Dualism (Identity)
Transferred from “Brain expansion”:
dhw: According to your belief, it should be the soul that works out the immaterial design, using information supplied by the neuronal network, and the soul will then go on to use the neuronal network to give material form to the immaterial design.
DAVID: Not my theory: The soul must use the existing brain neuronal network to think. More complex larger network more advanced conceptualization by the soul. If you want to use my theory, please get it correctly!
If the “use” is not the provision of information and the means of implementing the concept, what is it? I agree with you that the more information the larger network provides, the more complex will be the thoughts of the soul. But how does that come to mean that the soul can’t think without the brain? Crucial to your belief in dualism is the subject of NDEs, when the brain is supposed to be dead but the soul not only observes but also enters a new world, perceives, communicates, remembers, reacts, and THINKS. You have said that the soul is housed within the brain. If it can think when it leaves its “house”, why is it incapable of thinking unless it has the house? Once again, the dualist’s soul uses the brain to gather information and to implement its thoughts. You have agreed with this before, but now you disagree, so please explain what else it uses the brain for.
DAVID: ...The new larger brain provides that neuronal complexity in the newly enlarged frontal and prefrontal lobes for the soul to think of it
dhw: So the neural network apparently has the thought without which the soul cannot think of the thought!
DAVID: Still confused. The soul must use the brain to think, just as I use my brain to think.
An added complication. What is the “I” that thinks? For a materialist the “I” is all that emerges from the interplay between the materials of the body (including heredity) plus the influences of upbringing, environment, experience, chance etc. For the dualist, it is all of these plus an immaterial component called the soul, which is responsible for all mental activity (and may even live on after bodily death). So “I” the soul uses “I” the brain to gather information and to give physical expression to its thoughts. Same question as above: what else does it use the brain for?
Dualism
by David Turell 
, Friday, May 01, 2020, 21:37 (1666 days ago) @ dhw
dhw: According to your belief, it should be the soul that works out the immaterial design, using information supplied by the neuronal network, and the soul will then go on to use the neuronal network to give material form to the immaterial design.
DAVID: Not my theory: The soul must use the existing brain neuronal network to think. More complex larger network more advanced conceptualization by the soul. If you want to use my theory, please get it correctly!
dhw: If the “use” is not the provision of information and the means of implementing the concept, what is it? I agree with you that the more information the larger network provides, the more complex will be the thoughts of the soul. But how does that come to mean that the soul can’t think without the brain?
My view of the soul is that it must use the brain it owns to think. The more complex the brain neuronal network, the more complex the concepts.
dhw: Crucial to your belief in dualism is the subject of NDEs, when the brain is supposed to be dead but the soul not only observes but also enters a new world, perceives, communicates, remembers, reacts, and THINKS.
Don't confuse death with life. In life the soul fuses with the brain and uses it. In death the soul is free of the body and can as you say: " perceives, communicates, remembers, reacts, and THINKS". As I use my theory in dualism, the soul changes roles in life and death.
DAVID: ...The new larger brain provides that neuronal complexity in the newly enlarged frontal and prefrontal lobes for the soul to think of it
dhw: So the neural network apparently has the thought without which the soul cannot think of the thought!
DAVID: Still confused. The soul must use the brain to think, just as I use my brain to think.
dhw: An added complication. What is the “I” that thinks? For a materialist the “I” is all that emerges from the interplay between the materials of the body (including heredity) plus the influences of upbringing, environment, experience, chance etc. For the dualist, it is all of these plus an immaterial component called the soul, which is responsible for all mental activity (and may even live on after bodily death). So “I” the soul uses “I” the brain to gather information and to give physical expression to its thoughts. Same question as above: what else does it use the brain for?
Why must you impose your confusion about dualism on my theory?
Dualism
dhw: According to your belief, it should be the soul that works out the immaterial design, using information supplied by the neuronal network, and the soul will then go on to use the neuronal network to give material form to the immaterial design.
DAVID: Not my theory: The soul must use the existing brain neuronal network to think. More complex larger network more advanced conceptualization by the soul. If you want to use my theory, please get it correctly!
dhw: If the “use” is not the provision of information and the means of implementing the concept, what is it? I agree with you that the more information the larger network provides, the more complex will be the thoughts of the soul. But how does that come to mean that the soul can’t think without the brain?
DAVID: My view of the soul is that it must use the brain it owns to think. The more complex the brain neuronal network, the more complex the concepts.
But you refuse to tell us HOW the soul uses the brain! Do you disagree that it uses the brain to acquire information and to give material form to its thoughts? In what other way does it use the brain?
dhw: Crucial to your belief in dualism is the subject of NDEs, when the brain is supposed to be dead but the soul not only observes but also enters a new world, perceives, communicates, remembers, reacts, and THINKS.
DAVID: Don't confuse death with life. In life the soul fuses with the brain and uses it. In death the soul is free of the body and can as you say: " perceives, communicates, remembers, reacts, and THINKS". As I use my theory in dualism, the soul changes roles in life and death.
Same problem for you as a dualist. In life it needs the brain to gather information about the material world and to give material expression to its thoughts. What other uses does the soul make of the brain in life? Of course it would change roles if it didn’t have a body and a material world to deal with. That doesn’t alter the fact that it doesn’t need the brain to do its thinking.
DAVID: The soul must use the brain to think, just as I use my brain to think.
dhw: An added complication. What is the “I” that thinks? For a materialist the “I” is all that emerges from the interplay between the materials of the body (including heredity) plus the influences of upbringing, environment, experience, chance etc. For the dualist, it is all of these plus an immaterial component called the soul, which is responsible for all mental activity (and may even live on after bodily death). So “I” the soul uses “I” the brain to gather information and to give physical expression to its thoughts. Same question as above: what else does it use the brain for?
DAVID: Why must you impose your confusion about dualism on my theory?
An extraordinary question. You keep accidentally telling us that the brain does the thinking when you mean the soul does the thinking, and when I correct you, you come up with the nebulous proposal that the soul “uses the brain to think”. I agree, and have explained how it does so. You disagree, but you won’t answer the question HOW ELSE it uses the brain. The confusion is hardly resolved by telling us that the soul can’t think without the brain except when the brain is dead. You then confused the issue still further by bringing in “I” as if it were separate from both the soul and the brain. I have tried to remove that source of confusion as well.
Dualism
by David Turell , Saturday, May 02, 2020, 22:21 (1665 days ago) @ dhw
DAVID: My view of the soul is that it must use the brain it owns to think. The more complex the brain neuronal network, the more complex the concepts.
dhw: But you refuse to tell us HOW the soul uses the brain! Do you disagree that it uses the brain to acquire information and to give material form to its thoughts? In what other way does it use the brain?
I don't refuse. I've told you. It obviously uses the brain neuronal networks to access memory, develop thought during life, but thinks on its own after death
dhw: Crucial to your belief in dualism is the subject of NDEs, when the brain is supposed to be dead but the soul not only observes but also enters a new world, perceives, communicates, remembers, reacts, and THINKS.DAVID: Don't confuse death with life. In life the soul fuses with the brain and uses it. In death the soul is free of the body and can as you say: " perceives, communicates, remembers, reacts, and THINKS". As I use my theory in dualism, the soul changes roles in life and death.
dhw: Same problem for you as a dualist. In life it needs the brain to gather information about the material world and to give material expression to its thoughts. What other uses does the soul make of the brain in life? Of course it would change roles if it didn’t have a body and a material world to deal with. That doesn’t alter the fact that it doesn’t need the brain to do its thinking.
My dualism is my dualism not yours. You constantly try to covert me to your thoughts about your concepts of dualism. We've done all this a while ago. It's memories are stored in the brain and it uses brain networks to create thought
DAVID: Why must you impose your confusion about dualism on my theory?dhw: An extraordinary question. You keep accidentally telling us that the brain does the thinking when you mean the soul does the thinking, and when I correct you, you come up with the nebulous proposal that the soul “uses the brain to think”. I agree, and have explained how it does so.
You just don't think clearly about what I have written. You explanation of what I mean are your theory, not mine. My 'accidentally' is my mental shorthand. You have the capacity to remember my shorthand for my theory.
dhw: You disagree, but you won’t answer the question HOW ELSE it uses the brain. The confusion is hardly resolved by telling us that the soul can’t think without the brain except when the brain is dead. You then confused the issue still further by bringing in “I” as if it were separate from both the soul and the brain. I have tried to remove that source of confusion as well.
Once again your confusion. My soul uses my brain networks to access memory, develop new information, and create immaterial complex concepts and designs. When I am alive I conceive of my soul as my essence, and using my brain as I feel myself do. My soul/essence, after my death, will do all of that on its own, no physical brain needed. What have I left out?
Dualism
DAVID: My view of the soul is that it must use the brain it owns to think. The more complex the brain neuronal network, the more complex the concepts.
dhw: But you refuse to tell us HOW the soul uses the brain! Do you disagree that it uses the brain to acquire information and to give material form to its thoughts? In what other way does it use the brain?
DAVID: I don't refuse. I've told you. It obviously uses the brain neuronal networks to access memory, develop thought during life, but thinks on its own after death.
“Develop thought” comes about through the gathering of information and implementation (= design, production and, after “erectus”, I should include expression) to thought. I’m not sure about memory. The soul has its own memory if there is such a thing as an afterlife as suggested by NDEs. But it seems that basically, you agree that the soul uses the brain exactly as I have said. Your belief that it thinks on its own after death should reinforce the idea that it does not depend on the complexity of the brain for its thoughts but only for information and implementation.
DAVID: Why must you impose your confusion about dualism on my theory?
dhw: An extraordinary question. You keep accidentally telling us that the brain does the thinking when you mean the soul does the thinking, and when I correct you, you come up with the nebulous proposal that the soul “uses the brain to think”. I agree, and have explained how it does so.
DAVID: You just don't think clearly about what I have written. You explanation of what I mean are your theory, not mine. My 'accidentally' is my mental shorthand. You have the capacity to remember my shorthand for my theory.
Your accidents are what cause confusion, as repeated yet again on the erectus thread. I can’t see any difference between your theory and mine as regards the way the soul uses the brain. The only remaining difference is your insistence that the dualist’s brain has to be changed before the dualist’s soul can come up with any new thoughts, whereas I propose that it is the thoughts of the soul that change the brain. This is the fundamental difference underlying the discussion under “brain expansion” and now the article on erectus and our speech mechanism.
dhw: The confusion is hardly resolved by telling us that the soul can’t think without the brain except when the brain is dead. You then confused the issue still further by bringing in “I” as if it were separate from both the soul and the brain. I have tried to remove that source of confusion as well.
