Hmmm. It has been my opinion that the problem with this thread has been the
lack of clarification of terms. Your response has confirmed this belief.
Why is it that no neuroscientists have posted in your defence? Do no
neuroscientists subscribe to newsgroups?
> >Ray Scalon Wrote:
> >>It is implicit in materialism that brain activity is determined by the
> >>of molecular interaction. Signal energy reverberating in your brain was
> >>writing that note.
> >You posit that the brain alone could compose and write that note.
> >it would be reasonable to assume that you believe that cognition, (the
> >if..., then... thinking) is done by the brain with no input from the
> >mind/soul. Yes?
>> No, it is not reasonable to assume.... My interest is in the nervous system
> as it is seen objectively by the neuroscientist. I see no "if" neurons and
> no "then" neurons. Cognition is the activity of the brain as seen
> subjectively by the soul (mind). Many people believe that the objective and
> subjective views of brain activity may be blended "scientifically". I do
> not. I hold that the subjective view of brain activity belongs to religion.
> This is in no way derogatory of religion. I merely believe that science and
> religion are separate and must remain so. Science is the objective
> examination of the material universe, religion is the subjective view of the
> spiritual universe. I enter both but I keep them separate.
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own