Soul or brain

[John_Martin]

When you are talking about brain as a interface then you are framing human in Cartesian dualism which we know has problems, one of them is interaction problem.

Chemicals can manifest themselves to a state which consciousness emerges. In fact, thoughts pop up inside your conscious mind which means that they are constructed somewhere else, inside your brain. Therefore thoughts also constructed by your brain so what is left?

You are seeking the truth in the wrong direction - the way to the truth is to be informed by the teacher what the truth is, before there is even understanding of the thing taught. Then to begin to work with this truth and over time come to understand it.

The truth is that there is the soul, that the brain and whole body are material suitable in potentiality to be a place where the will and intellect relate to that which is not the self.

Knowing always comes from a teacher (in the case of Catholics, which we are, it is from the Church, therefore from our Master, Jesus who is True God). We know nothing else - there is my Soul, it is the act of my potentially anything body. Over time we become like our teacher, our Master, and we understand because we study and contemplate and experiment with this knowing. We are studying to understand what it is and means, but not whether it is true. Our Master is true, so we do have a soul as the place of our knowing and willing.

Who tells you what is? That is your teacher.

 

[hasantas]

=STT;14408272]In fact you can detect thought this days. You can read this article. This is a quote from the article (section Neuronal prediction of free will):

Can show me your mind and intelligence? Perhaps you can take a photo!

You can’t show because intelligence is not a material object. Like that soul is not a material object which could be shown as sensual.

What senses?

Life, hearing, seeing, feeling etc. Non of these are just material literally. Ofcourse there are materials means for these actions but soul can hear without ears and can see without eyes and soul has a life out of body. Our body and brain is not exactly like a computer. A computer can record but cannot feel or see or evaluate. To do that it need something beyond energy and materail and soul do that.

Of course you can detect gravity. Just leave an apple in the air and it falls down. That is gravity. You cannot see it by you can detect it.

You need to study some physics to understand. There is no a detected material object which cause gravity. Ofcourse there is something which cause drawing that we call gravity. İt is one law of God. Like that soul is a law of God which we cannot detected as physical.

We cannot detect soul otherwise it become physical.

What make human different from an animal? Intangibles? But you cannot detected these intangibles by machines!

Soul is not physical to be detected. You are right.

 

[STT]

St. Thomas Aquinas addresses what you asked in the first post:

“What is the use of neurobiological process in our brain otherwise? What is the use of soul?”

I see. But why don’t we accept the fact that intellect and will might be explicable in term of neurobiological process? We don’t have any scientific evidence for soul and we have no proof that matter cannot be consciousness.

 

[STT]

You are seeking the truth in the wrong direction -

I might. I will change the direction when I notice that I am wrong.

the way to the truth is to be informed by the teacher what the truth is, before there is even understanding of the thing taught. Then to begin to work with this truth and over time come to understand it.

We of course learn first then prepare to discover more. That is how it is.

The truth is that there is the soul, that the brain and whole body are material suitable in potentiality to be a place where the will and intellect relate to that which is not the self.

I don’t see any strong reason to accept the soul if intellect and will is describable by neurobiological process. In fact there is an argument against soul:

1. Soul is not physical
2. This means that the soul cannot be detected
3. Soul is the sit of will and intellect
4. This means that soul can affect our behavior
5. This means that soul can be detected
6. (2) and (5) cannot be both correct therefore there is no soul

Knowing always comes from a teacher (in the case of Catholics, which we are, it is from the Church, therefore from our Master, Jesus who is True God). We know nothing else - there is my Soul, it is the act of my potentially anything body. Over time we become like our teacher, our Master, and we understand because we study and contemplate and experiment with this knowing. We are studying to understand what it is and means, but not whether it is true. Our Master is true, so we do have a soul as the place of our knowing and willing.

Who tells you what is? That is your teacher.

So you mean that Jesus introduce Hyelmorphic dualism for the first time? That is to best of my knowledge is not true. Hylemorphic dualism is our invention and we could be wrong.

 

[STT]

Can show me your mind and intelligence? Perhaps you can take a photo!

You can’t show because intelligence is not a material object. Like that soul is not a material object which could be shown as sensual.

Yes, I can see that you have a mind just by knowing that you behave.