DAVID: Once again your confusion. My soul uses my brain networks to access memory, develop new information, and create immaterial complex concepts and designs.
Again, I think we more or less agree on this, though your terminology is slightly different from mine and you’ve left out material production as part of what I call the implementation of concepts. Not important.
DAVID: When I am alive I conceive of my soul as my essence, and using my brain as I feel myself do. My soul/essence, after my death, will do all of that on its own, no physical brain needed. What have I left out?
Nothing. You had written: “The soul must use the brain to think, just as I use my brain to think” – which distinguished between the soul and “I”. I found this confusing, and tried to clarify the relationship. Mission accomplished between us.
Dualism
by David Turell , Sunday, May 03, 2020, 15:37 (1664 days ago) @ dhw
DAVID: I don't refuse. I've told you. It obviously uses the brain neuronal networks to access memory, develop thought during life, but thinks on its own after death.
dhw: “Develop thought” comes about through the gathering of information and implementation (= design, production and, after “erectus”, I should include expression) to thought. I’m not sure about memory. The soul has its own memory if there is such a thing as an afterlife as suggested by NDEs. But it seems that basically, you agree that the soul uses the brain exactly as I have said. Your belief that it thinks on its own after death should reinforce the idea that it does not depend on the complexity of the brain for its thoughts but only for information and implementation.
In the bold you can't seem to leave your teachings about dualism to accept my own theory. You have skipped over my explanation once again. One final time: my soul in life is my essence, and as I use my brain to think, my soul does. In death, as shown by NDE's the soul is separated and doesn't need the brain.
DAVID: You just don't think clearly about what I have written. You explanation of what I mean are your theory, not mine. My 'accidentally' is my mental shorthand. You have the capacity to remember my shorthand for my theory.dhw: Your accidents are what cause confusion, as repeated yet again on the erectus thread. I can’t see any difference between your theory and mine as regards the way the soul uses the brain. The only remaining difference is your insistence that the dualist’s brain has to be changed before the dualist’s soul can come up with any new thoughts, whereas I propose that it is the thoughts of the soul that change the brain. This is the fundamental difference underlying the discussion under “brain expansion” and now the article on erectus and our speech mechanism.
Just another version of 'hard thought' enlarges ancient brains. Doesn't fly with my view of evolution by God
DAVID: When I am alive I conceive of my soul as my essence, and using my brain as I feel myself do. My soul/essence, after my death, will do all of that on its own, no physical brain needed. What have I left out?dhw: Nothing. You had written: “The soul must use the brain to think, just as I use my brain to think” – which distinguished between the soul and “I”. I found this confusing, and tried to clarify the relationship. Mission accomplished between us.
Good
Dualism
DAVID: [The soul] obviously uses the brain neuronal networks to access memory, develop thought during life, but thinks on its own after death.
dhw: “Develop thought” comes about through the gathering of information and implementation (= design, production and, after “erectus”, I should include expression) to thought. I’m not sure about memory. The soul has its own memory if there is such a thing as an afterlife as suggested by NDEs. But it seems that basically, you agree that the soul uses the brain exactly as I have said. Your belief that it thinks on its own after death should reinforce the idea that it does not depend on the complexity of the brain for its thoughts but only for information and implementation.
DAVID: In the bold you can't seem to leave your teachings about dualism to accept my own theory. You have skipped over my explanation once again. One final time: my soul in life is my essence, and as I use my brain to think, my soul does. In death, as shown by NDE's the soul is separated and doesn't need the brain.
There is absolutely nothing here that contradicts what I wrote! We agree that the dualist’s soul is his essence, and we agree that the soul uses the brain to think, and unless you now disagree that the soul’s use of the brain consists in acquiring information and implementing thought (to which you added memory), where do we differ? Obviously if there is an afterlife, the soul doesn’t need the brain. No disagreement there either. The disagreement lies in what I wrote below:
dhw: Your accidents are what cause confusion, as repeated yet again on the erectus thread. I can’t see any difference between your theory and mine as regards the way the soul uses the brain. The only remaining difference is your insistence that the dualist’s brain has to be changed before the dualist’s soul can come up with any new thoughts, whereas I propose that it is the thoughts of the soul that change the brain.[…] .
DAVID: Just another version of 'hard thought' enlarges ancient brains. Doesn't fly with my view of evolution by God.
It’s not “just another version”! It IS the disagreement between us! And when you make statements like “Only an advanced brain can have advanced thoughts”, you are confirming the materialist view of thought, and of course if the brain IS the source of thought, what you are saying makes perfect sense! What does not make sense is the claim that the soul which uses the brain cannot have new thoughts unless the (non-thinking) brain undergoes changes beforehand. Hence my constant references to the known fact that hard thinking changes the brain through the effort to implement the thought. (Once more I shall refrain from going into my reconciliation between dualism and materialism, as it is irrelevant to this particular aspect of our discussion.)
Dualism
by David Turell , Monday, May 04, 2020, 18:52 (1663 days ago) @ dhw
DAVID: [The soul] obviously uses the brain neuronal networks to access memory, develop thought during life, but thinks on its own after death.
dhw: “Develop thought” comes about through the gathering of information and implementation (= design, production and, after “erectus”, I should include expression) to thought. I’m not sure about memory. The soul has its own memory if there is such a thing as an afterlife as suggested by NDEs. But it seems that basically, you agree that the soul uses the brain exactly as I have said. Your belief that it thinks on its own after death should reinforce the idea that it does not depend on the complexity of the brain for its thoughts but only for information and implementation.
DAVID: In the bold you can't seem to leave your teachings about dualism to accept my own theory. You have skipped over my explanation once again. One final time: my soul in life is my essence, and as I use my brain to think, my soul does. In death, as shown by NDE's the soul is separated and doesn't need the brain.
dhw: There is absolutely nothing here that contradicts what I wrote! We agree that the dualist’s soul is his essence, and we agree that the soul uses the brain to think, and unless you now disagree that the soul’s use of the brain consists in acquiring information and implementing thought (to which you added memory), where do we differ? Obviously if there is an afterlife, the soul doesn’t need the brain. No disagreement there either. The disagreement lies in what I wrote below:
dhw: Your accidents are what cause confusion, as repeated yet again on the erectus thread. I can’t see any difference between your theory and mine as regards the way the soul uses the brain. The only remaining difference is your insistence that the dualist’s brain has to be changed before the dualist’s soul can come up with any new thoughts, whereas I propose that it is the thoughts of the soul that change the brain.[…] .
DAVID: Just another version of 'hard thought' enlarges ancient brains. Doesn't fly with my view of evolution by God.
dhw: It’s not “just another version”! It IS the disagreement between us! And when you make statements like “Only an advanced brain can have advanced thoughts”, you are confirming the materialist view of thought, and of course if the brain IS the source of thought, what you are saying makes perfect sense! What does not make sense is the claim that the soul which uses the brain cannot have new thoughts unless the (non-thinking) brain undergoes changes beforehand. Hence my constant references to the known fact that hard thinking changes the brain through the effort to implement the thought. (Once more I shall refrain from going into my reconciliation between dualism and materialism, as it is irrelevant to this particular aspect of our discussion.)
We do differ. You totally dismiss or ignore my major point. At each stage of hominin or homo the organisms soul in life can only think up to a complexity level the existing complex form of brain allows. Since the soul must use the brain circuits to think, it can produce complex artifacts only to the level the brain complexity allows. Our brain has helped the soul to produce our current complex civilization. The bolded portion of your statement, always forgets what I have just written. THE SOUL ALWAYS USES THE LIVING BRAIN'S NETWORKS TO DEVELOP THOUGHTS, JUST AS I DO. My version of dualism: soul immaterial, brain material. In death, purely immaterial soul remembers, thinks as NDE's demonstrate. Over the years this has never changed, but you keep pouncing every time I don't mention all of it. WHY?
As for you comment about brain enlargement, my position still is God did it. Your convoluted twist about the archaeological articles dating brain size and artifacts and not really knowing when each aspect occurred is pure sophistry. The assumption in the articles is obvious.
Dualism
dhw: And when you make statements like “Only an advanced brain can have advanced thoughts”, you are confirming the materialist view of thought, and of course if the brain IS the source of thought, what you are saying makes perfect sense! What does not make sense is the claim that the soul which uses the brain cannot have new thoughts unless the (non-thinking) brain undergoes changes beforehand. Hence my constant references to the known fact that hard thinking changes the brain through the effort to implement the thought. (Once more I shall refrain from going into my reconciliation between dualism and materialism, as it is irrelevant to this particular aspect of our discussion.)
DAVID: We do differ. You totally dismiss or ignore my major point. At each stage of hominin or homo the organisms soul in life can only think up to a complexity level the existing complex form of brain allows.
In the same post (adopting the dualist’s viewpoint), I wrote: “The only remaining difference is your insistence that the dualist’s brain has to be changed [i.e. by God] before the dualist’s soul can come up with any new thoughts, whereas I propose that it is the thoughts of the soul that change the brain.” In other words, it is new thought that complexifies or expanded the brain, not the complexified or expanded brain that gives/gave rise to new thoughts. You have merely repeated that in different words.
DAVID: Since the soul must use the brain circuits to think, it can produce complex artifacts only to the level the brain complexity allows.
"To think" is too vague. I thought we agreed that the soul uses the brain for information and for implementation (= design and production), to which you added memory. The rest of your sentence is exactly right according to my theory: if the existing brain complexity did not allow the production of the complex artefact, it had to expand in order to design and produce the artefact. (In the modern brain, it would complexify instead of expanding).
DAVID: Our brain has helped the soul to produce our current complex civilization. The bolded portion of your statement, always forgets what I have just written. THE SOUL ALWAYS USES THE LIVING BRAIN'S NETWORKS TO DEVELOP THOUGHTS, JUST AS I DO. My version of dualism: soul immaterial, brain material. In death, purely immaterial soul remembers, thinks as NDE's demonstrate. Over the years this has never changed, but you keep pouncing every time I don't mention all of it. WHY?
