Mind Body problem

[Wesrock]

A lot of this stems from Humean notions of causation, too.

 

[STT]

There is no need to break the laws of thermodynamics or deny the mind with an Aristotlean-Thomist conception of the mind.

Here I am arguing in favor of Cartesian and hylemorphic theory of mind. Could we fly? No. I am arguing that our motion should be limited to specific forms in order to keep psychic force zero.

 

[STT]

You assume that a law is broken if the mind plays a causal role in body movement, but you provide no evidence to support this. There are several credible criticisms of the argument from physics. Of course, since you are on a Catholic website, you can be confident that we do not necessarily agree with your assumption.

No, I am not saying that. I am saying that if our motion is subjected to F=m.a then psychic force needed to initiate motion is zero therefore we can move freely as far as we respect F=m.a.

 

[mrsdizzyd]

No, I am not saying that. I am saying that if our motion is subjected to F = m . a then psychic force needed to initiate motion is zero therefore we can move freely as far as we respect F = m . a .

Why is it even necessary to argue for such a construction? There is some underlying assumption here.

 

[fide]

Gov, I don’t think that’s a handicap on this thread!

Sorry, but in my post to you, I accidentally left out the most important word “think” - I just edited the post to include it. It is:
“Gov, I don’t think that’s a handicap on this thread!” It made no sense without the work “think”.

 

[STT]

Let’s describe this without any formula. You need force in order to create motion. We know all sort of forces in nature since we study motion carefully. Let’s have a couple of examples: (1) Think of falling stone. The stone is under motion (acceleration) because Earth pull it down (force). (2) You are sitting on the chair and are without motion because, Earth pull you down and the chair push you up. These two forces cancel each other and that allows you to stay on rest. (3) Now suppose that you raise yourself from the chair. For that you need something to initiate this motion. You do that for example by pushing your feet on the floor. You can experience it yourself. But what initiate the command for pushing your feet on the floor. Your mind. What I am arguing is that the force caused by your mind is zero because total force causes an appropriate motion. If the motion was not appropriate then we needed an non-zero force caused by your mind. This is something that is not observed by science.

 

[Sedona]

Hello STT: I think there may be a flaw in assuming there is a force generated by mind. By mind, I think you could be referring to consciousness, but I’m not certain what you mean. Can you clarify? If you can, I think we could have a good discussion, but I think the formulaic approach is a bit dry and unnecessary. In truth, I don’t think the mind necessarily needs to generate force in order to to be primary over matter rather than epiphenomenal, although I don’t have a decided position on any of that. I’m just saying it’s possible.

 

[STT]

Hello STT: I think there may be a flaw in assuming there is a force generated by mind. By mind, I think you could be referring to consciousness, but I’m not certain what you mean. Can you clarify?

By mind, I mean the essence of any being with ability to experience, decide and cause.

If you can, I think we could have a good discussion, but I think the formulaic approach is a bit dry and unnecessary. In truth, I don’t think the mind necessarily needs to generate force in order to to be primary over matter rather than epiphenomenal, although I don’t have a decided position on any of that. I’m just saying it’s possible.

I showed that the force needed by mind to cause a motion is zero (or infinitesimal).

 

[Sedona]

I agree. As far as I am able to reason, it’s quite possible for the force needed to be zero.

 

[STT]

That is what I showed in OP and #28. Please let me know what you think.

 

[Sedona]

I agree. However, the nature of mind/consciousness is a problem that I don’t think has been solved. I have spent a lot of cognitive overhead on the matter and still come up short.