The Removal of "Mind" from Human Inquiry

a reply to: Aphorism

So what is it you're seeing when you think of one? If it isn't an actual physical brick wall that exists in the real world that you can feel and touch then what is it? Where is it? It's not in your brain, I can't cut open your brain and find that brick wall inside of it, so where is it? What is this "mimic" you speak of? A copy? What is that copy exactly? It's not the actual physical brick wall so what is it?

I don't think you can answer these questions because you can't comprehend that they're not the body or physical in any way.

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

So what is it you're seeing when you think of one? If it isn't an actual physical brick wall that exists in the real world that you can feel and touch then what is it? Where is it? It's not in your brain, I can't cut open your brain and find that brick wall inside of it, so where is it? What is this "mimic" you speak of? A copy? What is that copy exactly? It's not the actual physical brick wall so what is it?

I don't think you can answer these questions because you can't comprehend that they're not the body or physical in any way.

You're not seeing anything. Our eyes point outwards. Your brain is activating the same areas it does when you see actually a brick wall. Because it is your brain, you experience this activity.

originally posted by: Aphorism


"Does a heart exist? What is the element that allows a heart to exist?" - me

The body.

I dont believe the body exists. I only believe DNA exists. A sperm and egg come together to create a novel expression of DNA, the heart does not exist, what you call 'the heart' is really only a sequence of proteins in the code of DNA.

A heart does beat when it is with he rest of the body. It doesn't when it is not. We can not only feel the heart beat, but we can watch it do so through intrusive means.

We can not only feel the heart beat... what is feeling the heart beat? The heart is the body, the heart beat is the body, the body feels the heart beat? How does the body feel the body? Does the heart feel itself?

Hands do not grasp when removed from the body; eyes do not see when removed from the body; legs do not run when removed from the body. If you were not born with these parts, the notions of grasp, running and seeing would be foreign to you.

Before hands are removed, hands are the body. The body is hands. When the hands are removed, the body is still body. The body can still do many things it could do without hands. When the brain is removed, the body is still the body, but the body cannot do the same things it could do as it can with the brain. There must be an aspect in and of the brain which allows the body to do what it can do with the brain. There must be an aspect of the heart which allows the body to do what it does with the heart, that it cannot do without the heart. The body is a system of parts, like a car, like a civilization. Certain parts are more necessary for the continuation of he existence of the system than others. The parts do things. The part that is the heart does not have fingers that can grasp. The parts that are fingers are separate from the heart. Yes they are part of the same system, as the architect and the construction worker and the burger maker and the car maker and the mathematician and the cia are part of the same system, yes if you remove some of these parts from existence the functioning of the system will be altered. Yes the parts of the system produce different quantitative and qualitative functions. Yes the body is still capable of thinking without a foot. No the body is not still capable of thinking without the brain. Yes the continued reduction of that process leads us to believe that something about the brain is fundamentally different than the foot. Yes we do see, yes we are capable of producing thought. Yes we determine since we can see and produce thought without a foot, that the foot is not entirely responsible as a part in the system for seeing and producing thought. Yes, the word mind seemingly was invented and/or used to refer to the quality of being in which we are all familiar with the aspect within ourselves in which we see and produce thoughts.

Thinking takes place throughout the whole body. There isn't "only the brain" invloved in thinking. I'm not here saying the nervous system isn't coninuously involved and contributing to thought, be every other system is also. This is why I ask you to remove a system from the body, and prove you have not brought the mind with it.

Every system of the body is required to produce one single thought.

Do the 'you' that I am speaking to have control over a thought that is produced? When you produce a thought that you can call your own, (I suppose that doesnt include things that would help your point; like; your stomach rumbling producing the thought of "i want to get food"), you believe it is the totality of your system producing the thought, there is no 'thought producer' in the brain, that experiences data, stores memories, sees dreams, utilizes imagination, invents artistic expressions, sees detailed memories 3d and in color? That everything you have ever seen, cannot be said to be produced by a 'you', but can only be said to be the 'natural' productions of your systems obeying the laws of physics. There is no 'you' which has control over your body, there is only an inclosed microcosm of environment, there is no free will, or will, there is no you, there is only one nature, and you have no control, you cannot choose anything, you are only nature obeying its laws, there is absolute hard determinism and fate.

a reply to: ImaFungi

I dont believe the body exists. I only believe DNA exists. A sperm and egg come together to create a novel expression of DNA, the heart does not exist, what you call 'the heart' is really only a sequence of proteins in the code of DNA.

Sure. All of which are parts of the body. They begin and end where the body does.

We can not only feel the heart beat... what is feeling the heart beat? The heart is the body, the heart beat is the body, the body feels the heart beat? How does the body feel the body? Does the heart feel itself?

We have the ability to focus on certain areas of the body, imagine them out of their surroundings, and name them. The heart is one of those areas.

