Replies

I would say the mind is a subset of the brain. The brain controls a lot of unconscious bodily functions as well. But I'm sure our mind is in our brain.

But in what way "in?"

A materialist/physicalist might say that the human brain is just a "meat machine," and that mind is an epiphenomenon of brain activity. In other words, the mind is simply the result of what the brain does. As an epiphenomenon of brain, mind itself cannot act as an independent cause of anything.

Mind, you see, is one of those pesky "intangible" or immaterial entities that the scientific method cannot bring within the range of direct observation. Mind cannot be isolated, let alone measured. So I gather the temptation is to simply reduce it to "what the brain does" and be done with the problem.

But this makes no sense to me. For it seems clear that brains do not build cathedrals, create works of art, rockets to the Moon and beyond, etc., etc. For what material principle could ever account for "dumb" matter's purported ability to evolve such projects all on its own?

In short, matter — the basic stuff of biological systems in nature including human bodies and brains — must be very clever indeed to manage this. But then some people maintain that inorganic, non-living matter spontaneously "evolves" into living, conscious systems. Matter seems to be a very magical entity indeed....

Anyhoot, from what I've read, the human brain is an astronomically complex distributed processing system that isn't fully wired up (so to speak) until about 2 years after birth. It seems the more we find out about it, the more we realize how much we don't know about it.

And yet a newborn child possesses consciousness from birth and develops a sense of "self" long before the physical brain achieves its final size and is fully wired up. So how can mind be said to be an epiphenomenon of the brain?

It makes more sense to me to say the brain is the tool the mind uses.

Just some "weird" thoughts, JediJones, FWTW....

Thank you so very much for writing!