Life, hearing, seeing, feeling etc. Non of these are just material literally. Of course there are materials means for these actions but soul can hear without ears and can see without eyes and soul has a life out of body. Our body and brain is not exactly like a computer. A computer can record but cannot feel or see or evaluate. To do that it need something beyond energy and materail and soul do that.

Hearing, seeing, etc. are the result of neurobiological activity therefore they are physical.

You need to study some physics to understand. There is no a detected material object which cause gravity. Of course there is something which cause drawing that we call gravity. İt is one law of God. Like that soul is a law of God which we cannot detected as physical.

That is not true. To detect gravity you need to see its effect on something, an apple which is falling. As simple as that.

 

[Vico]

I see. But why don’t we accept the fact that intellect and will might be explicable in term of neurobiological process? We don’t have any scientific evidence for soul and we have no proof that matter cannot be consciousness.

Yes, using Occam’s razor would eliminate complexity. Of course, for Christians, the reason is based upon revelation, and this may not be acceptable to others not using revelation. The Greeks believed that even their gods were material. Some use the conception of the Supreme Being as immaterial spiritual being as well as created immaterial spiritual souls.

 

[STT]

Yes, using Occam’s razor would eliminate complexity.

Yes.

Of course, for Christians, the reason is based upon revelation, and this may not be acceptable to others not using revelation. The Greeks believed that even their gods were material. Some use the conception of the Supreme Being as immaterial spiritual being as well as created immaterial spiritual souls.

I respect that.

 

[esieffe]

This is really difficult to me to believe that there is no life after death. Soul is believed to be animator of body but with the recent scientific progress in area of neurobiology it becomes more and more clearer as time passes that the animator of body is only brain. We know that any damage can affect our beings even our identity. People use medicine to cure many psychiatric maladies. The scientists can read our decision in advance and influence them (wiki). So everything to me seems physical, the result of neurobiological process. What is the use of neurobiological process in our brain otherwise? What is the use of soul?

And by what process and miracle, was that wondrous and most intricate brain made?
Do you really think all the magnificence of man crawled out of some dark pool 20 million years ago Brother? It just isn’t possible. When an infant gazes up at it’s parents for the first time and smiles, you have to know, that it just wasn’t some primordial accident. It just isn’t.

 

[STT]

And by what process and miracle, was that wondrous and most intricate brain made?

Who we are.

Do you really think all the magnificence of man crawled out of some dark pool 20 million years ago Brother?

Yes.

It just isn’t possible. When an infant gazes up at it’s parents for the first time and smiles, you have to know, that it just wasn’t some primordial accident. It just isn’t.

We wouldn’t be here otherwise.

 

[John_Martin]

I might. I will change the direction when I notice that I am wrong.

And we go in the direction our Master has informed us to know as true.

We of course learn first then prepare to discover more. That is how it is.

But learning is a kind of “memorizing” what the teacher declares as true. We never “discover” anything at all that contradicts the Master’s declaration of what is true.

I don’t see any strong reason to accept the soul if intellect and will is describable by neurobiological process. In fact there is an argument against soul:

1. Soul is not physical
2. This means that the soul cannot be detected
3. Soul is the sit of will and intellect
4. This means that soul can affect our behavior
5. This means that soul can be detected
6. (2) and (5) cannot be both correct therefore there is no soul

There is ONE STRONG REASON only: The Master says there is a soul.
That is the only reason. And we follow behind the Master, we do not go before him to teach him.

So you mean that Jesus introduce Hyelmorphic dualism for the first time? That is to best of my knowledge is not true. Hylemorphic dualism is our invention and we could be wrong.

I do not recall hylomorphic dualism on my Master’s lips;
That term arises in the investigation to understand the truth, not in an attempt to find whether there is a soul.
The fact is that the human individual, to be an individual of the species, is a composite of soul and body.

Just as your example with gravity, where
“To detect gravity you need to see its effect on something, an apple which is falling” (STT),
in the same way with the Soul, where:
“To detect the soul, you need to see its effect on something, a Body of material is moving about on feet and a thought is moving out the mouth in sound waves.”
But to know that the soul is truth, you hear your Teacher tell you - then you are curious to go out and try to detect it.
(of course, anyone who tries to tell the Teacher there is no soul, this person does not go out and try to detect it, time and time again until he detects what he knows is true (because his Master told him it is true).