Before hands are removed, hands are the body. The body is hands. When the hands are removed, the body is still body. The body can still do many things it could do without hands. When the brain is removed, the body is still the body, but the body cannot do the same things it could do as it can with the brain. There must be an aspect in and of the brain which allows the body to do what it can do with the brain. There must be an aspect of the heart which allows the body to do what it does with the heart, that it cannot do without the heart. The body is a system of parts, like a car, like a civilization. Certain parts are more necessary for the continuation of he existence of the system than others. The parts do things. The part that is the heart does not have fingers that can grasp. The parts that are fingers are separate from the heart. Yes they are part of the same system, as the architect and the construction worker and the burger maker and the car maker and the mathematician and the cia are part of the same system, yes if you remove some of these parts from existence the functioning of the system will be altered. Yes the parts of the system produce different quantitative and qualitative functions. Yes the body is still capable of thinking without a foot. No the body is not still capable of thinking without the brain. Yes the continued reduction of that process leads us to believe that something about the brain is fundamentally different than the foot. Yes we do see, yes we are capable of producing thought. Yes we determine since we can see and produce thought without a foot, that the foot is not entirely responsible as a part in the system for seeing and producing thought. Yes, the word mind seemingly was invented and/or used to refer to the quality of being in which we are all familiar with the aspect within ourselves in which we see and produce thoughts.

Cars, companies and civilizations are artifacts of human beings. Bodies are not. Unfortunately, there is no analogy there.

Once again I am speaking explicitly about bodily systems. If there was a human skin, in which was contained a nervous system and brain, but without a vascular, repiritory, endocrine systems, would you say it was thinking?

The mind is indeed affected by losing a foot. Ask anyone who's lost one. My grandfather lost his legs in WWII. He basically had to relearn how to live, and thus had to think differently. In order to gain new foot experience and knowledge, or to control a foot, or to think, feel and be conscious of one's foot, the foot is required.

Do the 'you' that I am speaking to have control over a thought that is produced? When you produce a thought that you can call your own, (I suppose that doesnt include things that would help your point; like; your stomach rumbling producing the thought of "i want to get food"), you believe it is the totality of your system producing the thought, there is no 'thought producer' in the brain, that experiences data, stores memories, sees dreams, utilizes imagination, invents artistic expressions, sees detailed memories 3d and in color? That everything you have ever seen, cannot be said to be produced by a 'you', but can only be said to be the 'natural' productions of your systems obeying the laws of physics. There is no 'you' which has control over your body, there is only an inclosed microcosm of environment, there is no free will, or will, there is no you, there is only one nature, and you have no control, you cannot choose anything, you are only nature obeying its laws, there is absolute hard determinism and fate.

Not necessarily; and that's the beauty of it. First I do not believe in free or unfree will. I consider myself to be a body, not a little being living in a head watching a screen and pulling levers. As a body, I can both will and not will. As a body, I am in complete control of everything – my heart beat, my emotions, my immune system, my breathing, my thoughts – except for the most part I do not need to think about regulating them.

let us not become so obsessed with the speck we see through the telescope that we fail to realize its not a celestial body, the lens is merely flawed. the lens, of course, being the mind. we cannot help but use the mind, so let us be vigilant with our understanding of its anatomy and function.

originally posted by: Aphorism
As a body, I am in complete control of everything – my heart beat, my emotions, my immune system, my breathing, my thoughts – except for the most part I do not need to think about regulating them.

As a body, you can't reach outside of your body; can't reach through time.

As a mind, you can.

This distinction is the crux of the matter, I think.

As a mind, you are continually reaching outside of your body to scan the near future. When you detect something frightening or arousing in your near future, you begin to prepare your bodily systems for the stimulus up to ten seconds in advance. It's called presentiment, and it's measurable.

There is a great deal of evidence supporting presentiment, and a great deal of resistance to the evidence. It's a very polarizing topic. Psi touches on our idea of ourselves; it makes the concept of mind necessary, if language is going to accommodate the full range of human experience.

"The paper reports a meta-analysis of 90 experiments from 33 laboratories in 14 different countries which yielded an overall positive effect in excess of 6 sigma with an effect size (Hedges’ g) of 0.09, combined z = 6.33, p = 1.2 × 10e-10. A Bayesian analysis yielded a Bayes Factor of 7.4 × 10e9, greatly exceeding the criterion value of 100 for “decisive evidence” in favor of the experimental hypothesis." papers.ssrn.com...

In layman terms this means that according to the same standards used throughout the psychological sciences, presentiment is a genuine effect.

But, I don't need to see the future to know that no evidence can sway you, because you've already made up your mind. Or should I say, you've made up your brain.

👣

a reply to: Aphorism

ill answer your response legitly tomorrow, if my body answers your response legitly tomorrow, its got a mind of its own.

What part of the body decides what words will be chosen to respond to this question?

Quite clearly, this is my assertion, which is found in the very first paragraph:

“The mind (another word for soul, psyche, ego, consciousness etc.) as a concept is a hurdle to further human understanding. It confuses more than it enlightens. It has zero explanatory power. It is without scope. It cannot be empirically validated. On top of that, it is dangerous to believe in, for it risks giving primacy to a fiction rather than the reality it is meant to explain, leading one to solipsism. ”

So..mind,psyche, ego, consciousness are all the same?

The only key to distinguish between those terms is meditation.

a reply to: Aphorism

i feel your criticisms are far too pedantic to offer any exceptional insight to how the human mind benefits or delays scientific advancement. whats a really flowery phrase for describing a stick in the mud? theres an idea for your next thread. heres to hoping you find some inspiration for a more positive reflection. take life with a smile dude, its not like your revolutionary approach to solipsism is going to outlast you.