Is the mind separate from the brain?

Werbung:
Nope. How'd you extract that? And why would I wanna'?

This statement:

" I had thought that we'd progressed enough in our science to warrant that "mind" itself could at least be considered to be an ongoing software development based on the creation of neural pathways created from the interplay of one's life experiences combined with one's natural or hereditary qualities "

Coupled with this statement:


"a term referring to the overall organization of a physical entity's personality and memories as applied to the execution of interactions with others within the same space-time continuum"


I understood you to be suggesting that the mind was no more and no less than the "mecnanics" of the brain.

If I understand a computer, and a piece of software that it is running well enough, I can know what it will do in any given situation. If I can know what it will do and how it will behave, I know, in essence, what it is like to be that computer running that software. I will still have knowledge of everything outside of the software, but will know and understand what it is like to function within those parameters.
 
It is good that you are examining morality in a secular sense. A large number of people don't seem to be able to grasp the concept of morality separate from religion.

Apply your thoughts on ethics to the number 2,000,000,000 and see where, if anywhere, it takes you.

You won't let this go with me will you? With things like this Pale, I do not make quick decisions - these are fundamental and life changing - and we're talking about a long life of thinking certain ways.


I have a defective God gene - I am unable to believe in religion thus my concept of morality and ethics doesn't come from religion as such.
 
I have a defective God gene - I am unable to believe in religion thus my concept of morality and ethics doesn't come from religion as such.

Lots of folks do. That is why I try to never frame my position in those terms. Ergo, the perception that I am "cold". It makes one wonder though, if you aren't equiped to have faith in God, by what mechanism are you equipped to have faith in the ethereal musings of necromancers and gypsys?
 
If you mean when I started it, was I willing to drift wherever its currents led, yes and no. Mostly yes.
Well, now I'm flummoxed... is it "Palerider" or "High Plains Drifter"?

Quit being so wishy-washy, Preacher!
 
Lots of folks do. That is why I try to never frame my position in those terms. Ergo, the perception that I am "cold". It makes one wonder though, if you aren't equiped to have faith in God, by what mechanism are you equipped to have faith in the ethereal musings of necromancers and gypsys?

There is a very interesting article on this - stating that we are hardwired to believe (Armchair General linked it for me) - I will see if I can find it. It explains a lot. It doesn't address whether or not gods exist - only why we are so willing to believe in supernatural, superstitious, religious doctrine etc. against all rational evidence.
 
There is a very interesting article on this - stating that we are hardwired to believe (Armchair General linked it for me) - I will see if I can find it. It explains a lot. It doesn't address whether or not gods exist - only why we are so willing to believe in supernatural, superstitious, religious doctrine etc. against all rational evidence.

Exactly which musings of necromancers and gypsys are rational?
 
Werbung:
Not sure what you mean here...I don't think any of them are though I do not necessarily include philosophy in that category.


The trouble you had on the other thread with "personhood" was due to a faith in the ethereal musings of necromancers and gypsys rather than the stratight forward fact of law.
 
Back
Top