Body, Mind and Soul

[jcrawford]

I am currently working on developing a comprehensive theory of cognition which will account for the existence of man's body, mind and soul, and hereby invite all other posters to reasonably critique or otherwise constructively contribute to the further development of the theory.

It should be presumed and understood from the outset that this scientific experiment is both a scientific and religious work in progress and that any successful development of this theory by current posters will be duly accredited to all those who make reasonable contributions to it's development.

Here is a minimalist account of the theory developed so far by yours truly:


COGNITIVE THEORY of BODY, MIND & SOUL.
by
John Crawford


Initial Premises, Presuppositions and Definitions:

1 BODY consists of physically perceivable sensations of material objects and physical forces.

2 MIND consists of self-conscious cognitive mental processes which intermediate between Body and Soul.

3 SOUL is the essence of self, ego, personality, memory and conscious self-awareness of existence.


Self-evident Postulate and Justification
for Theoretical Premises:

I know (cognize) that I have a brain and nervous system within my body, but have no observable, experiential, testable or scientific way of knowing that my brain or nervous system are capable of knowing anything in the sense that it may be classified as mental, cognitive or self-conscious knowledge.


Further Expositions on, and definitions of,
the Nature, Character, Being, Structure and Essence
of Body, Mind and Soul.


1. BODY:

All physical phenomena which may be reasonably and rationally categorized and classified as being part of the universe which physicists have defined as consisting of material force and mass.


2. MIND

All that which is strictly intellectual, cognitive, conceptual and mental in the realm of consciousness and self-awareness.

Eg: ideas, beliefs, theories, thoughts and knowledge.


3. SOUL

All which pertains to self-consciousness and awareness of self, ego, personhood, individual identity and spiritual existence.

[jcrawford]

Personally I see the soul as the whole person, body, which includes the brain and mind. They are a mixture of reality(matter?) and abstractions.

I modified and updated the original hypotheses concerning Mind and Soul to better reflect what has been reasonably suggested by others:

3. SOUL

The soul consists of mind, will and emotions, (thinking, willing and feeling) and is the substance of, and vehicle by which, we relate, communicate and interact with others.

All which pertains to self-consciousness and awareness of self, ego, personhood, individual identity and spiritual existence.


2. MIND

Mind consists of, and functions as, the intellectual and mental faculties of the Soul in which consciousness, knowledge and memory of both itself and external physical stimuli reside, and are mediated and reflected upon by the Soul. It is an intrinsic part of the Soul and self, but may be conceptually isolated and distinguished for the sole purpose of relating it to mental activities which may or may not include the will or the emotions. ie: abstract mathematics

All that which is strictly intellectual, cognitive, conceptual and mental in the realm of the Soul’s self- conscious awareness of itself in its physical surroundings.

Eg: ideas, beliefs, theories, thoughts, knowledge, concepts and images (imaginations).

Some how you have taken abstractions and separated them into parts.

I don't consider anything about myself to be an abstraction other than what some secular psychologist or neurologist might fantasize about the nature of my soul, ego or "psyche."

I am questioning your idea of "thoughtful" but I can't for the life of me think of what you mean by "soulful" I have never heard it used in this context.

Just as thoughtful would mean full of thought, soulful means full of soul. I tend to talk about soulful experiences the way neurologists talk about brain currents.

Are you trying to separate the metaphysical from the physical or make a tossed salad?

I see the varieties of human self-conception as a tossed salad already, so yes, I am trying to separate the physical from the metaphysical, the supernatural from the natural and cognitive science from biology, if you like.

What is their proper perspective?

That would depend on what one considers to be an appropriate point of view.

Since I consider my soul to be what is generally referred to as one's psychological profile, ego, personality and character, and reject secular psychologies or philosophies of mind, I start with my soul, as perhaps Socrates and other metaphysicians have done throughout history, and don't pay any attention to my brain at all, being content to regard it simply as a neurological processing center in much the same way as our mindless and soulless computers function.

Nice input there, Cathar. Gave me something to contemplate and meditate on in my soul.

[bernee51]

3. SOUL

The soul consists of mind, will and emotions, (thinking, willing and feeling) and is the substance of, and vehicle by which, we relate, communicate and interact with others.

All which pertains to self-consciousness and awareness of self, ego, personhood, individual identity and spiritual existence.

So the soul exists as a result of the function of the mind. Without the mind there would not be (cannot be?) a soul.

2. MIND

All that which is strictly intellectual, cognitive, conceptual and mental in the realm of the Soul’s self- conscious awareness of itself in its physical surroundings.

Without these (intellectual, cognitive, concepts et al) we would not be able to self create that which is the soul...i.e. emotions, memories, hopes, dreams, aspirations, suffering, loves, joys, hates, sorrows, regrets, creativity, spite, knowledge, learning, understanding, empathy, sympathy, pity, greed, lust, desire, initiative, and instinct.

[jcrawford]

Without these (intellectual, cognitive, concepts et al) we would not be able to self create that which is the soul...i.e. emotions, memories, hopes, dreams, aspirations, suffering, loves, joys, hates, sorrows, regrets, creativity, spite, knowledge, learning, understanding, empathy, sympathy, pity, greed, lust, desire, initiative, and instinct.

I am including all these faculties, capacities, activities and functions as an intrinsic part of my soul, all of which I can cognize, be aware of and relect on intuitively in my mind.

