What the Neocortex Does

Ray Scanlon rscanlon at wsg.net
Sat Aug 12 20:18:34 EST 2000

"Gary Forbis" <GaryForbis at email.msn.com> wrote in message
news:O8Zd#5zAAHA.327 at cpmsnbbsa09...
> "Ray Scanlon" <rscanlon at wsg.net> wrote in message
news:39930875.0 at ns2.wsg.net...

> > Possibly you are thinking of the soul (mind). That is the subject of an
> > entirely different tale told by the religionists. The brain belongs to
> > science; the soul (mind) to religion. Let us stick to the brain.
> Nope.  I'm thinking of the brain.
> An analogy.
> An automated door may open when a person is near but a person needn't
> enter every time the door is opened.

Oh, come now. That is a story to point up the difference between
"sufficient" and "necessary". Another is: If it is raining, it is necessary
that the pavement be wet, but if the pavement is wet, that is not sufficient
for it to be raining.

Can you speak of the brain without speaking of neurons? I say a scientist
may not.  But a religionist may because his real interest lies in the soul
(mind). A religionist contemplates his soul (mind) and all sorts of wondrous
things are found. He speaks of memories of sunsets and the ecstasy of love.
The scientist looks at a cat's brain and finds only neurons. The religionist
says that is because the cat cannot think, does not have language, does not
have a soul. The scientist says he is not interested in the soul during the
workweek, he looks at the brain.


Those interested in the brain might look at

More information about the Neur-sci mailing list