No disagreement on any of this, especially your block capitals. Yes, the soul needs the brain to “DEVELOP” thoughts. But the difference between us is that the soul’s initial thoughts (e.g. kill from a distance) come before there is any brain change. It is the DEVELOPMENT that changes the brain, i.e. the effort to implement the thought. I have explained above (first paragraph) why I “pounce” on "Only an advanced brain can have advanced thoughts." Your theory of expansion preceding new thoughts makes perfect sense if the brain is the source of thought (materialism)! It does not make sense if the soul is the source of thought (dualism).
Dualism
by David Turell , Tuesday, May 05, 2020, 19:38 (1662 days ago) @ dhw
DAVID: We do differ. You totally dismiss or ignore my major point. At each stage of hominin or homo the organisms soul in life can only think up to a complexity level the existing complex form of brain allows.
dhw: In the same post (adopting the dualist’s viewpoint), I wrote: “The only remaining difference is your insistence that the dualist’s brain has to be changed [i.e. by God][/b] before the dualist’s soul can come up with any new thoughts, whereas I propose that it is the thoughts of the soul that change the brain.” In other words, it is new thought that complexifies or expanded the brain, not the complexified or expanded brain that gives/gave rise to new thoughts. You have merely repeated that in different words.
No I haven't. The bold applies. We are following different thoughts. I still maintain God expands larger more complex brains which allows the soul to have more complex thoughts. Same motto: a brain is capable of thinking only at a level the brain networks allow.
DAVID: Since the soul must use the brain circuits to think, it can produce complex artifacts only to the level the brain complexity allows.
dhw: "To think" is too vague. I thought we agreed that the soul uses the brain for information and for implementation (= design and production), to which you added memory. The rest of your sentence is exactly right according to my theory: if the existing brain complexity did not allow the production of the complex artefact, it had to expand in order to design and produce the artefact. (In the modern brain, it would complexify instead of expanding).
Your usual confused interpretation of what I present. See statements above. For brain size to advance God is needed.
DAVID: Our brain has helped the soul to produce our current complex civilization. The bolded portion of your statement, always forgets what I have just written. THE SOUL ALWAYS USES THE LIVING BRAIN'S NETWORKS TO DEVELOP THOUGHTS, JUST AS I DO. My version of dualism: soul immaterial, brain material. In death, purely immaterial soul remembers, thinks as NDE's demonstrate. Over the years this has never changed, but you keep pouncing every time I don't mention all of it. WHY?dhw: No disagreement on any of this, especially your block capitals. Yes, the soul needs the brain to “DEVELOP” thoughts. But the difference between us is that the soul’s initial thoughts (e.g. kill from a distance) come before there is any brain change. It is the DEVELOPMENT that changes the brain, i.e. the effort to implement the thought. I have explained above (first paragraph) why I “pounce” on "Only an advanced brain can have advanced thoughts." Your theory of expansion preceding new thoughts makes perfect sense if the brain is the source of thought (materialism)! It does not make sense if the soul is the source of thought (dualism).
It makes perfect sense if you accept God expands and complexifies the more advanced brain, which the soul can then use to think and design. We are still arguing at cross purposes. You are trying to establish from known facts a possible way brains enlarged naturally, no God involved. The theory simply boils down to hard thought drives enlargement. It is pure invention from wishful thinking. I see no natural support for it. And my God theory says: a brain/soul can only think of advanced thought if the networks are sufficiently advanced to allow creation of those thoughts.
Dualism
DAVID: -[…] At each stage of hominin or homo the organisms soul in life can only think up to a complexity level the existing complex form of brain allows.
dhw: […] I wrote: “The only remaining difference is your insistence that the dualist’s brain has to be changed [i.e. by God][/b] before the dualist’s soul can come up with any new thoughts, whereas I propose that it is the thoughts of the soul that change the brain.” […] You have merely repeated that in different words.
DAVID: No I haven't. The bold applies. We are following different thoughts. I still maintain God expands larger more complex brains which allows the soul to have more complex thoughts. Same motto: a brain is capable of thinking only at a level the brain networks allow.
You mean the soul is capable of thinking….The only change you’ve made is to individual words: God has to change (expand) the brain, and the expansion allows the soul to think more complex (new) thoughts, i.e. more complex (new) thoughts can only be thought after God has expanded the brain. Boils down to the same.
DAVID: Since the soul must use the brain circuits to think, it can produce complex artifacts only to the level the brain complexity allows.
dhw: "To think" is too vague. I thought we agreed that the soul uses the brain for information and for implementation (= design and production), to which you added memory. The rest of your sentence is exactly right according to my theory: if the existing brain complexity did not allow the production of the complex artefact, it had to expand in order to design and produce the artefact. (In the modern brain, it would complexify instead of expanding).
DAVID: Your usual confused interpretation of what I present. See statements above. For brain size to advance God is needed.
We agree that the artefact can only be PRODUCED to the level the brain allows. You say God has to expand the brain before the initial idea ("kill from distance") is conceived, designed and produced, and I say it is the design and production of the artefact that expands the brain! There is no confusion – just two different views of the timing and the cause of expansion.
DAVID: Our brain has helped the soul to produce our current complex civilization. The bolded portion of your statement, always forgets what I have just written. THE SOUL ALWAYS USES THE LIVING BRAIN'S NETWORKS TO DEVELOP THOUGHTS, JUST AS I DO. My version of dualism: soul immaterial, brain material. In death, purely immaterial soul remembers, thinks as NDE's demonstrate. Over the years this has never changed, but you keep pouncing every time I don't mention all of it. WHY?
dhw: No disagreement on any of this, especially your block capitals. Yes, the soul needs the brain to “DEVELOP” thoughts[…]I have explained above (first paragraph) why I “pounce” on "Only an advanced brain can have advanced thoughts." Your theory of expansion preceding new thoughts makes perfect sense if the brain is the source of thought (materialism)! It does not make sense if the soul is the source of thought (dualism).
DAVID: It makes perfect sense if you accept God expands and complexifies the more advanced brain, which the soul can then use to think and design.
Please let’s clarify this once and for all. The soul uses the brain to gather information and to design and produce the artefact (and you added access to memory). Yes or no? If no, please tell us what else it uses the brain for. If yes, and the soul is the source of thought, why can’t it think new thoughts using existing information and without the brain expanding/complexifying? That is at the core of my theory - original thought: “kill from distance”, IMPLEMENTATION causes expansion.
DAVID: We are still arguing at cross purposes. You are trying to establish from known facts a possible way brains enlarged naturally, no God involved.
Wrong. God may have invented the mechanism whereby the cells of the brain organize its expansion.
DAVID: The theory simply boils down to hard thought drives enlargement.
Correct.
DAVID: It is pure invention from wishful thinking. I see no natural support for it.
Do you deny that the modern brain is changed by hard thinking? If you agree, why do you think ancient brains could NOT have been changed by hard thinking?
DAVID: And my God theory says: a brain/soul can only think of advanced thought if the networks are sufficiently advanced to allow creation of those thoughts.
What your theory says is no answer to the logic of my theory. Why do you say “brain/soul can only think…”? As a dualist, do you believe that the brain thinks, or the soul uses the brain in the manner I have bolded above?
Dualism
by David Turell , Wednesday, May 06, 2020, 21:29 (1661 days ago) @ dhw
DAVID: No I haven't. The bold applies. We are following different thoughts. I still maintain God expands larger more complex brains which allows the soul to have more complex thoughts. Same motto: a brain is capable of thinking only at a level the brain networks allow.
dhw: You mean the soul is capable of thinking….The only change you’ve made is to individual words: God has to change (expand) the brain, and the expansion allows the soul to think more complex (new) thoughts, i.e. more complex (new) thoughts can only be thought after God has expanded the brain. Boils down to the same.
dhw: We agree that the artefact can only be PRODUCED to the level the brain allows. You say God has to expand the brain before the initial idea ("kill from distance") is conceived, designed and produced, and I say it is the design and production of the artefact that expands the brain! There is no confusion – just two different views of the timing and the cause of expansion.
A vast change in the timing, which I totally reject.
DAVID: Our brain has helped the soul to produce our current complex civilization. The bolded portion of your statement, always forgets what I have just written. THE SOUL ALWAYS USES THE LIVING BRAIN'S NETWORKS TO DEVELOP THOUGHTS, JUST AS I DO. My version of dualism: soul immaterial, brain material. In death, purely immaterial soul remembers, thinks as NDE's demonstrate. Over the years this has never changed, but you keep pouncing every time I don't mention all of it. WHY?dhw: No disagreement on any of this, especially your block capitals. Yes, the soul needs the brain to “DEVELOP” thoughts[…]I have explained above (first paragraph) why I “pounce” on "Only an advanced brain can have advanced thoughts." Your theory of expansion preceding new thoughts makes perfect sense if the brain is the source of thought (materialism)! It does not make sense if the soul is the source of thought (dualism).
DAVID: It makes perfect sense if you accept God expands and complexifies the more advanced brain, which the soul can then use to think and design.
dhw: Please let’s clarify this once and for all. The soul uses the brain to gather information and to design and produce the artefact (and you added access to memory). Yes or no? If no, please tell us what else it uses the brain for. If yes, and the soul is the source of thought, why can’t it think new thoughts using existing information and without the brain expanding/complexifying? That is at the core of my theory - original thought: “kill from distance”, IMPLEMENTATION causes expansion.
Again exactly backward with a misdirected thought about the timing and cause of expansion. I repeat, The brain/soul complex can only reach a level of complex thought allowed by the new brain's complexity of neuronal networks.
DAVID: We are still arguing at cross purposes. You are trying to establish from known facts a possible way brains enlarged naturally, no God involved.dhw: Wrong. God may have invented the mechanism whereby the cells of the brain organize its expansion.
'May' is your usual escape route. Your God versions always having Him giving up total control.
DAVID: The theory simply boils down to hard thought drives enlargement.dhw: Correct.
DAVID: It is pure invention from wishful thinking. I see no natural support for it.
dhw: Do you deny that the modern brain is changed by hard thinking? If you agree, why do you think ancient brains could NOT have been changed by hard thinking?
As I've written antecedent ancient brains probably did a little complexification in tiny areas as ours does.
