minds and brains

Ray Scanlon rscanlon at wsg.net
Thu Dec 10 16:37:16 EST 1998

Aaron Bearchief wrote in message <74nhpu$psm at ds2.acs.ucalgary.ca>...
>On Wed, 9 Dec 1998, Ray Scanlon wrote:
>> their heart's content. Our position for purposes of brain explanation is
>> that there is soul (mind) but it has no part to play in a material
>> of brain action.
>Medical science is replete with examples of patients having affected the
>outcomes of bodily processes.  A cursory study of neuroimmunology should
>demonstrate this.  We may be discounting (too quickly?) the value in the
>mind's ability to provide proactive feedback to the biochemical processes.

I see no reason to couple this process with the mind. If the brain, through
hormonal action or whatever, influences the remainder of the body why do we
need speak of mind. This is the type of magical thinking that has bedeviled
all attempts to explain the brain. Ascribing causal powers to the mind leads
to the homunculus.

Those interested in how the brain works might look at

More information about the Neur-sci mailing list