[bernee51]

Without these (intellectual, cognitive, concepts et al) we would not be able to self create that which is the soul...i.e. emotions, memories, hopes, dreams, aspirations, suffering, loves, joys, hates, sorrows, regrets, creativity, spite, knowledge, learning, understanding, empathy, sympathy, pity, greed, lust, desire, initiative, and instinct.

I am including all these faculties, capacities, activities and functions as an intrinsic part of my soul, all of which I can cognize, be aware of and relect on intuitively in my mind.

So your soul can be cognized and relfected on intuitively in your mind. Can I assume that your soul can then change its attributes based on this cognition, awareness and reflection?

If so you would agree then...the soul is a function of the mind.

[jcrawford]

I am including all these faculties, capacities, activities and functions as an intrinsic part of my soul, all of which I can cognize, be aware of and relect on intuitively in my mind.

So your soul can be cognized and relfected on intuitively in your mind. Can I assume that your soul can then change its attributes based on this cognition, awareness and reflection?

If so you would agree then...the soul is a function of the mind.

Since your mind is a property, attribute and function of your soul, none of their original faculties or capacities may ever be changed in formative structure, status and nature, but only in terms of their functional quality based on the variable amount of cognitive awareness and reflection which a soul is pursuant of.

None of us ever get to experience our brains or brain functions in the same way that we experience and cognize the rest of life, unless of course we are fortunate enough to be born as brain surgeons, but even then, they don't get to operate on and examine their own brains, but only the brains of others.

One thing is for certain. No brain surgeon has ever found a human mind or soul hiding out in any particular crevice of the brain.

[McCulloch]

One thing is for certain. No brain surgeon has ever found a human mind or soul hiding out in any particular crevice of the brain.

No electrician has ever found software or algorithms hiding out in any particular circuit of a computing device. And yet, there it is.

[QED]

While waiting for physicists to work out a GUT, it should be possible for cognitive scientists and others to distinguish between that which is physical or metaphysical, material or immaterial, natural or supernatural, theoretical or factual, or else we may fail to distinguish between what constitutes science and that which is strictly religious.

No, I don't think it's possible to make these subtle distinctions at all and the consequences of doing so on the basis of a partial understandings puts us in the same position as the ancients mistaking natural phenomena for angry Gods. It only takes one little scientific discovery to dislodge a God like this. Strictly Religious matters will most likely remain confined to those hunches of men who refer to their assumptions as "revealed truths".

Observations and assumptions are necessary in order to distinguish between living and "dead" matter, and to base the hypothetical foundations of an accurate theory on.

Any such theory is only as sound as its assumptions. I find some assumptions concerning what constitutes living or dead matter quite unsatisfactory. We might assume that other human beings share our own experience of consciousness, for example, but how can we extend this assumption beyond ourselves? It sure does look like some other animals are conscious but I'll be darned if anyone can prove it.

Since that old Holme's maxim is only applicable when and where the impossible has been realistically and properly identified, it really doesn't apply in cases where and when the possibility of intellectual cognition and acurate scientific knowledge exists or could be ruled out on the basis of being highly improbable.

But that's my point. If we know that someone was bricked-in in a door-less and windowless room at a given time, then we know that they could not be elsewhere. We can safely base the logic of an argument on this. But the same logic would not apply if the person and room were substituted by quantum objects.

Just in case you don't appreciate the significance of this I shall refer you to the Elitzur-Vaidman bomb-testing problem in which logic of the quantum world takes precedence over the classical. If I presented you with a number of bombs and I want to know which are not duds it might be that the only way to find out would be to actually attempt to detonate them. Clearly this would leave us with no working bombs -- yet if the trigger mechanism was a Quantum device (i.e. one that requires a single photon to trigger it) then it turns out that we can perform a test which will reveal a live bomb without setting it off.

So here is a glimpse of the way the natural world can be that is totally counter to our intuition and logic. I fail to see how we can then use those things to infer the existence of anything that is supposed to be supernatural.

[Furrowed Brow]

Also, I don't see the necessity or even logic of locating the mind in a physical dimension at all since mine is not the typical brain-bound theory which neurologists construct in their minds.

Ok putting the soul to one side for a moment. You are saying the mind is not physical too. So your theory will have wo immaterial/non physical? is that correct?

What problems do you see this resolving? I think the major hurdle for dualist theories is mind body interaction. How are you going to get over that hurdle? I think the more non physical concepts you begin to stock pile the greater the problems you will end up causing yourself here.

[jcrawford]

I am including all these faculties, capacities, activities and functions as an intrinsic part of my soul, all of which I can cognize, be aware of and relect on intuitively in my mind.

So your soul can be cognized and relfected on intuitively in your mind. Can I assume that your soul can then change its attributes based on this cognition, awareness and reflection?

No. It (I) can change its (my) mind about its attributes, properties, potential and structure, but otherwise it is immutable in its current form and state since it's existence is neither determined nor controlled by any known function or process within the mind or brain.

If so you would agree then...the soul is a function of the mind.

Knowledge of the composition and contents of my mind is the co-ordinated by-product of the functions of my brain and soul.

It may help you to understand and appreciate my soulful POV if you consider that it is my soul (my self) which is communicating with you now, and not just with the powers of my mind or brain, but with their assistance, and of course, with the functions and services provided by the Internet.

[jcrawford]

One thing is for certain. No brain surgeon has ever found a human mind or soul hiding out in any particular crevice of the brain.

No electrician has ever found software or algorithms hiding out in any particular circuit of a computing device. And yet, there it is.

So show us what part of your brain your mind and soul reside in, or point out the neurological circuitry which causes you to both imagine and believe that your mind exists in, or is solely a created product of, your brain.