DAVID: And my God theory says: a brain/soul can only think of advanced thought if the networks are sufficiently advanced to allow creation of those thoughts.dhw: What your theory says is no answer to the logic of my theory. Why do you say “brain/soul can only think…”? As a dualist, do you believe that the brain thinks, or the soul uses the brain in the manner I have bolded above?
Back to your same niggling. The soul uses the brain during life to gather info and have thoughts
Dualism: materialist philosopher finds it a problem!:
by David Turell , Thursday, May 07, 2020, 02:05 (1660 days ago) @ David Turell
Consciousness is not ever the result of dualism is his point:
https://mindmatters.ai/2020/05/philosopher-consciousness-is-not-a-problem-dualism-is/
"In a recent piece for Institute for Art and Ideas, he declared that dualism is the problem, not consciousness. If we just shed the idea that there is any significant distinction between the mind and the brain, the notorious hard problem of consciousness would disappear:
"I’ve never viewed the so-called “hard problem” as any problem at all. According to David Chalmers, who coined the term, the hard problem is supposed to be the problem of figuring out what our idea of consciousness refers to in the real world. The obvious answer is that it refers to brain processes that feel like something.
***
"He goes on to say,
"Conscious states are just ordinary physical states that happen to have been co-opted by reasoning systems. Consciousness doesn’t depend on some extra shining light, but only on the emergence of subjects, complex organisms that distinguish themselves from the rest of the world and use internal neural processes to guide their behaviour.
***
"Essentially, Papineau defines the hard problem out of existence by 1) proclaiming as a fact that “conscious states are just ordinary physical states that happen to have been co-opted by reasoning systems” and then 2) describing doubt of that proposition as arising from a partiality to “spooky” force fields rather than a lack of fit between physicalism and the evidence.
***
"A thoughtful commenter at Reddit responds,
"… Papineau has it backwards—the hard problem does not presuppose dualism, rather dualism is a proposed response to materialism’s inability thus far to account for the explanatory gap. What a lot of these materialist thinkers fail to understand is that the hard problem is hard because we cannot even begin to conceptualize a possible solution.
"That’s what makes it different from most of the other unresolved issues in science. For example, we dont currently have a universally accepted unified theory of quantum gravity, but we can imagine what it would look like (tiny particles that can interact with gravity that we just havnt discovered yet). Meanwhile, we cannot even think of a materialist proposal that would explain a causal chain that starts with interacting particles and ends in qualitative experience.
:Literally all it takes to solve the hard problem is a sound hypothesis, and to the best of my knowledge, nobody has been able to come up with one. You can’t just say “consciousness refers to brain processes that feel like something” and call it a day. We know that already, it’s a strawman argument. The real question is how are those brain processes able to feel like something? (my bold)
***
"what about dualism? Is the distinction between the mind and the brain a misconception or is it a fact?
"Elsewhere, Papineau has written,
It is widely supposed that this impression of an explanatory gap arises because our pre-theoretical concepts of pain and other conscious states do not allow a priori derivations of mind-brain identities from the physical facts, in the way that concepts like water and heat arguably allow the corresponding derivations of the scientific identities. The implication is that there is something wrong with current physicalism. In order to be successful, physicalism needs to do something more. It needs to come up with some alternative way of conceiving conscious states, some way that will allow us to bridge the explanatory gap.
"I have a quite different diagnosis. I think that the so-called ‘explanatory gap’ is simply a manifestation of an intuitive conviction that dualism is true. It’s not that mind-brain identities are hard to explain—they are simply hard to believe.
"A key reason that the identity of the mind and the brain is hard to believe is the evidence against it. Neurosurgeon Michael Egnor argues that, far from being a misconception, dualism is a fact: The mind is not the same type of entity as the brain. Sensing that fact helps us understand why people with split brains or only half a brain can have a normal mental life, and why people with massive, permanent brain damage can remain cognizant. So if dualism is an intuition, it is evidence-based. Whether or not we find it “spooky,” dualism is something we can observe.
Comment: I'm very happy with my form of dualism. Papineau is in the same boat as Dan Dennett. Call it an illusion and problem is solved. Horsefeathers!
Dualism: materialism is only as our mind sees it
by David Turell , Tuesday, January 12, 2021, 05:14 (1410 days ago) @ David Turell
What is materialism, if not a mind's interpretation?:
https://mindmatters.ai/2021/01/science-based-reasons-why-materialism-is-a-dead-end/
"First—and we sometimes forget this—science only exists as it is perceived by the human mind. We could do it well or badly or someway in between. We could succeed or fail. But it is a world of ideas, not things. He writes,
"Materialism—the view that nature is fundamentally constituted by matter outside and independent of mind—is a metaphysics, in that it makes statements about what nature essentially is. As such, it is also a theoretical inference: we cannot empirically observe matter outside and independent of mind, for we are forever locked in mind. All we can observe are the contents of perception, which are inherently mental. Even the output of measurement instruments is only accessible to us insofar as it is mentally perceived.
"Perhaps one reason we sometimes forget this is that we imagine science to be the equipment scientists use or the journals in which they express their ideas. But is actually the ideas themselves, sometimes expressed as massive explanations of cell biology or sometimes as simply as E=MC^2.
"For starters, there is nothing about the parameters of material arrangements—say, the position and momentum of the atoms constituting our brain—in terms of which we could deduce, at least in principle, how it feels to fall in love, to taste wine, or to listen to a Vivaldi sonata. There is an impassable explanatory gap between material quantities and experiential qualities, which philosophers refer to as the ‘hard problem of consciousness.’ Many people don’t recognize this gap because they think of matter as already having intrinsic qualities—such as color, taste, etc.—which contradicts mainstream materialism: according to the latter, color, taste, etc., are all generated by our brain, inside our skull. They don’t exist in the world out there, which is supposedly purely abstract.
"Materialism has the advantage of being simple: You are your body. Your mind is your brain. The universe is a collection of rocks floating around.
"But the fact that we can even think these things shows that that’s not really the universe we live in."
comment: I can expect the comment that the material brain conjures all of these impressions, but the point is the impressions we have are second hand representations of the outside world. We only know what the brain allows us to think it is as we use our mind to drive the the brain to produce impressions and thought. The mind uses the brain as a material tool, and produces immaterial thoughts and concepts..
Dualism
dhw […]I have explained […] why I “pounce” on "Only an advanced brain can have advanced thoughts." Your theory of expansion preceding new thoughts makes perfect sense if the brain is the source of thought (materialism)! It does not make sense if the soul is the source of thought (dualism).
DAVID: It makes perfect sense if you accept God expands and complexifies the more advanced brain, which the soul can then use to think and design.
dhw: Please let’s clarify this once and for all. The soul uses the brain to gather information and to design and produce the artefact (and you added access to memory). Yes or no? If no, please tell us what else it uses the brain for. If yes, and the soul is the source of thought, why can’t it think new thoughts using existing information and without the brain expanding/complexifying? That is at the core of my theory - original thought: “kill from distance”, IMPLEMENTATION causes expansion.
DAVID: Again exactly backward with a misdirected thought about the timing and cause of expansion. I repeat, The brain/soul complex can only reach a level of complex thought allowed by the new brain's complexity of neuronal networks.
Why do you refuse to answer a straight question? And why do you simply repeat a convoluted formula which cries out for definition? Forget your complex, your level, your complexity of neural networks, and stick to basics. If the soul can only think what the brain allows it to think, you have the brain controlling the soul. But we have both agreed that the soul uses the brain – hence the above question which you refuse to answer until the very end of your post. (I am now cutting the passages in between, as they are dealt with under “Brain expansion”):
DAVID: […] a brain/soul can only think of advanced thought if the networks are sufficiently advanced to allow creation of those thoughts.
dhw: [...] Why do you say “brain/soul can only think…”? As a dualist, do you believe that the brain thinks, or the soul uses the brain in the manner I have bolded above?
DAVID: Back to your same niggling. The soul uses the brain during life to gather info and have thoughts.
It’s not a niggle – it’s at the heart of our disagreement. Thank you for this semi-agreement, but why have you left out implementation of a new thought (= development - I’ll add this to my previous definition - design and production) – to which you had added memory? These are the uses the soul makes of the brain when it thinks. And so, if the soul is the source of thought and there is nothing else it uses the brain for, why can’t it think new thoughts using existing information and without the brain expanding/complexifying?
Under "Dualism: materialist philosopher finds it a problem"
DAVID: I'm very happy with my form of dualism. Papineau is in the same boat as Dan Dennett. Call it an illusion and problem is solved. Horsefeathers!
You may be surprised to hear that I agree with you completely. I am – as usual – torn between materialism and dualism, but if I were a materialist, I would squirm at the silliness of Papineau’s arguments.
Just to save space, I can only nod in agreement with the article under "Intelligent Design Scientists". And I’ll repeat that for me the design argument and the realm of psychic experience present the strongest possible case for theism. I shan’t repeat the equally powerful arguments that keep me on my agnostic fence!
Dualism
by David Turell , Thursday, May 07, 2020, 21:06 (1660 days ago) @ dhw
DAVID: Again exactly backward with a misdirected thought about the timing and cause of expansion. I repeat, The brain/soul complex can only reach a level of complex thought allowed by the new brain's complexity of neuronal networks.
dhw: Why do you refuse to answer a straight question? And why do you simply repeat a convoluted formula which cries out for definition? Forget your complex, your level, your complexity of neural networks, and stick to basics. If the soul can only think what the brain allows it to think, you have the brain controlling the soul. But we have both agreed that the soul uses the brain – hence the above question which you refuse to answer until the very end of your post.
Crazy bold. Why are you so confused? I'm not. The soul uses the brain networks to think and those thoughts when they appear are now independent of the brain and are immaterial. What the various-sized brains control is the level of thought complexity, based on their individual construction, the soul can reach. At each level the soul is freely thinking to whatever limit is imposed.
DAVID: […] a brain/soul can only think of advanced thought if the networks are sufficiently advanced to allow creation of those thoughts.dhw: [...] Why do you say “brain/soul can only think…”? As a dualist, do you believe that the brain thinks, or the soul uses the brain in the manner I have bolded above?
DAVID: Back to your same niggling. The soul uses the brain during life to gather info and have thoughts.
dhw: It’s not a niggle – it’s at the heart of our disagreement. Thank you for this semi-agreement, but why have you left out implementation of a new thought (= development - I’ll add this to my previous definition - design and production) – to which you had added memory? These are the uses the soul makes of the brain when it thinks. And so, if the soul is the source of thought and there is nothing else it uses the brain for, why can’t it think new thoughts using existing information and without the brain expanding/complexifying?
