Mind body Problem

-

 The presence of illusions means that we need to be cautious of our senses it doesn't mean you cannot trust them at all.

Computer AI is modeled after the human brain. There are interconnections between neurons done in either software or hardware. No individual node is the AI, but together it is.
If the mind was separate from the brain and you got brain damage, then you would expect that your personality would not change only some perceptions to your senses. Your memories would still be intact but that is not what we see.
Nor would consciousness necessarily understand how it worked.
The mind body problem has not been fully resolved but I don't think that substance dualism (which is what you are suggesting is winning at this point.
Here is a short video discussing both sides.
Where Does Your Mind Reside?: Crash Course Philosophy #22
Damage to your brain can cause changes in personality.
This may lead to Reductive Physicalism. This is the view that the world is only made of physical stuff including us.
Descartes first postulate “cogito ergo sum” ( I think therefore I am) concluded that you could doubt the existence of your body but not the existence of your mind which leads to
Substance Dualism - The world is made of both physical and mental stuff. Minds are separate from and cannot be explained by the physical. God is pure mind and rocks are pure matter. Humans are special in that we have both minds and matter. Interactionism says that the body can affect the mind and the mind can affect the body. Physical illness can affect your ability to think but mental and emotional stress can make you ill.
But how can a purely mental thing affect a purely physical thing and vice versa. This is the mind-body problem.
Substance dualists claim physicalism is missing qualia - subjective first hand experiences.
Physical reductionist claim this begs the question (see video for more details)
Epiphenomenalism claims physical states give rise to mental states but mental states can’t affect physical states.
Mysterianism says the question of consciousness is unsolvable by human minds.
The mind body problem has not been resolved.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Important Scriptures

-
  Bhagavad Gita, Brahmsutras, Isha Upanishad, Kena  Upanishad ,  Katha Upanishad,  Prashan Upanishad,  Mundaka Upanishad,  Mandukya Upanishad,  Tattiriya Upanishad,  Aitareya Upanishad,  Chhandogya Upanishad   Brihadaranyaka Upanishad Tripitakas (Triple Baskets, one of them is Abhidhamma-pitaka- which includes Philosophical teachings)., Diamond sutra, Lotus Sutra, Heart Sutra, The Jewel Heap Sutra, The Lankavatara Sutra, The Heroic Gate (Shurangama) Sutra, The Brahma Net (Brahmajala) Sutra, Flower Garland Sutra (The Avatamsaka) Sutra, The Great Perfection of Wisdom (Maha Prajnaparamita) Sutra, The Pure Land Sutras, The Vimalakirti Sutra, Sandhinimocana Sutra, Amitabha Sutra, Mahaparinirvana Sutra. Abhidharmakosa Karika (highest Knowledge)
Read more

This universe doesn't exist unless if we are observing it

-
That solves the fermi paradox and has in its back the general relativity and the double slit providing the influence of observation on our reality Plato is correct about abstract forms beyond our existential experience like infinity Relativity goes deeper than we can imagine it gets into our subjective experience with the universe making it our mere creation theory of "relative observetism" There is the "unknown" realm this thing if it's a thing is no matter it's beyond the observer notation or even comprehension it cannot be observed thus described in detail yet it's possible to comprehend on abstract level as it is in its "normal" state and will change or form based on an observer ! When observed it's subjective form holds an experience for the observer a universe is shaped based on this type of observation in the realm of the unknown there is no such thing as a "verse" or gravity these all results of observational typology real
Read more

Can memory be called as fictional ?

-
What kind of evidence exactly do atheists want? What will atheists conclude after getting the evidence? How do atheists define reality relative to imaginary, and reality relative to illusion? They should be able to apply their point of view on reality to all the mental elements and material elements.  If all that exists is real and illusions also exist, then all the illusions become reality, can all the illusions be called reality? If I imagine the Eiffel tower, does imagining make it unreal? If it is real, then imaginations cannot be necessarily called non-existent.  God also exists in the form of memory, and God is not different from memory. So if God is fictional, then can memory be called fictional and imaginary? But, we all have memory, so how can it be called fictional? What is different between existence and non-existence, and reality and illusion from an atheist's point of view?  How do you define Reality as opposed to imaginary, and Reality as opposed to illusion? 
Read more