 

[STT]

And we go in the direction our Master has informed us to know as true.

But learning is a kind of “memorizing” what the teacher declares as true. We never “discover” anything at all that contradicts the Master’s declaration of what is true.

There is ONE STRONG REASON only: The Master says there is a soul.
That is the only reason. And we follow behind the Master, we do not go before him to teach him.

I do not recall hylomorphic dualism on my Master’s lips;
That term arises in the investigation to understand the truth, not in an attempt to find whether there is a soul.
The fact is that the human individual, to be an individual of the species, is a composite of soul and body.

Just as your example with gravity, where
“To detect gravity you need to see its effect on something, an apple which is falling” (STT),
in the same way with the Soul, where:
“To detect the soul, you need to see its effect on something, a Body of material is moving about on feet and a thought is moving out the mouth in sound waves.”
But to know that the soul is truth, you hear your Teacher tell you - then you are curious to go out and try to detect it.
(of course, anyone who tries to tell the Teacher there is no soul, this person does not go out and try to detect it, time and time again until he detects what he knows is true (because his Master told him it is true).

I respect what you believe but that doesn’t provide any proof for anything.

 

[John_Martin]

I respect what you believe but that doesn’t provide any proof for anything.

It does not need to; you are on a CATHOLIC Answer forum, supposedly seeking Catholic Answers. Now you have the Catholic Answer and can be happy that you received what this Forum has to give to the world.

 

[o_mlly]

What is the relation between brain and immune system? It seems that there is no significant relation between them.

That’s correct.

Since we agree the science shows that the brain does not order the immune system and the immune system is ordered then the ordering of the immune system must emanate from some source other than the brain.

The only other possible material explanation is that the immune cells are autonomous. But laboratory testing of the immune cells outside of the body has failed to duplicate the immune system response. It appears the petri dish is not an integrating principle for the myriad of cells in our immune system.

The integrating principle that organizes, coordinates and conducts the immune system we call the soul. You may wish to call “soul” something else ie, animating principle, integrating principle, etc but whatever you name it you must define it as immaterial.

 

[STT]

It does not need to; you are on a CATHOLIC Answer forum, supposedly seeking Catholic Answers. Now you have the Catholic Answer and can be happy that you received what this Forum has to give to the world.

Yes, but we are in philosophy sub-forum so your belief doesn’t count.

 

[John_Martin]

Yes, but we are in philosophy sub-forum so your belief doesn’t count.

A species never contradicts its genera; let me say it specifically: “Now you have the Catholic PHILOSOPHY Answer and can be happy that you received what this Forum has to give to the world.”.

Theology provides universals for Philosophy, which provides universals for natural sciences and arts, which provide universals for practical sciences and arts.

Theology judges the validity of philosophical knowledge and tells it either “You know correctly” or “You do not know correctly”, and ,
Philosophy then in proper sequence judges the validity of natural sciences’ / arts’ knowledge and tells them either “You know correctly” or “You do not know correctly”, etc.,

You are coming from the observations and interpretations of material scientific observation and asserting a contradiction to what philosophy and theology have imposed upon you, (that their is a soul), and instead of being a servant science to seek to see the signs of the soul, material sciences wish to be the master science that defines philosophy.

And you believe them -

 

[AgnosticBoy]

This is really difficult to me to believe that there is no life after death. Soul is believed to be animator of body but with the recent scientific progress in area of neurobiology it becomes more and more clearer as time passes that the animator of body is only brain. We know that any damage can affect our beings even our identity. People use medicine to cure many psychiatric maladies. The scientists can read our decision in advance and influence them (wiki). So everything to me seems physical, the result of neurobiological process. What is the use of neurobiological process in our brain otherwise? What is the use of soul?

As far as your study goes, I would say not all choices are created equal. There are conscious choices and then there are reflexive choices. The latter type are just mere acts.