Explained above. Our final very complex brain allows our souls to reach concepts the erectus folks could never achieve using their much less complex brain. The issue is both size and neuron networks complexity, as well as synapse changeable complexity.
Under "Dualism: materialist philosopher finds it a problem"
DAVID: I'm very happy with my form of dualism. Papineau is in the same boat as Dan Dennett. Call it an illusion and problem is solved. Horsefeathers!
dhw: You may be surprised to hear that I agree with you completely. I am – as usual – torn between materialism and dualism, but if I were a materialist, I would squirm at the silliness of Papineau’s arguments.
I'm not surprised you agree about the article.. And I'm not surprised at your reluctance about dualism, It puts a theistic foot in the door!
dhw: Just to save space, I can only nod in agreement with the article under "Intelligent Design Scientists". And I’ll repeat that for me the design argument and the realm of psychic experience present the strongest possible case for theism. I shan’t repeat the equally powerful arguments that keep me on my agnostic fence!
Just to put to rest, there are a very large number of well-trained scientist who follow ID
Dualism
For some reason - absent-minded brain or soul? - I forgot to post this yesterday!
Parts of this post are more “brain expansion” than “dualism”, but that is why we got onto dualism in the first place. The subjects overlap.
Dhw: The soul uses the brain to gather information and to design and produce the artefact (and you added access to memory). Yes or no?
DAVID: Again exactly backward with a misdirected thought about the timing and cause of expansion. I repeat, The brain/soul complex can only reach a level of complex thought allowed by the new brain's complexity of neuronal networks.
dhw: Why do you refuse to answer a straight question? And why do you simply repeat a convoluted formula which cries out for definition? Forget your complex, your level, your complexity of neural networks, and stick to basics. If the soul can only think what the brain allows it to think, you have the brain controlling the soul. But we have both agreed that the soul uses the brain – hence the above question…
DAVID: Crazy bold. Why are you so confused? I'm not. The soul uses the brain networks to think and those thoughts when they appear are now independent of the brain and are immaterial.
Agreed, but HOW does it use the brain? You refuse to commit yourself to a yes or no to my list. Instead you hide behind vague generalities:
DAVID: What the various-sized brains control is the level of thought complexity, based on their individual construction, the soul can reach. At each level the soul is freely thinking to whatever limit is imposed.
How does their construction control the level at which your dualist’s soul can think? The brain provides information, so you can rightly argue that the soul’s thinking is limited to the information given by the senses. And so, using our example of the first spear: small-brained homo thinks: “me want kill from distance”. He is using EXISTING information. But now he needs more information – and so he has to do some hard thinking, and hard thinking is what changes the brain. That is what we mean by developing, designing and finally manufacturing the artefact. The rest follows:
DAVID: Our final very complex brain allows our souls to reach concepts the erectus folks could never achieve using their much less complex brain. The issue is both size and neuron networks complexity, as well as synapse changeable complexity.
No, the issue is what causes the brain to change. How has our final brain reached this level of complexity? My proposal (again!): each successive expansion was caused by “hard thinking”, leading to increased knowledge and skills. Erectus was more advanced than australopithecus. We are more advanced than erectus. And so of course the increased knowledge and skills coincide with the bigger or vastly more complex brain (complexification having replaced expansion). The dualist’s soul learns more and more, as it uses the brain to gather more and more information and to implement its thoughts. But it is always the soul that does the thinking, as is apparently demonstrated by NDEs, in which the soul thinks and retains its knowledge (and memories) when the brain is dead.
Dualism
by David Turell , Saturday, May 09, 2020, 19:19 (1658 days ago) @ dhw
dhw: Why do you refuse to answer a straight question? And why do you simply repeat a convoluted formula which cries out for definition? Forget your complex, your level, your complexity of neural networks, and stick to basics. If the soul can only think what the brain allows it to think, you have the brain controlling the soul. But we have both agreed that the soul uses the brain – hence the above question…
DAVID: Crazy bold. Why are you so confused? I'm not. The soul uses the brain networks to think and those thoughts when they appear are now independent of the brain and are immaterial.
Agreed, but HOW does it use the brain? You refuse to commit yourself to a yes or no to my list. Instead you hide behind vague generalities:
DAVID: What the various-sized brains control is the level of thought complexity, based on their individual construction, the soul can reach. At each level the soul is freely thinking to whatever limit is imposed.
dhw: How does their construction control the level at which your dualist’s soul can think? The brain provides information, so you can rightly argue that the soul’s thinking is limited to the information given by the senses. And so, using our example of the first spear: small-brained homo thinks: “me want kill from distance”. He is using EXISTING information. But now he needs more information – and so he has to do some hard thinking, and hard thinking is what changes the brain. That is what we mean by developing, designing and finally manufacturing the artefact. The rest follows:
The brain provides much more than just information. How about the ability to conceptualize? You refuse to accept my concept that complexity of thought is limited by complexity and size of neuronal networks available for use by the soul/human essence. Erectus at 1,000 cc is basically our immediate predecessor and never could have had our thinking ability. The brain provides much more than just information as you keep trying to imply. As below:
DAVID: Our final very complex brain allows our souls to reach concepts the erectus folks could never achieve using their much less complex brain. The issue is both size and neuron networks complexity, as well as synapse changeable complexity.dhw: No, the issue is what causes the brain to change. How has our final brain reached this level of complexity? My proposal (again!): each successive expansion was caused by “hard thinking”, leading to increased knowledge and skills. Erectus was more advanced than australopithecus. We are more advanced than erectus. And so of course the increased knowledge and skills coincide with the bigger or vastly more complex brain (complexification having replaced expansion). The dualist’s soul learns more and more, as it uses the brain to gather more and more information and to implement its thoughts. But it is always the soul that does the thinking, as is apparently demonstrated by NDEs, in which the soul thinks and retains its knowledge (and memories) when the brain is dead.
You're off on a tangent we left and had agreed. In life the soul must use the living brain networks to not only gain info but to develop new concepts and immaterial thoughts. In NDE's and death the soul does this all on its own. This is my dualism. The discussion about enlargement has no business in this thread. In the bold I don't understand the use of the word 'coincide'. The larger brain allowed the development of our very advanced concepts, such as grammatical language 50-70,000 years ago, while erectus had very simple communication skills, and we didn't come out of erectus' stone age until 10-12,000 years ago. I view the stasis as proof we were given a brain we didn't know how use and had to learn to use it.
Dualism
DAVID: What the various-sized brains control is the level of thought complexity, based on their individual construction, the soul can reach. At each level the soul is freely thinking to whatever limit is imposed.
dhw: How does their construction control the level at which your dualist’s soul can think? The brain provides information, so you can rightly argue that the soul’s thinking is limited to the information given by the senses. And so, using our example of the first spear: small-brained homo thinks: “me want kill from distance”. He is using EXISTING information. But now he needs more information – and so he has to do some hard thinking, and hard thinking is what changes the brain. That is what we mean by developing, designing and finally manufacturing the artefact.
DAVID: The brain provides much more than just information. How about the ability to conceptualize?
I have just listed what else the brain is used for (now bolded)! Concepts are immaterial and would come from the dualist’s soul, which processes all the information and instructs the brain to give material expression to its thoughts.
DAVID: You refuse to accept my concept that complexity of thought is limited by complexity and size of neuronal networks available for use by the soul/human essence.
The dualist’s soul is limited by the extent of knowledge made available to it by the brain and other parts of the body.
DAVID: Erectus at 1,000 cc is basically our immediate predecessor and never could have had our thinking ability. The brain provides much more than just information as you keep trying to imply. As below:
I imply no such thing, as above. Your comment about erectus implies that a 1000 cc brain cannot have the thinking ability of a 1500 cc brain, and you may well be right. Materialists would certainly agree. But dualists believe in a soul that does the thinking, and so the more thinking it does, the more the brain will change, and that in turn will provide more information for the soul to work on, and the more information the soul has, the more complex its thoughts will become, and then the more complex the brain will become as it responds to those thoughts. This is a perfectly logical, interactive progression.
DAVID: In life the soul must use the living brain networks to not only gain info but to develop new concepts and immaterial thoughts.
Agreed, as described above. It is the soul that does the immaterial conceptualizing and developing while the brain provides the information and the material development and expression or production of the concept.
DAVID: In NDE's and death the soul does this all on its own. This is my dualism.
Also agreed. And this provides evidence that the soul does the thinking and the developing of new concepts and the production of immaterial thoughts. And (once more) in the material world it acquires information from the brain and it uses the brain to give material expression to its immaterial thoughts and concepts.
Dualism
by David Turell , Sunday, May 10, 2020, 16:43 (1657 days ago) @ dhw
DAVID: What the various-sized brains control is the level of thought complexity, based on their individual construction, the soul can reach. At each level the soul is freely thinking to whatever limit is imposed.
dhw: How does their construction control the level at which your dualist’s soul can think? The brain provides information, so you can rightly argue that the soul’s thinking is limited to the information given by the senses. And so, using our example of the first spear: small-brained homo thinks: “me want kill from distance”. He is using EXISTING information. But now he needs more information – and so he has to do some hard thinking, and hard thinking is what changes the brain. That is what we mean by developing, designing and finally manufacturing the artefact.
DAVID: The brain provides much more than just information. How about the ability to conceptualize?
dhw: I have just listed what else the brain is used for (now bolded)! Concepts are immaterial and would come from the dualist’s soul, which processes all the information and instructs the brain to give material expression to its thoughts.
You've again left out the soul can only initiate concepts by using the brain's networks to think of them. The soul in life must do that. The soul does not sit outside the brain and tell it what to do. They are intricately bound together
DAVID: You refuse to accept my concept that complexity of thought is limited by complexity and size of neuronal networks available for use by the soul/human essence.dhw: The dualist’s soul is limited by the extent of knowledge made available to it by the brain and other parts of the body.
How does that differ from my theory?
