Instantiated mind

Non-MBTI psychology topics, mental disorders, human nature...
Post Reply
User avatar
synapser
Posts: 68
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2018 1:44 am
MBTI type: INFJ
Gender (M or F): M

Instantiated mind

Post by synapser » Sat Mar 10, 2018 9:58 pm

I recently read a book about how the mind is entirely represented by definable elements of our brain. That the experience and external forces that change the electrical and structural features of the cells and molecules in our brain can be applied as a comprehensive method to understand all of human thought. It was an interesting point that has appealed to me since before I read the book. My motivat8on is to discuss anything anyone can think of that would falsify that perspective. Do you think your brain completely represents your mind? If not why?

User avatar
BabyDragon
Site Admin
Posts: 438
Joined: Thu Oct 28, 2010 12:39 pm
MBTI type: INTJ
Gender (M or F): M
Contact:

Re: Instantiated mind

Post by BabyDragon » Sun Mar 11, 2018 11:28 am

I actually agree that your thoughts and feelings come from purely the mechanics and chemistry of your brain. I don't believe there's anything outside that.

But your body affects your brain. The level of different hormones can cause feelings. You physical fitness can change your thoughts. The old Latins used to say "in corpore sano mens sana" so they kinda knew it too.

User avatar
BabyDragon
Site Admin
Posts: 438
Joined: Thu Oct 28, 2010 12:39 pm
MBTI type: INTJ
Gender (M or F): M
Contact:

Re: Instantiated mind

Post by BabyDragon » Sun Mar 11, 2018 11:31 am

This doesn't mean that the mind isn't a wondrous instrument that can be influenced by things we would consider immaterial, like the look in our partners eyes, the hug of a child, a memory of a friend... but even that is all just neurochemistry.

User avatar
crow
Posts: 819
Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2014 5:19 am
MBTI type: INFJ
Gender (M or F): M
Location: Among trees.
Contact:

Re: Instantiated mind

Post by crow » Sun Mar 11, 2018 6:27 pm

It's a crying shame that humans live out their whole existence, locked inside the little simulators of their over-valued minds.
But they wouldn't be humans, if they lived, instead, in Reality.

User avatar
synapser
Posts: 68
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2018 1:44 am
MBTI type: INFJ
Gender (M or F): M

Re: Instantiated mind

Post by synapser » Mon Mar 12, 2018 1:02 am

BabyDragon wrote:
Sun Mar 11, 2018 11:28 am
I actually agree that your thoughts and feelings come from purely the mechanics and chemistry of your brain. I don't believe there's anything outside that.

But your body affects your brain. The level of different hormones can cause feelings. You physical fitness can change your thoughts. The old Latins used to say "in corpore sano mens sana" so they kinda knew it too.
That's sort of interesting. I agree that a bulk of evidence suggests that our physical activity can influence our neurochemistry. Hormone release from adrenal, pituitary, and hypothalamus glands effect the body and feedback on the brain. Runners high or feeling good after physical exertion is another example. It also brings to mind the fundamental physiology of neurotransmission necessary to initiate somatic muscle movements. However, I don't think that this suggests that consciousness or the mind is represented by the physiology of the body. Improved cognitive function with higher levels of physical activity alter the brain. So to me it still seems that the mind rests solely within the function of the brain. It does also lead me to think about the massive psychological and physiological changes that occur after major damage to the body, amputees and paraplegicsee for example. Those are still changes that alter brain function as well.

I guess my point is, I don't see the body as the seat of the mind. More like the body is the agent of the mind. Capable of carrying out the intentions of the mind and providing specialized information about reality to the mind (albeit in our limited capacity to perceive it). Looking at it with a truly open mind does make me think that I may be indoctrinated by the idea of organ systems and an education that separates the functions of the body into neat little categories.

I find it much more reasonable to think that the mind could be separated from the body, than the mind to be separated from then brain. In other words, I think the effects of a healthy body could be artificially enhanced in the absence of actual physical stimuli and produce the same effect on the mind.

