Firstly mental states are not identical to brain states; a state of happiness is a state of the person, not just a state of the brain. — Janus
How about "A mental state is a bodily state"
this would be to say that the mind can be exhaustively understood in terms of brain processes, which it obviously cannot. — Janus
Doesn't seem that obvious. — khaled
How so? — khaled
We are what we think we are; our selves are the stories we tell about our lives and who we are. — Janus
give an account of your first person experience in terms of brain processes, and then try to discover where you are in that description. — Janus
Sure but I don’t see how that makes mental states more than body states. — khaled
Doesn’t seem too challenging to someone who knows their neurology. Assuming this “you” is in any way a coherent concept we can mess with the brain enough to find out when it’s present and when it isn’t. The physical difference would be precisely this “you” — khaled
then you could present an example from someone who does "know their neurology" to support your case. — Janus
It's because there is a conceptual element there that is lacking in non-mental bodily states. So, it could be said that they are also bodily states, but are not just bodily states. — Janus
Otherwise it just looks like an empty presumption. — Janus
I have.... no clue what this means. What's a "non-mental bodily state"? — khaled
And as predicted what it does is: Look for cases where "you" isn't present and try to find what the significant variables are. Just like any other science. — khaled
But I explained why it isn't. If "You" is in any way a coherent concept then we should be able to find brain states where "You" is present and others when it isn't. Find the the difference between the two. That is "You".
And if it is empty presumption then its alternative (that we can never account for "You" neurologically) is also empty presumption. — khaled
I have.... no clue what this means. What's a "non-mental bodily state"?
— khaled
Digestion, respiration, tendonitis, etc.,etc.,: the list is endless, — Janus
Right, in order to understand the self; eliminate it just as I said. — Janus
and narratives are not understandable in terms of neural processes — Janus
it must be since we use it effectively all the time — Janus
It would need to be established that there are no subconscious narratives going on in people; how are you going to do that? — Janus
Mental states', as the term is ordinarily used, refers to states of a person. I have no idea what you think big toes and pubic hair have to do with it. — Janus
So the body is composed of both mental and non-mental states? How do they interact? For instance, how do you know you have tendonitis when you have it?I have.... no clue what this means. What's a "non-mental bodily state"?
— khaled
Digestion, respiration, tendonitis, etc.,etc.,: the list is endless, — Janus
Here:Strange. You seem to believe that a processor can exist independent of its processing.
— Harry Hindu
I do? Cite where I've given you that impression. — 180 Proof
The latter makes sense and the former does not. "Mind" is predicate (processing), "brain" is subject (processor) like e.g. walk and legs, respiration and lungs, respectively. Mind(ing) is what a brain does. — 180 Proof
Ok... What is the "conceptual element lacking in digestion". I still don't understand what the sentence means at all. — khaled
and narratives are not understandable in terms of neural processes — Janus
You keep asserting this with no evidence. What's your reasoning? — khaled
it must be since we use it effectively all the time — Janus
Non sequitor. Often people use the same word to mean a bunch of different things. I suspect "You" as you use it is one such word. — khaled
If "You" is in any way a coherent concept then we should be able to find brain states where "You" is present and others when it isn't. Find the the difference between the two. That is "You". — khaled
Wtf is a "subconscious narrative". And what does it mean for a narrative to "go on" inside someone. To have some sort of neurological impact? Because we CAN study that... — khaled
Right, in order to understand the self; eliminate it just as I said. — Janus
Well you didn't even say that. And I definitely didn't say that. — khaled
And as predicted what it does is: Look for cases where "you" isn't present and try to find what the significant variables are. Just like any other science. — khaled
Are not big toes and public hairs part of a person? Are mental states of a person the same as the physical states of a person? If not, what is the difference between them? — Harry Hindu
So the body is composed of both mental and non-mental states? How do they interact? For instance, how do you know you have tendonitis when you have it? — Harry Hindu
Thought is a conceptual as well as a physical process. Digestion is just a physical process. — Janus
My reasoning is that I've never seen a narrative explained in terms of neural processes — Janus
What we think of as me is the story I tell myself about my life. — Janus
but a thought process is distinct from a neural process insofar as one is physical, whereas the other is conceptual. If you can't see that obvious distinction then I don't know what else to say. — Janus
The hypothesis is that conceptual thought is a physical process. So I don’t see the difference. — khaled
That you’ve never seen one means it’s fundamentally impossible to achieve? — khaled
And this “telling” is not a neurological process? What is it then? — khaled
Well no because it’s a fabricated distinction. It’s dualistic. And dualism doesn’t have to be the case. I know you claim not to be a dualist but I see no way to interpret “One is physical whereas the other is conceptual” in non dualistic terms.
