That seems to be asking whether or not the mind is material.

There are lots of differen positions on that. Is there any specific reason you're asking?

Does the mind occupy a space? — Daniel

What would it occupy if not a space?

Is there any specific reason you're asking? — Echarmion

I was just trying to find an argument in favour of the mind's physical nature. My reasoning was:

1. Everything that exists occupies a space.
2. The mind exists.
3. The mind occupies a space.

But what space does the mind occupy?

You made me think of another question: is everything that occupies a space of a material (physical?)* nature?

*some particles are said to be massless but still physical... they interact with mass and must occupy a space (right?). Mind could be massless but physical nonetheless.

What would it occupy if not a space? — Isaac

If it occupies a space, it must have a limit. What limits the mind?

I was just trying to find an argument in favour of the mind's physical nature. My reasoning was:

1. Everything that exists occupies a space.
2. The mind exists.
3. The mind occupies a space. — Daniel

I think this is, in a way, backwards. Space describes the relations between physical objects. Fundamental particles don't necessarily "occupy" space so much as creating it.

You made me think of another question: is everything that occupies a space of a material (physical?)* nature?

*some particles are said to be massless but still physical... they interact with mass and must occupy a space (right?). Mind could be massless but physical nonetheless. — Daniel

I tend to go with the notion that everything that can be observed (has observable effects) is physical.

The problem with the mind is that if you look at everything a body does, some specific things that happen in minds, like what the color red looks like, are nowhere to be found.

I think it's a property of space, so I'd go for 'yes', as space occupies space.

Do you think, however, that the mind occupies a space?

Edit: Also, isn't everything that interacts with matter physical? Does the mind interact with matter?

Could you give an example of a property of space other than the mind? Now, if you think the mind occupies a space, what would you say its limit is? I am asking this because it seems that everything that occupies a space is limited (i.e., it has a shape/form/limit).

Could you give an example of a property of space other than the mind? — Daniel

Not sure. Extension. Stretchability. Self-movingness.

Now, if you think the mind occupies a space, what would you say its limit is? — Daniel

Not sure. Maybe a mind is the space that a brain occupies.

I am asking this because it seems that everything that occupies a space is limited (i.e., it has a shape/form/limit). — Daniel

Nearly everything yes. But maybe fields occupy all of space, without limit.

1. Everything that exists occupies a space. — Daniel

Where do you get this idea from?

What do you mean by 'exist'? What do you mean by 'space'?

Does mathematics 'exist'? Does phase space 'exist'?
Does 'phase space' take up space?
What about an 'idea'? Does that 'exist'?

Better to claim that things that exist do not necessarily occupy space.

Not sure. Maybe a mind is the space that a brain occupies. — bert1

Interesting definition. I have come to believe that the mind is the set of changes in the composition of the extracellular space surrounding neurons (and supportive cells) which occur throughout the life of an individual. In my definition, the mind is not the cells which form the brain nor is it the space they occupy; it is rather the microenvironment that surrounds such cells and its dynamics (change in composition). As such, the mind would occupy a space (the extracellular space) different to the space which the cells occupy.

1. Everything that exists occupies a space.
— Daniel

Where do you get this idea from?

What do you mean by 'exist'? What do you mean by 'space'?

Does mathematics 'exist'? Does phase space 'exist'? — A Seagull

If they are inside a mind then they do....

For me to-exist is a synonym of to-be-a-particular/unity/discrete-entity. Something either exists or does not, no matter the state in which it exists. Space is the dimensions of height, width and depth within which all things exist and move (I borrowed this definition from a dictionary). An idea is a neuronal process dependent on physical elements (cells, molecules, and their interactions) which occupy a space. Every concept is an idea. Therefore, every concept exists as a neuronal process which occupies a space. Math and phase space are concepts. They exist as ideas. They must occupy a space.

Something either exists or does not, no matter the state in which it exists. — Daniel

What do you mean by 'something'.

