Mind a no-brainer?

Patrik Bagge pab at neramd.no
Wed Jan 5 08:42:37 EST 2000


>Lets try again. Let's say the brain does generate the mind; and that
>mind then correctly perceives the brain which creates it.
>
>If this were true, then the brain would actually perceive itself (via
>the mind which it generates.) This is what I mean by (directly). But,
>again (if Kant is right), the mind would not know the truth about its
>own brain which it perceives. Thus, in this sense, the mind must view
>itself to be independent of it's brain. But we (our minds) already said
>that it depends upon the brain for its very existance. Thus, it appears
>we have some sort of inherent contradiction.
>
>I hope this helps. But, perhaps my views are still not well expressed.


Why do you separate 'brain' from 'mind' ?
To me there is no special distinction, it's somewhat like separating
hardware (computer) from software (programs) that run on it.

One could perhaps say that 'mind' is a subset of brain, which
runs the software (electrical/chemical/connectivist activity)

The fantastic part is that the brain is probably the first
'machine' capable of understanding itself.

Yours
/pat






More information about the Neur-sci mailing list