You’ve defined thought processes to be different from anything physical. That is a choice. That is not some metaphysical truth. And I consider it a bad choice. — khaled
If a processor processes, when it doesn't process does it still make sense to call it a processor? Is a brain still a brain without the activity, or just a lump of matter that takes up space? What's the difference between a brain that doesn't think and a leg that can't move besides their shape? They are both just lumps of biological matter.You're right, I misread what you called "strange". I read it backwards, in fact, as 'processing can exist independent of its processor'. Yeah, there are examples (e.g. coma patients, chickens, fish) of mindless brains but, as far as I know, there aren't any examples of brainless minds. Infants & paraplegics have legs without walking just as there can be brains independent of minding. Why is that "strange"? — 180 Proof
Think about logical entailment, for example: how do you explain that in physical terms? — Janus
we cannot explain the conceptual in physical terms — Janus
You haven't presented any worthy objections so far, just empty assertions. Can't you find anything to present other than that? I doubt you can, but I'm prepared to listen if you do. — Janus
digestion isn't a presupposition for our very knowing — schopenhauer1
There is something about brain states that allows the very knowing of all the other states and this is really what makes it unique. — schopenhauer1
So it is not just equivocating brain states with mental states — schopenhauer1
but what we are really asking in a philosophical sense is why is there an "inner feeling" at all with mental states? — schopenhauer1
This is, I think, the specific point on which Isaac and I differ. If I understand him aright, he thinks that there must be one brain state for one mind state. I suspect this is something he assumes for methodological reasons: it makes the MRI scans more impressive. — Banno
What about processes in the brain that do not involve conceptual thought? The information in your consciousness was processed in the brain before appearing in consciousness. Are those not mental processes?Physical states (or better, processes) like digestion do not necessarily involve conceptual thought, whereas mental processes just are conceptual thought processes. It amazes me that you seem to find this difficult to understand. — Janus
Then you're saying that mental states are physical states -mind is the brain and vice versa? How is does the non-mental process of tendonitis become a mental conceptual thought?I don't know what you are asking. I haven't said the body is "composed of both mental and non-mental states". The body is physically composed. I may have tendonitis, a physical condition, without knowing it. I know I have tendonitis, when it is demonstrated to me beyond reasonable doubt that I have it, just like I know anything else. — Janus
You're right, I misread what you called "strange". I read it backwards, in fact, as 'processing can exist independent of its processor'. Yeah, there are examples (e.g. coma patients, chickens, fish) of mindless brains but, as far as I know, there aren't any examples of brainless minds. Infants & paraplegics have legs without walking just as there can be brains independent of minding. Why is that "strange"? — 180 Proof
We find what's common in the degenerate neuronal systems that produce the same cognitive function? — khaled
I'd refer to the emic-etic distinction.I've also struggled to see the distinction between identity theory and some reductionist theories. What's the difference between saying "The mind is the brain" and "The mind reduces to the brain"? So any help there would be appreciated. — khaled
You have this idea where logical entailment is a “thing out there”. Some law inherent in the universe or something. Whereas I think logical entailment is just another instinct. — khaled
You keep saying that you are saying nothing ontological but you keep splitting up the conceptual and physical ontologically as far as I can tell. That or you're just asserting that the conceptual cannot be explained in physical terms because...... idk. — khaled
Something “makes sense” when it is logically entailed. And this “making sense” is a neural process. — khaled
What about processes in the brain that do not involve conceptual thought? The information in your consciousness was processed in the brain before appearing in consciousness. Are those not mental processes? — Harry Hindu
Then you're saying that mental states are physical states -mind is the brain and vice versa? How is does the non-mental process of tendonitis become a mental conceptual thought? — Harry Hindu
Logical entailment is simply what seems self-evident to us. — Janus
you cannot explain how it is that you are moved by the poem by simply examining the physical marks on the paper, the processes of visual perception involved in looking at them and the ensuing neural processes going on in the brain — Janus
Do you believe it would be possible to examine two different neural processes associated with two different thought processes, one logically valid and the other not, and tell just from that physical examination which thought process was logically valid and which was not? — Janus
Neural processes are just neural processes; they are physical, not logical processes — Janus
Nope.Are you a naive realist?
— Harry Hindu
Are you? — 180 Proof
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.