If you don't have a process for determining whether something exists or not, it is meaningless to assert that 'Something either exists or does not'.

What about things that do not fit into either of the categories 'exist' or 'not exist'.

What about things that do not fit into either of the categories 'exist' or 'not exist'. — A Seagull

What things would those be?

It depends on your view. In the view of Monism mind and brain are the same thing so the mind does occupy a space, that of what ever space the brain matter occupies. In some types of dualism, like property dualism, the mind is a property of the brain matter so the mind itself does not have a location anymore than an electrons mass has a location.

Define "the mind". The brain does. We know that.

Honestly, I do not know how to define the mind. When I think about "the mind" I think of that quality (of my body?) which allows my body to refer to itself as I and to reason as I... if that makes sense. But to be honest I have never been able to fully grasp the concept. I think this is the purpose of my question, to try to define it by finding its properties (if it occupies a space, in this case).

Thoughts on this?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirror_test

I dunno Seagull... I'd say that something does not exist when it does not interact with anything at all. Therefore, I guess something would be a thing that interacts. I mean, I do not think it is possible to truly talk about something which does not exist... when we do, we are talking about an idea that represents the concept of non-existence, which does exist.

Also, like Pantagruel, I'd like to know what things do not fall in any of those categories?

Is not to have a location the same as to not occupy a space? An electron's position might not be able to be stablished, but it will never be found in the nucleus of an atom. Makes sense?

Perhaps the only answer would be "nothing".

Best keep that under wraps though. I often wonder if the majority of the thinking world ever starts thinking "nothing exists" the entirety of the universe and all existence would just vanish into nothingness.

Reminds me of an old episode of "Tales from the Darkside" called "Effect and Cause".

Nothing in Biology Makes Sense Except in the Light of Evolution, I guess? Every concept a result of it.

Not exactly my point and though I wouldn't say so it's not like I could or even would disprove it. I'd instead assert there is a unique quality about the human mind over self-awareness that is evidenced in animals. Usually lol.

It appears the human body and most animals require a brain (which generally requires a head) to function in an intelligent way. Interestingly enough cockroaches can live without a head for a week or more. Lizard tails wriggle for quite some time after detached but we wouldn't call this intelligence or awareness or consciousness or a mind rather just nerves and impulses. A starfish can regenerate it's entire body from a limb. My point is since humans cannot do any of these things, this places the human brain and so mind above others. For obvious reasons. That's why we're not being hunted by killer starfish or dolphins using infrared technology, for example.

I think there is an idea in the human mind in which such mind is believed to be divine/not of this realm/world, supernatural (a dangerous idea, in my opinion). Even though the human mind is certainly something really special, it is not something divine, in my opinion. It is just a trait, like echolocation or sight, for example (astonishing traits which are not considered to be divine). A product of evolution. The original question was intended to challenge the idea that the mind is not something physical while at the same time it was an attempt to determine what space it occupies (since it exists).

Also, like Pantagruel, I'd like to know what things do not fall in any of those categories? — Daniel

Possibly those things that some people think exist but others don't.

so... Santa Claus? Bigfoot? Various deities? Poltergeists? What other entities are admitted to the class of objects that both exist and don't exist (or neither exist nor don't exist)? And if you don't exist, but you also don't not exist, then what exactly is it that you do, and how does that work?

how does that work? — Enai De A Lukal

How does what work?

My point was that assuming everything can be neatly classified as either existing or not existing does not work.

Right, and so I'm asking you to give examples and to elaborate on that point- why the coyness? If you don't exist, but you don't not exist either, then what do you do? What is the third option here? These two options (existing or not existing) would appear to be exhaustive, but you disagree, so tell us what you have in mind.

Yes I am using having a location synonymous with occupying a space. Whether or not an electrons absolute location can be established scientifically is not really relevant because that same concept can basically be applied to almost all of matter.

well they are not quite exhaustive unless you include both and neither as possibilities.