Brain scans; being human (Introduction)
by David Turell 
, Monday, January 10, 2011, 05:16 (5069 days ago)
The following is a book review from the WSJ of "The Tell-Tale Brain: A Neuroscintists Quest for What Makes Us Human", by V.S. Ramachandran. The reviewer is an emeritus profedssor of geriatric medicine, and he is quite negative about the use of brain scans to discover the secrets of consciousness. I can only heartily agree with him:-http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704034804576025681468057572.html?KEYWORDS=Raymond+Tallis
Brain scans; being human
by xeno6696 , Sonoran Desert, Monday, January 10, 2011, 22:52 (5068 days ago) @ David Turell
The following is a book review from the WSJ of "The Tell-Tale Brain: A Neuroscintists Quest for What Makes Us Human", by V.S. Ramachandran. The reviewer is an emeritus profedssor of geriatric medicine, and he is quite negative about the use of brain scans to discover the secrets of consciousness. I can only heartily agree with him: > > http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704034804576025681468057572.html?KEYWORDS... can support a critical attack like the reviewers only insofar as skepticism prevails: we don't have positive evidence for what in the brain causes consciousness. -However, it is certainly a valid hypothesis that the brain is the sole center of consciousness based on the evidence that if you harm the brain enough, you cease to be conscious. It certainly has more to avail itself than the Aristotelian idea that the "brain" (then it was thought your "heart") was a hollow "acceptor" of your consciousness. Or, in other terms, a hollow "machine" for your "ghost." -We have no valid explanation for how consciousness could be "outside" of you, therefore it stands to reason that the brain IS you.
--
\"Why is it, Master, that ascetics fight with ascetics?\"
\"It is, brahmin, because of attachment to views, adherence to views, fixation on views, addiction to views, obsession with views, holding firmly to views that ascetics fight with ascetics.\"
Brain scans; being human
MATT: [...] we don't have positive evidence for what in the brain causes consciousness.-MATT: We have no valid explanation for how consciousness could be "outside" of you, therefore it stands to reason that the brain IS you.-MATT (in an earlier post): It is intrinsically unreasonable to put belief in something when it is not supported by positive evidence.-While I will happily go along with your hypothesis that the brain is the centre of consciousness, that does not mean it is the SOURCE of consciousness. It may well be, but the counter-thesis is that the brain is the receiver or physical medium through which consciousness works. Your evidence is that "if you harm the brain enough, you cease to be conscious." True. If you wreck my TV set, I shan't be able to get any more pictures. Until you have positive evidence that the brain is the SOURCE of consciousness, is it not ... according to your criteria ... intrinsically unreasonable to believe that the brain IS you? Or do you really want to claim that not having a valid explanation for (a) is reason enough to believe in (b)? If so, could it not be argued that since we do not have a valid explanation for how life and the mechanisms of evolution could spontaneously have chanced to form themselves, it stands to reason that they were designed?-Welcome to the world of agnosticism!
Brain scans; being human
by xeno6696 , Sonoran Desert, Wednesday, January 12, 2011, 02:39 (5067 days ago) @ dhw
dhw welcomes me to agnosticism! (Had a good chuckle here...)-I posted a new thread in response to this. I would suggest by attacking holes in my framework first; then we can amend and proceed from there.
--
\"Why is it, Master, that ascetics fight with ascetics?\"
\"It is, brahmin, because of attachment to views, adherence to views, fixation on views, addiction to views, obsession with views, holding firmly to views that ascetics fight with ascetics.\"