Secondly, there is evidence that the mind can effect the brain as the following study shows:

1. Change the mind and you change the brain”: effects of cognitivebehavioral therapy on the neural correlates of spider phobia (from *NeuroImage *Journal)

In conclusion, the present findings suggest that a psychotherapeutic approach, such as CBT, has the potential to modify the dysfunctional neural circuitry associated with anxiety disorders. These findings support the conclusions of previous PET studies showing that psychotherapy can lead to adaptative regional brain metabolic changes in patients suffering from major depression (Brody et al., 2001; Martin et al., 2001) and obsessive-compulsive disorder (Baxter et al., 1992; Schwartz et al., 1996). These findings further indicate that the changes made at the mind level, in a psychotherapeutic context, are able to functionally “rewire” the brain. In other words, “change the mind and you change the brain.”

Keep in mind that neuroplasticity, which involves brain structure not being fixed (being changeable) is widely accepted. However, my point is about ‘self-directed’ neuroplasticity where the change in brain structure is being caused as subjective/mental stimuli (thoughts or subjective experience). This shows that humans can play an active/purposeful role in brain function. You brought up some evidence however when you factor in my evidence this shows that the mind and brain can both affect each other, which is characteristic of mind-body dualism as opposed to your view that the brain controls everything about the mind and body.

 

[STT]

As far as your study goes, I would say not all choices are created equal. There are conscious choices and then there are reflexive choices. The latter type are just mere acts.

Secondly, there is evidence that the mind can effect the brain as the following study shows:

1. Change the mind and you change the brain”: effects of cognitivebehavioral therapy on the neural correlates of spider phobia (from *NeuroImage *Journal)

Keep in mind that neuroplasticity, which involves brain structure not being fixed (being changeable) is widely accepted. However, my point is about ‘self-directed’ neuroplasticity where the change in brain structure is being caused as subjective/mental stimuli (thoughts or subjective experience). This shows that humans can play an active/purposeful role in brain function. You brought up some evidence however when you factor in my evidence this shows that the mind and brain can both affect each other, which is characteristic of mind-body dualism as opposed to your view that the brain controls everything about the mind and body.

If mind as you mentioned in the study is created by brain then the conclusion is that brain just affect itself. We know well that Cartesian dualism has serious issues, such as conservation of energy and interaction problem.

 

[AgnosticBoy]

If mind as you mentioned in the study is created by brain then the conclusion is that brain just affect itself.

Your reasoning has some assumptions. First, products can have distinct qualities from their cause or source. Babies are created from the DNA of their parents, but we can say that babies are separate from their parents. I think of the mind and brain the same way since the thought of a red apple is different from brain tissue.

We know well that Cartesian dualism has serious issues, such as conservation of energy and interaction problem.

How the mind ‘emerges’ from the brain has yet to be scientifically explained and evidenced, but there is no doubt that the subjective experiences that our part of our minds are objectively unobservable. I’ve also presented you with evidence of this unobserved subjective phenomena being able to not just merely generate brain activity but to also change brain function. Interaction problem just means we don’t have an understanding and we need to explain it; it does NOT mean dualism is proven wrong. If it goes against observed physical laws then perhaps it’s time to posit the supernatural (isn’t that the whole point of the concept? Observation of physical laws being broken?) It just so happens that we all experience this interaction and that the brain does not totally control the mind as my evidence shows.

 

[STT]

Your reasoning has some assumptions. First, products can have distinct qualities from their cause or source. Babies are created from the DNA of their parents, but we can say that babies are separate from their parents. I think of the mind and brain the same way since the thought of a red apple is different from brain tissue.

Thought of red apple is manifestation of brain tissue activities. One cannot have a single thought if the tissue is damaged.

How the mind ‘emerges’ from the brain has yet to be scientifically explained and evidenced, but there is no doubt that the subjective experiences that our part of our minds are objectively unobservable.

We haven’t built a model which can explain consciousness but that doesn’t mean that we should have a doubt on emergence of mind from brain activities since there is a strong correlation between brain activity and conscious experience.

I’ve also presented you evidence of this unobserved subjective phenomena being able to not just merely influence the brain but to also change brain function.

Something which is unobservable, mind, cannot have any observable effect.

Interaction problem just means we don’t an understanding and we need to explain it; it does NOT mean dualism is proven wrong. It just so happens that we all experience this interaction and that the brain does not totally control the mind as my evidence shows.

Why bother calling mind immaterial if there is an interaction between mind and body?

 

[catholic1seeks]

Check out these links

edwardfeser.blogspot.com/2011/05/mind-body-problem-roundup.html?m=1