The Mind vs Brain

  • Thread starter Thread starter Faith1960
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I’m reading a book by a Christian author, Holley Gerth called You’re Going To Be Okay.
She’s a counselor with a master’s. It sounds like she’s equating the brain and mind as one in the same, unless I’m misunderstanding.

For those who believe that the brain and mind are separate, do you acknowledge that without the various parts of the brain and it’s function we’d have no emotion, no ability to do anything?
The brain and the mind are not identical. The mind uses the brain. If the brain is damaged our thinking, emotions, sensation will be impared or lost. But the mind will still be present and unimpared, it just will not be able to function properly.

Pax
Linus2nd
 
The brain and the mind are not identical. The mind uses the brain. If the brain is damaged our thinking, emotions, sensation will be impared or lost. But the mind will still be present and unimpared, it just will not be able to function properly.

Pax
Linus2nd
Ok, then you do acknowledge that the brain is needed to think, feel, walk etc. That’s the point I was trying to get at. 👍
 
The mind uses the brain…

If the brain is damaged our thinking, emotions, sensation will be impared or lost. But the mind will still be present and unimpared, it just will not be able to function properly.

Pax
Linus2nd
If the mind can’t function properly without a properly functioning brain…then?

The ability to walk is there, except the legs don’t function…so? Where is the ability to walk? In the mind?

If something cannot function then how can one claim it is unimpaired?

The mind and the brain are NOT identical.

But I do believe the mind to be a function of the brain, and I know that when my brain is “impaired” it most certainly affects my mind…thinking, emotion, etc.

rather like when my leg is broken it affects my ability to walk.
 
If the mind can’t function properly without a properly functioning brain…then?

The ability to walk is there, except the legs don’t function…so? Where is the ability to walk? In the mind?

If something cannot function then how can one claim it is unimpaired?

The mind and the brain are NOT identical.

But I do believe the mind to be a function of the brain, and I know that when my brain is “impaired” it most certainly affects my mind…thinking, emotion, etc.

rather like when my leg is broken it affects my ability to walk.
Ooops I missed the part of his post where he said the mind would be unimpaired if the brain was impaired.
 
I’m reading a book by a Christian author, Holley Gerth called You’re Going To Be Okay.
She’s a counselor with a master’s. It sounds like she’s equating the brain and mind as one in the same, unless I’m misunderstanding.

For those who believe that the brain and mind are separate, do you acknowledge that without the various parts of the brain and it’s function we’d have no emotion, no ability to do anything?
Dear FLX,

If this is a Christian counselor, does she then deny the spiritual soul as holding at least part of the human mind?

ICXC NIKA.
 
I want to clarify my stand in this discussion.

I am speaking only of the mind and brain and their relationship to one another and our emotions, behavior etc.

I am not speaking of the soul, nor do I equate it with the mind.
 
Dear FLX,

If this is a Christian counselor, does she then deny the spiritual soul as holding at least part of the human mind?

ICXC NIKA.
What’s FLX mean?i dont know if she acknowleges that or not. It wasnt clear.
 
Ok, then you do acknowledge that the brain is needed to think, feel, walk etc. That’s the point I was trying to get at. 👍
Yes, but you have to keep in mind that the mind is a property of the soul and the soul is the substantial form ot the body and the brain is a part of the body. The soul, you see, is not a part of the body. Yet the two are united as a single substance. the substance which makes a human being. I doubt your author goes into this kind of depth. So I can’t say I agree with her or not. But I do know that what I have said is true.

Pax
Linus2nd
 
Yes, but you have to keep in mind that the mind is a property of the soul and the soul is the substantial form ot the body and the brain is a part of the body. The soul, you see, is not a part of the body. Yet the two are united as a single substance. the substance which makes a human being. I doubt your author goes into this kind of depth. So I can’t say I agree with her or not. But I do know that what I have said is true.

Pax
Linus2nd
First you said the soul is a substantial part of the body, then said it isn’t part of the body.:confused:
 
First you said the soul is a substantial part of the body, then said it isn’t part of the body.:confused:
The two are separate if considered separately. However, to be exact, this occurrs only at death. The proper mode of existence of the soul is as the substantial form of the body. That does not make it a part of the body but a part of a human being. It is the human being that is the living thing, not the body alone, nor the soul alone and not as one added together. United in life they make one thing, a human being.

Pax
Linus2nd
 
I want to clarify my stand in this discussion.

I am speaking only of the mind and brain and their relationship to one another and our emotions, behavior etc.

I am not speaking of the soul, nor do I equate it with the mind.
But the soul has two faculties–intellect and will. “Mind” is just another word for intellect, which is a faculty of the soul, and which abstracts sensory (name removed by moderator)ut from body to form thoughts and concepts.
 
But the soul has two faculties–intellect and will. “Mind” is just another word for intellect, which is a faculty of the soul, and which abstracts sensory (name removed by moderator)ut from body to form thoughts and concepts.
Do you disagree with science that says impulses travel to the brain and cause us to think or recognise,a loved one? What do you think the brain does?
 
Do you disagree with science that says impulses travel to the brain and cause us to think or recognise,a loved one? What do you think the brain does?
I would quibble with the word “cause.” The intellect (mind) thinks because that is it’s nature. But because we are human the mind requires integrated sensory (name removed by moderator)ut from the body. There is certainly a close connection.

A philosophical truism is that “all knowledge begins in the senses.” I would add that sense knowledge is integrated by the brain, and abstracted by the mind to become ideas and concepts.

Memory, emotion, and feelings, are all primarily physical, having mainly biological components, so I do not include them as products of the mind.
 
I would quibble with the word “cause.” The intellect (mind) thinks because that is it’s nature. But because we are human the mind requires integrated sensory (name removed by moderator)ut from the body. There is certainly a close connection.

A philosophical truism is that “all knowledge begins in the senses.” I would add that sense knowledge is integrated by the brain, and abstracted by the mind to become ideas and concepts.

Memory, emotion, and feelings, are all primarily physical, having mainly biological components, so I do not include them as products of the mind.
Sorry, can you dumb it down for me again?
 
Scientists can’t figure out the mysteries of the brain because they refuse to allow for the presence of a spiritual component existing conterminously with the neurons, the material component. The presence of a spiritual component provides us with dual memory: a material memory located in the neuronal circuitry of the brain and a “perceptual” memory located in the spiritual substance called nous. The perceptual memory stores qualia, feelings, emotions, meanings, concepts, and percepts, all of which have a “continuous” nature. Neurons, on the other hand have a “discrete” (individual) nature. Specific neuronal circuits activate specific areas of the perceptual memory to induce sentient experiences.

Photons of a certain energy (wavelength) activate certain cones in the retina that convert light to an action potential that is transferred through 3 other types of cells to the optic nerve. The optic nerve sends the action potentials to the thalamus where it is transferred to visual area of the cerebral cortex and we “see” the color red. The redness is not the complex neuronal circuitry; neurons are matter and matter cannot and does not generate redness. The neurons merely provide the pathway from the photons to the experience of redness. Light energy causes redness, but the photons are not red. The photon merely start the activation of neurons that activate the nous in which the neurons are immersed. The redness, along with all other qualia, must inhere in the nous that forms the perceptual memory from which the sentient experience arises.

From this we can argue that the mind is the interaction of the brain and the nous. Without the brain or without the nous we cannot see. Both are required. However, when we see red, the mind invariably silently “thinks” the word red. Thinking requires language and that implies that the part of the brain that interacts with the nous to form the mind is the neuronal circuits that store the language instinct in humans. Other animals have brains with similar neuronal circuitry and nous that generates an experience of redness, but do not possess minds. Consequently both a material component, the language circuitry of the brain and a spiritual component called nous are necessary for a mind to exist and function.
Yppop
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top