DAVID: Erectus at 1,000 cc is basically our immediate predecessor and never could have had our thinking ability. The brain provides much more than just information as you keep trying to imply. As below:dhw: I imply no such thing, as above. Your comment about erectus implies that a 1000 cc brain cannot have the thinking ability of a 1500 cc brain, and you may well be right. Materialists would certainly agree. But dualists believe in a soul that does the thinking, and so the more thinking it does, the more the brain will change, and that in turn will provide more information for the soul to work on, and the more information the soul has, the more complex its thoughts will become, and then the more complex the brain will become as it responds to those thoughts. This is a perfectly logical, interactive progression.
Again, you have quoted a dualist theory that is not mine. Don't impose your dualist theories on me! You've done this before. I don't accept it, as stated many times before..
DAVID: In life the soul must use the living brain networks to not only gain info but to develop new concepts and immaterial thoughts.dhw: Agreed, as described above. It is the soul that does the immaterial conceptualizing and developing while the brain provides the information and the material development and expression or production of the concept.
No, no, no. In the bold it's your dualism theory, not mine. The soul must use the brain's thinking networks to conceptualize. eh brain dos give sensory input.
DAVID: In NDE's and death the soul does this all on its own. This is my dualism.dhw: Also agreed. And this provides evidence that the soul does the thinking and the developing of new concepts and the production of immaterial thoughts. And (once more) in the material world it acquires information from the brain and it uses the brain to give material expression to its immaterial thoughts and concepts.
If you accept my way of stating my theory, we may be in agreement.
Dualism
dhw: Concepts are immaterial and would come from the dualist’s soul, which processes all the information and instructs the brain to give material expression to its thoughts.
DAVID: You've again left out the soul can only initiate concepts by using the brain's networks to think of them. The soul in life must do that. The soul does not sit outside the brain and tell it what to do. They are intricately bound together.
You simply refuse to pinpoint what the soul (if it exists) uses the brain FOR! Once again, do you or do you not agree that the soul does the thinking, and uses the information provided by the brain to initiate concepts, and uses the brain to implement them (= develop, design, produce and/or express them)? If the soul exists, then OK, it’s housed within the brain, and so it sits INSIDE the brain and tells it what to do! Just as a materialist would no doubt argue that certain parts of the brain tell other parts what to do. And one of the crucial arguments to support dualism is NDEs, which appear to prove that even though the brain is dead, the soul lives on and continues to do its thinking independently of the brain!
DAVID: Erectus at 1,000 cc is basically our immediate predecessor and never could have had our thinking ability. The brain provides much more than just information as you keep trying to imply.
dhw: I imply no such thing, as above. Your comment about erectus implies that a 1000 cc brain cannot have the thinking ability of a 1500 cc brain, and you may well be right. Materialists would certainly agree. But dualists believe in a soul that does the thinking, and so the more thinking it does, the more the brain will change, and that in turn will provide more information for the soul to work on, and the more information the soul has, the more complex its thoughts will become, and then the more complex the brain will become as it responds to those thoughts. This is a perfectly logical, interactive progression.
DAVID: Again, you have quoted a dualist theory that is not mine. Don't impose your dualist theories on me! You've done this before. I don't accept it, as stated many times before.
When you make such complaints, I wish you would be specific. You moan if I pick you up on statements such as “only an advanced brain can have advanced thoughts”, and you claim that is shorthand for the soul using the brain in order to do its thinking, and then you either accept or try to ignore my list of the ways the soul uses the brain. Unless you now reject the proven fact that hard thinking complexifies the brain, or wish to claim that the soul does NOT do the thinking, I can’t see any point of disagreement here.
DAVID: In life the soul must use the living brain networks to not only gain info but to develop new concepts and immaterial thoughts.
dhw: Agreed, as described above. It is the soul that does the immaterial conceptualizing and developing while the brain provides the information and the material development and expression or production of the concept.
DAVID: No, no, no. In the bold it's your dualism theory, not mine. The soul must use the brain's thinking networks to conceptualize. eh brain dos give sensory input.
Back you go to the brain thinking! So now you are saying the soul uses the brain’s thoughts to do its thinking! Or maybe the brain has a thinking network but it doesn’t think? Or the soul can’t think unless the brain thinks first? I’m sorry, I haven’t a clue what role your brain’s thinking networks can play in your concept of dualism.
DAVID: In NDE's and death the soul does this all on its own. This is my dualism.
dhw: Also agreed. And this provides evidence that the soul does the thinking and the developing of new concepts and the production of immaterial thoughts. And (once more) in the material world it acquires information from the brain and it uses the brain to give material expression to its immaterial thoughts and concepts.
DAVID: If you accept my way of stating my theory, we may be in agreement.
Your way of stating your theory makes no sense to me. If you accept the above as it is written, there is no disagreement between us. So please pinpoint what you disagree with.
Dualism
by David Turell , Monday, May 11, 2020, 18:32 (1656 days ago) @ dhw
DAVID: You've again left out the soul can only initiate concepts by using the brain's networks to think of them. The soul in life must do that. The soul does not sit outside the brain and tell it what to do. They are intricately bound together.
dhw: You simply refuse to pinpoint what the soul (if it exists) uses the brain FOR! Once again, do you or do you not agree that the soul does the thinking, and uses the information provided by the brain to initiate concepts, and uses the brain to implement them (= develop, design, produce and/or express them)?
I've pinpointed over and over. The soul receives info from the brain's sensory input sources, uses the info to think by using the brains thinking networks and develops new designs and concepts by using those same networks. What don't you understand about my dualism theory that I haven't repeated before? In life the soul must use the brain's neuronal networks to receive info and think!!!
DAVID: In life the soul must use the living brain networks to not only gain info but to develop new concepts and immaterial thoughts.
DAVID: In NDE's and death the soul does this all on its own. This is my dualism.
dhw: Also agreed. And this provides evidence that the soul does the thinking and the developing of new concepts and the production of immaterial thoughts. And (once more) in the material world it acquires information from the brain and it uses the brain to give material expression to its immaterial thoughts and concepts.
DAVID: If you accept my way of stating my theory, we may be in agreement.
dhw: Your way of stating your theory makes no sense to me. If you accept the above as it is written, there is no disagreement between us. So please pinpoint what you disagree with.
I've edited your above statement below to show you where you make me uncomfortable:
dhw: Also agreed. And this provides evidence that the soul does the thinking and the developing of new concepts and the production of immaterial thoughts [only by having to use the brains's neuronal networks in life]. And (once more) in the material world it acquires information from the brain and it uses the brain to give material expression to its immaterial thoughts and concepts.
Dualism
DAVID: You've again left out the soul can only initiate concepts by using the brain's networks to think of them. […]
dhw: You simply refuse to pinpoint what the soul (if it exists) uses the brain FOR! Once again, do you or do you not agree that the soul does the thinking, and uses the information provided by the brain to initiate concepts, and uses the brain to implement them (= develop, design, produce and/or express them)?
DAVID: I've pinpointed over and over. The soul receives info from the brain's sensory input sources, uses the info to think by using the brains thinking networks and develops new designs and concepts by using those same networks. What don't you understand about my dualism theory that I haven't repeated before? In life the soul must use the brain's neuronal networks to receive info and think!!!
And there you go again with “the brain’s thinking networks”, which you then try to gloss over by leaving out “thinking”. Here is yesterday’s response to “thinking networks”, which you left out: “So now you are saying the soul uses the brain’s thoughts to do its thinking! Or maybe the brain has a thinking network but it doesn’t think? Or the soul can’t think unless the brain thinks first? I’m sorry, I haven’t a clue what role your brain’s thinking networks can play in your concept of dualism.” Now look at what you have agreed to below:
dhw: please pinpoint what you disagree with.
DAVID: I've edited your above statement … to show you where you make me uncomfortable:
dhw: And this provides evidence that the soul does the thinking and the developing of new concepts and the production of immaterial thoughts [only by having to use the brain's neuronal networks in life]. And (once more) in the material world it acquires information from the brain and it uses the brain to give material expression to its immaterial thoughts and concepts.
You clearly agree now with the uses I have listed, so all you’ve added is “having to”. Fine. So I agree that it HAS to use the brain in life – a) for information, and b) to give material expression to its thoughts and concepts. Now that you have discarded the materialist concept of the brain’s “THINKING network”, I can’t see any disagreement between us. (The implications concerning brain expansion are best left on that thread.)
Dualism
by David Turell , Tuesday, May 12, 2020, 16:04 (1655 days ago) @ dhw
DAVID: You've again left out the soul can only initiate concepts by using the brain's networks to think of them. […]
dhw: You simply refuse to pinpoint what the soul (if it exists) uses the brain FOR! Once again, do you or do you not agree that the soul does the thinking, and uses the information provided by the brain to initiate concepts, and uses the brain to implement them (= develop, design, produce and/or express them)?
DAVID: I've pinpointed over and over. The soul receives info from the brain's sensory input sources, uses the info to think by using the brains thinking networks and develops new designs and concepts by using those same networks. What don't you understand about my dualism theory that I haven't repeated before? In life the soul must use the brain's neuronal networks to receive info and think!!!
dhw: And there you go again with “the brain’s thinking networks”, which you then try to gloss over by leaving out “thinking”.
I don 't understand your confusion. In my dualism in life the soul must use the brain's thinking/conceptual networks in the frontal and prefrontal cortex to originate thoughts.
dhw: Here is yesterday’s response to “thinking networks”, which you left out: “So now you are saying the soul uses the brain’s thoughts to do its thinking! Or maybe the brain has a thinking network but it doesn’t think? Or the soul can’t think unless the brain thinks first? I’m sorry, I haven’t a clue what role your brain’s thinking networks can play in your concept of dualism.”
More confusion. The brain never thinks by itself without the soul/essence actually doing it by use of the brain's neuronal networks.
Now look at what you have agreed to below:
dhw: please pinpoint what you disagree with.DAVID: I've edited your above statement … to show you where you make me uncomfortable:
dhw: And this provides evidence that the soul does the thinking and the developing of new concepts and the production of immaterial thoughts [only by having to use the brain's neuronal networks in life]. And (once more) in the material world it acquires information from the brain and it uses the brain to give material expression to its immaterial thoughts and concepts.
dhw: You clearly agree now with the uses I have listed, so all you’ve added is “having to”. Fine. So I agree that it HAS to use the brain in life – a) for information, and b) to give material expression to its thoughts and concepts. Now that you have discarded the materialist concept of the brain’s “THINKING network”, I can’t see any disagreement between us. (The implications concerning brain expansion are best left on that thread.)
The brain has networks that are specifically used for thinking up concepts. I simple called those 'thinking networks' to name them, not to imply they think by themselves. You interpret what I write in a strange overly literal way .
Dualism
dhw: You simply refuse to pinpoint what the soul (if it exists) uses the brain FOR! Once again, do you or do you not agree that the soul does the thinking, and uses the information provided by the brain to initiate concepts, and uses the brain to implement them (= develop, design, produce and/or express them)?
DAVID: I've pinpointed over and over. The soul receives info from the brain's sensory input sources, uses the info to think by using the brains thinking networks and develops new designs and concepts by using those same networks. What don't you understand about my dualism theory that I haven't repeated before? In life the soul must use the brain's neuronal networks to receive info and think!!!
dhw: And there you go again with “the brain’s thinking networks”, which you then try to gloss over by leaving out “thinking”.
DAVID: I don't understand your confusion. In my dualism in life the soul must use the brain's thinking/conceptual networks in the frontal and prefrontal cortex to originate thoughts.
dhw: Here is yesterday’s response to “thinking networks”, which you left out: “So now you are saying the soul uses the brain’s thoughts to do its thinking! Or maybe the brain has a thinking network but it doesn’t think? Or the soul can’t think unless the brain thinks first? I’m sorry, I haven’t a clue what role your brain’s thinking networks can play in your concept of dualism.”
DAVID: More confusion. The brain never thinks by itself without the soul/essence actually doing it by use of the brain's neuronal networks.
Why do you keep adding to the confusion with these nebulous constructions? “Never thinks without…suggests that it only thinks with…So it only thinks if the soul actually thinks. This is just as confusing as the “thinking networks” which don’t think! Let’s try once more: The dualist’s soul does the thinking and uses the brain – but this is what I keep trying to pin down: WHAT does the soul use the brain’s neuronal networks for (and why can’t you just say “brain”)?
DAVID: I've edited your above statement … to show you where you make me uncomfortable:
dhw: You clearly agree now with the uses I have listed, so all you’ve added is “having to”. Fine. So I agree that it HAS to use the brain in life – a) for information, and b) to give material expression to its thoughts and concepts. Now that you have discarded the materialist concept of the brain’s “THINKING network”, I can’t see any disagreement between us.
DAVID: The brain has networks that are specifically used for thinking up concepts. I simple called those 'thinking networks' to name them, not to imply they think by themselves. You interpret what I write in a strange overly literal way.
You have now agreed that the dualist’s soul uses the brain in the ways described and bolded above. The dualist’s brain does not think. So just drop the highly ambiguous term “thinking networks”, and we shall be in complete agreement. The implications are best left to the “brain expansion” thread, and this one can be closed unless you actually disagree with my summary of the way the soul uses the brain.
Dualism
by David Turell , Wednesday, May 13, 2020, 19:21 (1654 days ago) @ dhw
DAVID: More confusion. The brain never thinks by itself without the soul/essence actually doing it by use of the brain's neuronal networks.
dhw: Why do you keep adding to the confusion with these nebulous constructions? “Never thinks without…suggests that it only thinks with…So it only thinks if the soul actually thinks. This is just as confusing as the “thinking networks” which don’t think! Let’s try once more: The dualist’s soul does the thinking and uses the brain – but this is what I keep trying to pin down: WHAT does the soul use the brain’s neuronal networks for (and why can’t you just say “brain”)?
How can I be any clearer? The soul can only think by using the brain networks assigned to producing thought during life. The brain alone can never produce thoughts by itself. The soul is therefore the originating cause of the thought appearing.
dhw: You clearly agree now with the uses I have listed, so all you’ve added is “having to”. Fine. So I agree that it HAS to use the brain in life – a) for information, and b) to give material expression to its thoughts and concepts. Now that you have discarded the materialist concept of the brain’s “THINKING network”, I can’t see any disagreement between us.DAVID: The brain has networks that are specifically used for thinking up concepts. I simple called those 'thinking networks' to name them, not to imply they think by themselves. You interpret what I write in a strange overly literal way.
dhw: You have now agreed that the dualist’s soul uses the brain in the ways described and bolded above. The dualist’s brain does not think. So just drop the highly ambiguous term “thinking networks”, and we shall be in complete agreement. The implications are best left to the “brain expansion” thread, and this one can be closed unless you actually disagree with my summary of the way the soul uses the brain.
I agree and think the above discussion ends the debate. The brain actually has areas which have networks for conceptualizing which I labeled as above. Sorry to confuse you, but they exist.
Dualism
DAVID: More confusion. The brain never thinks by itself without the soul/essence actually doing it by use of the brain's neuronal networks.
dhw: Why do you keep adding to the confusion with these nebulous constructions? “Never thinks without…suggests that it only thinks with…So it only thinks if the soul actually thinks. This is just as confusing as the “thinking networks” which don’t think! Let’s try once more: The dualist’s soul does the thinking and uses the brain – but this is what I keep trying to pin down: WHAT does the soul use the brain’s neuronal networks for (and why can’t you just say “brain”)?
DAVID: How can I be any clearer? The soul can only think by using the brain networks assigned to producing thought during life. The brain alone can never produce thoughts by itself. The soul is therefore the originating cause of the thought appearing.
What do you mean by “the brain networks assigned to producing thought”? You keep coming up with these nebulous terms instead of sticking to the concrete terms you have actually agreed to! The dualist’s brain networks do not “produce thought”. But yes, the soul produces thought. The dualist’s brain provides the information and gives material expression to the thought (or, if you like, gives the thought its material appearance).
dhw: You have now agreed that the dualist’s soul uses the brain in the ways described and bolded above. The dualist’s brain does not think. So just drop the highly ambiguous term “thinking networks”, and we shall be in complete agreement. The implications are best left to the “brain expansion” thread, and this one can be closed unless you actually disagree with my summary of the way the soul uses the brain.
DAVID: I agree and think the above discussion ends the debate. The brain actually has areas which have networks for conceptualizing which I labeled as above. Sorry to confuse you, but they exist.
You agree, and then once again you insist on muddying the waters! The dualist’s brain does not conceptualize, so how can it have networks for conceptualizing? It has networks which the soul uses to do its conceptualizing. We don’t need any of these ambiguous expressions when we have already agreed on a perfectly clear description of the different functions! The dualist’s brain has areas for providing information and for giving material expression to immaterial concepts. These are produced by the soul, which uses the different areas of the brain to create its immaterial concepts. If you think the brain has networks for conceptualizing – as it may well do – you are switching to materialism!
Dualism
by David Turell , Thursday, May 14, 2020, 23:05 (1653 days ago) @ dhw
DAVID: More confusion. The brain never thinks by itself without the soul/essence actually doing it by use of the brain's neuronal networks.
dhw: Why do you keep adding to the confusion with these nebulous constructions? “Never thinks without…suggests that it only thinks with…So it only thinks if the soul actually thinks. This is just as confusing as the “thinking networks” which don’t think! Let’s try once more: The dualist’s soul does the thinking and uses the brain – but this is what I keep trying to pin down: WHAT does the soul use the brain’s neuronal networks for (and why can’t you just say “brain”)?
DAVID: How can I be any clearer? The soul can only think by using the brain networks assigned to producing thought during life. The brain alone can never produce thoughts by itself. The soul is therefore the originating cause of the thought appearing.
dhw: What do you mean by “the brain networks assigned to producing thought”? You keep coming up with these nebulous terms instead of sticking to the concrete terms you have actually agreed to! The dualist’s brain networks do not “produce thought”. But yes, the soul produces thought. The dualist’s brain provides the information and gives material expression to the thought (or, if you like, gives the thought its material appearance).
Once again, the soul, in life, can only produce/initiate thought by using the brain's living thought networks, which are assigned to frontal and pre-frontal cortex regions, as you should remember.
dhw: You have now agreed that the dualist’s soul uses the brain in the ways described and bolded above. The dualist’s brain does not think. So just drop the highly ambiguous term “thinking networks”, and we shall be in complete agreement. The implications are best left to the “brain expansion” thread, and this one can be closed unless you actually disagree with my summary of the way the soul uses the brain.DAVID: I agree and think the above discussion ends the debate. The brain actually has areas which have networks for conceptualizing which I labeled as above. Sorry to confuse you, but they exist.
dhw: You agree, and then once again you insist on muddying the waters! The dualist’s brain does not conceptualize, so how can it have networks for conceptualizing? It has networks which the soul uses to do its conceptualizing. We don’t need any of these ambiguous expressions when we have already agreed on a perfectly clear description of the different functions! The dualist’s brain has areas for providing information and for giving material expression to immaterial concepts. These are produced by the soul, which uses the different areas of the brain to create its immaterial concepts. If you think the brain has networks for conceptualizing – as it may well do – you are switching to materialism!
All brain studies have found areas assigned to different tasks and different functions, the material side of the dualist theory. The simplest summary is: the living soul initiates thought by using living brain networks, and I agree gets its info from the brain receiving stimuli.
Dualism
dhw: What do you mean by “the brain networks assigned to producing thought”? You keep coming up with these nebulous terms instead of sticking to the concrete terms you have actually agreed to! The dualist’s brain networks do not “produce thought”. But yes, the soul produces thought. bbThe dualist’s brain provides the information and gives material expression to the thought (or, if you like, gives the thought its material appearance).bb
DAVID: Once again, the soul, in life, can only produce/initiate thought by using the brain's living thought networks, which are assigned to frontal and pre-frontal cortex regions, as you should remember.
It’s not “once again”. You keep changing the terminology. We’ve had “thinking networks”, and “networks assigned to producing thought”. You keep agreeing that the soul uses the brain (or the brain’s networks, if you must – and these include the frontal and pre-frontal cortex) to produce its thoughts. You’ve agreed on HOW it uses these networks (information and material expression/implementation of its thoughts), so why can’t you leave it at that?
dhw: You have now agreed that the dualist’s soul uses the brain in the ways described and bolded above. The dualist’s brain does not think. So just drop the highly ambiguous term “thinking networks”, and we shall be in complete agreement. The implications are best left to the “brain expansion” thread, and this one can be closed unless you actually disagree with my summary of the way the soul uses the brain.
DAVID: I agree and think the above discussion ends the debate. The brain actually has areas which have networks for conceptualizing which I labeled as above. Sorry to confuse you, but they exist.
dhw: You agree, and then once again you insist on muddying the waters! The dualist’s brain does not conceptualize, so how can it have networks for conceptualizing? […] If you think the brain has networks for conceptualizing – as it may well do – you are switching to materialism!
DAVID: All brain studies have found areas assigned to different tasks and different functions, the material side of the dualist theory.
If you assign conceptualizing to the brain, you are siding with materialists (and that may well be right. I am not taking sides.). Stop muddying the waters!
DAVID: The simplest summary is: the living soul initiates thought by using living brain networks, and I agree gets its info from the brain receiving stimuli.
Well, at least you’ve now dropped your materialist thinking, thought-producing, conceptualizing brain networks. I’m surprised that you don’t include the soul’s vital use of the brain to give material expression to its thoughts. And I don’t know why you use the word “initiate”, since the soul will continue to develop its thoughts and will continue to use the brain to gather information and express or implement its thoughts and concepts. But since you’ve already agreed to what I wrote originally, I think we should close the discussion – at least until the next time you produce a materialist version of your dualism.
Dualism
by David Turell , Friday, May 15, 2020, 21:45 (1652 days ago) @ dhw
dhw: You agree, and then once again you insist on muddying the waters! The dualist’s brain does not conceptualize, so how can it have networks for conceptualizing? […] If you think the brain has networks for conceptualizing – as it may well do – you are switching to materialism!
DAVID: All brain studies have found areas assigned to different tasks and different functions, the material side of the dualist theory.
dhw: If you assign conceptualizing to the brain, you are siding with materialists (and that may well be right. I am not taking sides.). Stop muddying the waters!
DAVID: The simplest summary is: the living soul initiates thought by using living brain networks, and I agree gets its info from the brain receiving stimuli.
dhw: Well, at least you’ve now dropped your materialist thinking, thought-producing, conceptualizing brain networks. I’m surprised that you don’t include the soul’s vital use of the brain to give material expression to its thoughts. And I don’t know why you use the word “initiate”, since the soul will continue to develop its thoughts and will continue to use the brain to gather information and express or implement its thoughts and concepts. But since you’ve already agreed to what I wrote originally, I think we should close the discussion – at least until the next time you produce a materialist version of your dualism.
I never have had a Materialist's view. Of course the soul must use the brain in life, and I'm sorry I confused you by specifying the known brain areas where this occurs. The soul cannot pick and choice which areas of the brain to use, as they are specific regions.
Dualism
DAVID: The simplest summary is: the living soul initiates thought by using living brain networks, and I agree gets its info from the brain receiving stimuli.
dhw: Well, at least you’ve now dropped your materialist thinking, thought-producing, conceptualizing brain networks. I’m surprised that you don’t include the soul’s vital use of the brain to give material expression to its thoughts. And I don’t know why you use the word “initiate”, since the soul will continue to develop its thoughts and will continue to use the brain to gather information and express or implement its thoughts and concepts. But since you’ve already agreed to what I wrote originally, I think we should close the discussion – at least until the next time you produce a materialist version of your dualism.
DAVID: I never have had a Materialist's view. Of course the soul must use the brain in life, and I'm sorry I confused you by specifying the known brain areas where this occurs. The soul cannot pick and choice which areas of the brain to use, as they are specific regions.
You have consistently stated your case in materialist terms (e.g. the brain’s "thinking networks"), though you didn’t mean to. Now you tell me the soul uses specific areas of the brain but can’t “pick and choose”. What does that mean? The soul gets information from some parts of the brain and uses other parts in order to give material expression to its immaterial thoughts (though for some reason you left that out of your "simplest summary"). Do you now want to discuss all the different parts of the brain and to explain why the soul can’t pick this one if it needs to use that one? I don’t see the point. (Please also note my comment on the cerebellum under “Brain expansion.) I really don't know why you wish to prolong this discussion with these questionable additions to what has been agreed.
Dualism
by David Turell , Saturday, May 16, 2020, 15:48 (1651 days ago) @ dhw
DAVID: The simplest summary is: the living soul initiates thought by using living brain networks, and I agree gets its info from the brain receiving stimuli.
dhw: Well, at least you’ve now dropped your materialist thinking, thought-producing, conceptualizing brain networks. I’m surprised that you don’t include the soul’s vital use of the brain to give material expression to its thoughts. And I don’t know why you use the word “initiate”, since the soul will continue to develop its thoughts and will continue to use the brain to gather information and express or implement its thoughts and concepts. But since you’ve already agreed to what I wrote originally, I think we should close the discussion – at least until the next time you produce a materialist version of your dualism.
DAVID: I never have had a Materialist's view. Of course the soul must use the brain in life, and I'm sorry I confused you by specifying the known brain areas where this occurs. The soul cannot pick and choice which areas of the brain to use, as they are specific regions.
dhw: You have consistently stated your case in materialist terms (e.g. the brain’s "thinking networks"), though you didn’t mean to. Now you tell me the soul uses specific areas of the brain but can’t “pick and choose”. What does that mean? The soul gets information from some parts of the brain and uses other parts in order to give material expression to its immaterial thoughts (though for some reason you left that out of your "simplest summary"). Do you now want to discuss all the different parts of the brain and to explain why the soul can’t pick this one if it needs to use that one? I don’t see the point. (Please also note my comment on the cerebellum under “Brain expansion.) I really don't know why you wish to prolong this discussion with these questionable additions to what has been agreed.
The soul must use the brain as it is set up to function. From brain expansion thread: "The brain does have different functions in different parts connected by networks of fibers."
Dualism: my theory says the soul must use its given brain
by David Turell , Monday, October 12, 2020, 20:27 (1502 days ago) @ David Turell
This article discusses serotonin and dopamine effects:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/10/201012120004.htm
In first-of-their-kind observations in the human brain, an international team of researchers has revealed two well-known neurochemicals -- dopamine and serotonin -- are at work at sub-second speeds to shape how people perceive the world and take action based on their perception.
***
the neurochemicals appear to integrate people's perceptions of the world with their actions, indicating dopamine and serotonin have far more expansive roles in the human nervous system than previously known.
***
"An enormous number of people throughout the world are taking pharmaceutical compounds to perturb the dopamine and serotonin transmitter systems to change their behavior and mental health," said P. Read Montague, senior author
"Every choice that someone executes involves taking in information, interpreting that information, and making decisions about what they perceived," said Kenneth Kishida, a corresponding author of the study and an assistant professor of physiology and pharmacology, and neurosurgery, at Wake Forest School of Medicine. "There's a whole host of psychiatric conditions and neurological disorders where that process is altered in the patients, and dopamine and serotonin are prime suspects."
***
"These neuromodulators play a much broader role in supporting human behavior and thought, and in particular they are involved in how we process the outside world," Bang said. "For example, if you move through a room and the lights are off, you move differently because you're uncertain about where objects are. Our work suggests these neuromodulators -- serotonin in particular -- are playing a role in signaling how uncertain we are about the outside environment."
Comment: Just another way to look at a human brain that is not electrical signals, pointing out that a normal mental state requires normal brain function which includes the proper production of dopamine and serotonin.
Dualism: Swinburne supports Descartes
by David Turell , Monday, February 22, 2021, 23:16 (1369 days ago) @ David Turell
From an interview which mentions his book, "Are We Bodies or Souls":
https://www.3-16am.co.uk/articles/philosophy-of-souls-and-other-religious-ideas?c=end-t...
"3:16: Your latest book asks whether we are bodies or souls and so engage with a very lively current debate within naturalism between substance monists and dualists – the Dennett clan on the one side and the Chalmer clan on the other! –but from a theistic perspective. To the Cartesian it always seemed that it was the body that needed justifying rather than minds or souls but these days the body seems to be taken for granted ( Searle’s comment ‘materialism is the religion of today’) and the problem is how minds fit in with a universe of just bodies. How do you characterize this lively contemporary debate – I take it that broadly speaking you think Descartes got things right?
"RS: Yes, I do think that broadly speaking Descartes got things right. That is what I have argued in Are We Bodies or Souls?
"3:16: You defend substance dualism but do so whilst standing by what current science is telling us about the mind and so forth. Can you sketch for us what you argue – and also say why ‘soul’ isn’t the same as ‘mind’ in your ontology?
"RS: The word “mind” is used in various sentences which merge into each other, and for that reason, I avoid it. I use “soul” in Plato’s and Descartes’s sense of an immaterial substance which is the essential part of each of us, while our bodies are the non—essential part of each of us. I argue that a future person being me consists in that future person having experiences which I will experience; and so the identity of me does not consist in what happens to my body, but in what happens to my conscious life, and so I am who I am in virtue of what happens to my conscious life. Nothing that happens in my body entails or is entailed by what happens to my conscious life. So being me must consist in being a substance separate from my body. But that’s far too short to be totally convincing, and you’ll have to read the book to get a thorough answer.
"3:16: How does your approach help understand personal identity and the questions that arise when we consider brain damage and aging and whether I can be the same person as the child or the very old person who is (barring unfortunate events) coming afterwards?
"RS: It is my soul which constitutes me. But my soul is sustained in existence by my brain (at least during my earthly life); and my brain largely determines which properties my soul has at any time. Hence my childhood interactions with the world form my childhood brain which forms my childhood outlook on the world; and my old age interactions with the world form my old age brain, which in turn forms my old age outlook on the world.
***
"3:16: How do you avoid epiphenomenalism ie the view that the soul has no causal effect on the brain, and vice versa – do laws of nature connect them in the right way and do neuro-scientists, physicists etc know these laws ?
"RS: Epiphenomenalism, which I understand more precisely as the view that brain events cause conscious events, but conscious events never cause brain events, is self-defeating. We could only know about our own past life if that conscious life caused effects in our brains which cause our subsequent memories of it; and we could only know about the conscious lives of others, if their conscious lives cause their testimony to it. So if epiphenomenalism were true, we could never have any grounds for believing that we have a conscious life (beyond the present moment) and so we could have no grounds for believing that epiphenomenalism was true."
Comment: I quoted Swinburne at length in my first book. Looking back. I find his thinking has stuck with me. I view the brain as a physical instrument the soul must use to form my immaterial conscious 'me'. There is lots more discussion about God, His personality and religion in this interview, and is worth reviewing.