Tag Info

New answers tagged

0

One of the things that is interesting to me about this mind- brain problem is that,according to modern Physics,we are a sort of " a bundle of energy" (matter is actually energy).In Near Death Experiencies (NDEs) people report encounters with "beings of light". We can then rightly speculate that if eventually the mind and the brain were found to be ...


4

The question that you are referring to is worded in a way that I think is leading to the confusion. The question in the title is "Can the mind affect the brain?" but in the question body the final question posed is "Does [a thought producing a tear] not contradict the (physical) law of cause and effect?". The answer is yes to the title question: the mind ...


0

That the "mind itself is a physical entity",seems to be very controversial,to say the least.In this respect Henry Stapp (a physicist at Berkeley) was asked during a lecture "what is this " I " you are talking about".He answered:"It might be that at some point the mind will be found to be material,but so far there is no evidence whatsoever that that will be ...


4

I disagree with @Josh (and all the other answers) that a materialist viewpoint is required to resolve this apparent contradiction. Firstly, we should not infer that the thought caused the tear. As an example, if I were to press the PrintScreen key on my keyboard, then a popup message would appear on my screen saying "printing to deskjet printer" and then ...


2

I'm not sure about the trained part, but there have been cases where people have spontaneously shifted into a very enjoyable state of mind for a very long time, for example: Eckhart Tolle, who supposedly spent 2 years in utter bliss.


0

Close your eyes and imagine a lemon on a cutting board. Then imagine cutting it in half and visualize the two halves rocking back and forth as juice beads up on the surface of the lemon. Next, imagine cutting one of those halves into quarters and taking one of the quarterd up to your mouth as you bite deep into the flesh and wrap your lips around the peel ...


0

Your line of reasoning seems to be that just thinking is not a physical action, a tear is a physical action, so just thinking cannot cause a tear. There is a lot of this naive materialism going on, even in the scientific circles, but this seems to be changing. There are so many things wrong with this argument. "Just thinking" is a very significant action, ...


0

Regardless of which side of the materialism vs dualism debate you find yourself on, the result is the same. If the mind is "material" then there is no issue. If the mind is immaterial, then the mind is the same kind of thing as a running software program. In that case, it doesn't have a physical form, but affects the state of the device that is running it. ...


1

The mind and cognitive processes are manifestations of physical processes in the brain, so there is no philosophical problem. Dualism loses out when you take into account biomedical reality, observation of the brain (fMRI), effect of physical drugs on the mental state and so on. The ultimate example of effect of mind on the structure of the brain is ...


4

This would be analogous to a factory robot mounting a door on a car that is being built. There is no "physical" reason that the untrained eye can see, which compells the robot to do what it does. There is no visible system of weights and pulleys that moves the robot's arm. In fact all the instructions the robot needs to do its task are encoded on a chip as ...


13

The short answer is no, this doesn't violate the law of cause and effect because the mind itself is a physical entity. Your thought experiment hinges on the debate of materialism (the mind is a physical thing) versus dualism (the mind is a different kind of thing than other physical things). Most cognitive scientists believe that materialism is the correct ...



Top 50 recent answers are included