Do you think the evidence suggests that the mind does depend fundamentally on the body and can not be separated from it?

User avatar
synapser
Posts: 68
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2018 1:44 am
MBTI type: INFJ
Gender (M or F): M

Re: Instantiated mind

Post by synapser » Mon Mar 12, 2018 1:11 am

crow wrote:
Sun Mar 11, 2018 6:27 pm
It's a crying shame that humans live out their whole existence, locked inside the little simulators of their over-valued minds.
But they wouldn't be humans, if they lived, instead, in Reality.
A shame maybe, but as you suggest in some of your other posts, don't overlook the shear awesome beauty of the complicated convergence of real things necessary to allow us to have a mind we can over value. Being alive is pretty amazing, even when our humanity leads us to despair, misery, and entitled vanity about our individual mind. To me the hardest part about living in reality is that society does not allow us to think in ways inconsistent with the linear experience fundamental to our biology. Suggesting quantum uncertainty applies to our daily lives, and minds in this context, is rapidly overshadowed by our biological needs to feed, reproduce, and feel.

Morphinedreams
Posts: 26
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 8:13 pm
MBTI type: INFP
Gender (M or F): F

Re: Instantiated mind

Post by Morphinedreams » Sat Apr 21, 2018 7:02 pm

That last part was beautifully expressed- "society does not allow us to think in ways inconsistent with the linear experience fundamental to our biology"... Words loving eachother (me getting a rush of ...dopamin?)

I might be to "stupid" for this conversation and the language a bit foreign but...;
Certainly we are biological creatures, neurochemistry perform amazing and sometimes unbelievable things.
So there are areas in the brain - discovered and mapped out to represent everything that is you and the measuring units invented up until now can tell that these certain areas lit up when you do this and that. There's also evidence of another brain - in our stomach that does not follow the lead of the one inbedded in our skull but it's action can certainly effect our behaviour (sidestep). But you where talking about consciense (and everything therein)?
The measuring-units are'nt able to tell you if something outside your brain is being lit too. Its eye is locked in on that certain thing it's supposed to study and what i guess it picks up are answers but maybe not the whole question?
Is it possible to get the title of the book? If i don't know how the research was performed, it's difficult to notice what is missing and to know if I'm just talking about nothing at all. But that is probably the same dilemma as for the people performing the research - if you don't know how the art is being performed, it's hard to get all the right questions. And sometimes you've already decided what answer you prefer so when you get to that you will stop the asking-part (still talking hypothetically about people performing research). And maybe they're not allowed to ask in a way that is inconsistent with the linear experience fundamental to our biology...

In my head it ultimately gets to a matter of human value or soul vs physical damage and it's a hard one to brake down into comprehendable pieces without it either making you feel unintelligent or coldhearted... But maybe feeling has nothing to do with it. And it's another topic

User avatar
synapser
Posts: 68
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2018 1:44 am
MBTI type: INFJ
Gender (M or F): M

Re: Instantiated mind

Post by synapser » Wed Apr 25, 2018 4:18 am

The book is called The Mind Within the Brain by Dr. Redish. Yes areas of the brain represent specialized function. There is a wide variety of experimental evidence discussed in the book. The question of the artistry behind the research was beyond my read of it. The topic was more focused on combined evidence that structure function relationships within the brain produce what we call the mind.

Feelings are definitely a part of the mind. Feeling actually has almost everything to do with it. However, feeling can usually be reduced to brain regions and neurochem. Even faith has been shown to activate specific regions of the parietal love.

I'm glad you enjoyed the perception, society, inconsistencies with how one can think about what quantum mechanics and quantum gravity/special relativity.

What you bring up about the soul and human value is an old metaphysical debate. Like Aristotle old. For me and modern science, it seems, our new understanding informs us about ourselves. Understanding the brain and the mind does not take anything away from faith, soul, or the value of human life. Quite the contrary, it shows us the beauty of it. From the idea of the extended reality in Einstein's special relativity to emerging theories that resolve gravity in general relativity, the beauty of our existence in every moment and spatial gravity field us hard to deny.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests