Skip to main content
Philosophy

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

10
  • Re. "The mind are the mental processes of the brain." – I was rather thinking of mind from the experiential point of view, as distinct from 'brain' which is objectively observed. While experience is all mind, mind is not so readily objectively observed. This is why I mention the 'shine' of spirit, which is most obvious when it shocks, eliciting in another a 'gasp' (also derived from *gheis-d-. So what I'm asking is how, from the experiential perspective, mind can be thought of as material if it is directly affected by material. Commented yesterday
  • 2
    The mind is readily observed, like everything else, because it manifests itself in action and behavior. It's impossible to having any feelings, for instance, that are not related to actions. Emotion is action-readiness. Fear manifests itself in fight, flight or immobility. It's impossible to even say what any "belief" is or means, if you abstract from the values and the possible actions that it implicitly refers to (or that form its actual context). The basic fact is that we learn to observe ourselves (and our own "inner" states) first by "outer" learning (imitation and learning to speak). Commented yesterday
  • @mudskipper – shows of "action and behavior" can just as well be done by a robot. In the examples I give of spirit, objective recognition is emphasised by heightened emotion, a transport, anger, shock, when the 'spirit' becomes more apparent to another. It probably won't be long till an AI can pull that off too. But anyway, really, mind is an interior phenomenon, and conventionally it can't be experienced by another. From the mind's point of view, awareness doesn't feel physical, (although of course one's body does). Commented yesterday
  • 1
    @mudskipper: I actually believe that nobody can observe our own minds. What we can observe is the models we have made of our own minds, in the same way that we can observe the models we have made of other minds. We refine the models continuously and without thinking about how we are doing so, and they are pretty good. But I certainly find myself doing some things I didn't expect I would, and I don't think I am unusual in that regard. Commented yesterday
  • 1
    @keshlam what we would need is an example of a non-physical thing affecting another with no physical mechanism involved. Like something in a running computer program affecting something else, but not affecting the hardware. It seems like an incoherent idea. But without an example to investigate, the question is best set aside, like all empty speculation. Commented 15 hours ago