions about autonomy of mind fails.

Your assertions fail because mind is a form of brain activity....and brain activity does not have autonomy from the brain that is generating that activity.

Which makes your assertion not only wrong, but absurd.

Saying the brain creates the mind tells us NOTHING about the nature of the mind.

To understand the nature of the mind requires knowing what the mind is.

There is nothing irrational about saying the dumb reflexive brain created the autonomous contemplative active mind.

That you think there is, without any supporting argument or evidence, is worthless faith.

This argument that the mind can't be autonomous because it was created by the brain is a worthless argument. There is no argument there. You have nothing.

 

[DBT]

It's not a dodge.

It's an indisputable fact that there is no mind, be it conscious or unconscious, without mind forming brain activity.

Which is why your assertions about autonomy of mind fails.

Your assertions fail because mind is a form of brain activity....and brain activity does not have autonomy from the brain that is generating that activity.

Which makes your assertion not only wrong, but absurd.

Saying the brain creates the mind tells us NOTHING about the nature of the mind.
.

It doesn't have to. It is sufficient to understand that it is the brain that creates mind through its own activity to also understand that mind is inseparable from brain activity, hence in no way autonomous from the very brain activity that is forming it.

 

[untermensche]

It's not a dodge.

It's an indisputable fact that there is no mind, be it conscious or unconscious, without mind forming brain activity.

Which is why your assertions about autonomy of mind fails.

Your assertions fail because mind is a form of brain activity....and brain activity does not have autonomy from the brain that is generating that activity.

Which makes your assertion not only wrong, but absurd.

Saying the brain creates the mind tells us NOTHING about the nature of the mind.
.

It doesn't have to. It is sufficient to understand that it is the brain that creates mind through its own activity to also understand that mind is inseparable from brain activity, hence in no way autonomous from the very brain activity that is forming it.

No it is not sufficient.

Knowing what a mind is is required to know what it can do.

Knowing the dumb mechanism that created the mind tells you NOTHING.

 

[DBT]

Fallacies of Defective Induction
These are arguments whose premise seems to provide ground for the conclusion but proven to be insufficient upon analysis.
1. Ad Ignorantiam or Appeal to Ignorance
2. Ad Verecundiam or Appeal to Inappropriate Authority
3. False Cause
4. Converse Accident or Hasty Generalization
5. Anecdotal Evidence
6. Faulty Comparison
7. Far-fetched Hypothesis
8. Confusing an explanation with an excuse
9. Guilt by Association

 

[untermensche]

That is nothing unless you can define dots and connect them.

The heater creates heat and the heat can have feedback on the heater.

All it takes is a thermostat.

But the heater is not in control of the thermostat. The heat is.

If a window is open it will take longer to reach the cutoff temperature.

The heater does not control the thermostat in any way.

The thermostat controls the heater.

 

[DBT]

Your analogy is flawed, a heater and thermostat are two separate and distinct objects/mechanisms. Conscious mind is inseparable from conscious brain activity, being one and the same process.

Unless you happen to be a dualist claiming a separation between body and mind, that mind is somehow an independent substance.

No, yours is the Fallacy of Defective Induction

 

[untermensche]

Your analogy is flawed, a heater and thermostat are two separate and distinct objects/mechanisms. Conscious mind is inseparable from conscious brain activity, being one and the same process.

Unless you happen to be a dualist claiming a separation between body and mind, that mind is somehow an independent substance.

No, yours is the Fallacy of Defective Induction

The analogy is fine.

The brain creates the mind and the brain has feedback mechanisms that the mind can effect.

Move on.

You have no argument here.

And talking about a mind and a body when you have no idea what either are is just frivolous nonsense.