A
Anonymous_1
Guest
First, I want to thank Saint Thomas Aquinas for his contributions to our pursuit and understanding of truth. Saint Thomas, please pray for us!
My philosophy teacher was a retired physicist who insisted we based our philosophical arguments on good, solid, scientific fact. He told us we must understand how the world works before we attempt to explain why it works that way. Get a degree in a hard science he told us, then our philosophy will not be useless; for good information and good thinking lead to good conclusions. With that said I present to you PROOF ala Thomas for the necessity and existence of an immaterial soul. Here are two arguments. The first argument is an argument from causation. The second an argument of necessity and is proposed in the form of a dilema.
The brain is considered by the vast majority to be the organ responsible for thought, reason, deliberation, choice, etc. As a result of scientific inquiry it is now possible to explain at least to some degree how the mind works. It has been discovered that the body is an intimate conglomerate of biochemical and electrical processes. The mind functions by electrical neural impulses and biochemical relays. Vast networks consisting of neurons, axons, terminals and dendrites carry these biochemical and electrical signals throughout the body which relays these messages to the body by means of nerves, hormones and other chemicals. It appears to many that the mind-body problem has been settled once and for all. The processes of the mind, once thought to be only possible by immaterial substance, have been proven to be the result of extraordinarily complex anatomical and physiological processes. Nevertheless these processes are strictly material.
I do not believe this solution to be adequate. When we think, neurons carry electrical impulses which stimulate the release of neurotransmitters which travel across the synaptic cleft to the receptor sites of another neuron initiating or inhibiting another electrical impulse. This complex series of bioelectrical events can be likened to a relay team passing the baton, one to another, until reaching their ultimate goal. The question that I pose is who blows the whistle? Perhaps the brains workings are also analogous to billiards with a cue striking a ball thus transferring its kinetic energy which causes the ball to move indefinitely until it loses its kinetic energy or finds its way to a pocket. The same question arises, who is it that strikes the cue? Now back to the issue at hand, if a particular thought process can be explained in light of neurological relays then what is it that causes the first neuron in the chain to fire? Sometimes I imagine it is a result of external stimulation. However I believe that sometimes it happens as a result of choice.
Case and point: I wanted to try to address this issue of the mind and so I sat down to think hard. I caused myself to think about this issue. Now how can such a thing be? How can a thing cause itself? How can I (my brain) be the source of the cause unless I am in some way distinct from my brain? I propose that in such a instance (this particular instance of my deliberate reason) and in many others it is the will of the person which causes the neural chain-of-events. It is my will that blows the whistle and it is my will which strikes the cue.
Furthermore I propose that either our will follows from a part of us that is immaterial or we have no will at all. But because we have a will it necessarily follows that part of us is immaterial. It is possible to present this dilemma because if our minds can work only by chemical reactions and physical laws, which are beyond our desire and control, then it is not possible that we are free. If we are not free then a “will” is impossible.
Let the flames fly and the criticisms abound. However, if these arguments be valid I pray that they may cause many to consider the possibility that we are a union of the physical and the meta physical. And that the source of our being is found in God the Creator.
My philosophy teacher was a retired physicist who insisted we based our philosophical arguments on good, solid, scientific fact. He told us we must understand how the world works before we attempt to explain why it works that way. Get a degree in a hard science he told us, then our philosophy will not be useless; for good information and good thinking lead to good conclusions. With that said I present to you PROOF ala Thomas for the necessity and existence of an immaterial soul. Here are two arguments. The first argument is an argument from causation. The second an argument of necessity and is proposed in the form of a dilema.
The brain is considered by the vast majority to be the organ responsible for thought, reason, deliberation, choice, etc. As a result of scientific inquiry it is now possible to explain at least to some degree how the mind works. It has been discovered that the body is an intimate conglomerate of biochemical and electrical processes. The mind functions by electrical neural impulses and biochemical relays. Vast networks consisting of neurons, axons, terminals and dendrites carry these biochemical and electrical signals throughout the body which relays these messages to the body by means of nerves, hormones and other chemicals. It appears to many that the mind-body problem has been settled once and for all. The processes of the mind, once thought to be only possible by immaterial substance, have been proven to be the result of extraordinarily complex anatomical and physiological processes. Nevertheless these processes are strictly material.
I do not believe this solution to be adequate. When we think, neurons carry electrical impulses which stimulate the release of neurotransmitters which travel across the synaptic cleft to the receptor sites of another neuron initiating or inhibiting another electrical impulse. This complex series of bioelectrical events can be likened to a relay team passing the baton, one to another, until reaching their ultimate goal. The question that I pose is who blows the whistle? Perhaps the brains workings are also analogous to billiards with a cue striking a ball thus transferring its kinetic energy which causes the ball to move indefinitely until it loses its kinetic energy or finds its way to a pocket. The same question arises, who is it that strikes the cue? Now back to the issue at hand, if a particular thought process can be explained in light of neurological relays then what is it that causes the first neuron in the chain to fire? Sometimes I imagine it is a result of external stimulation. However I believe that sometimes it happens as a result of choice.
Case and point: I wanted to try to address this issue of the mind and so I sat down to think hard. I caused myself to think about this issue. Now how can such a thing be? How can a thing cause itself? How can I (my brain) be the source of the cause unless I am in some way distinct from my brain? I propose that in such a instance (this particular instance of my deliberate reason) and in many others it is the will of the person which causes the neural chain-of-events. It is my will that blows the whistle and it is my will which strikes the cue.
Furthermore I propose that either our will follows from a part of us that is immaterial or we have no will at all. But because we have a will it necessarily follows that part of us is immaterial. It is possible to present this dilemma because if our minds can work only by chemical reactions and physical laws, which are beyond our desire and control, then it is not possible that we are free. If we are not free then a “will” is impossible.
Let the flames fly and the criticisms abound. However, if these arguments be valid I pray that they may cause many to consider the possibility that we are a union of the physical and the meta physical. And that the source of our being is found in God the Creator.
