Where is the Mind?

[harvey1]

In another thread QED and I were discussing IGUSes (information gathering & utilizing systems: a term that physicist James Hartle articulated), and there's one issue I'd like to hear back from materialists of the mind. Where is the mind? By that I mean let's suppose that humans can only "see" atoms and sub-atomic particles (e.g., electrons). That's all that we can see. Now, using this illustration, please tell me in conceptual terms where the mind is. For example, if we look at a computer, we can see the operating system as atoms in energized states on what we normally see as a disk drive. We see how atoms are energized, how electrons flow, etc., upon the booting up of that computer, and we see why the computer works at an atomic level. However what we don't see--can never see--is anything but atoms and sub-atomic particles being shifted about inside the machine. So, I think we can quite naturally conclude that the computer has no internal state that is "non-atomic" in nature. That is, the computer has no awareness of itself, and no feelings, etc. (i.e., qualia).

So, being that we humans have this subjective inner state, I'd like to hear how materialists and identity theorists of mind (i.e., mind=brain) can conceptually account for the mind solely in terms of atomic and sub-atomic particles. Where is it among the stew of particles?

[charles51]

Harvey,

However what we don't see--can never see--is anything but atoms and sub-atomic particles being shifted about inside the machine. So, I think we can quite naturally conclude that the computer has no internal state that is "non-atomic" in nature. That is, the computer has no awareness of itself, and no feelings, etc. (i.e., qualia).

Isn't this also true of the human brain? When we examine a human brain, do we ever see anything that is "non-atomic" in nature? If the brain can have awareness, why not my computer, or my pencil?

[harvey1]

Isn't this also true of the human brain? When we examine a human brain, do we ever see anything that is "non-atomic" in nature? If the brain can have awareness, why not my computer, or my pencil?

That's actually my point. The mind is something "other" than sub-atomic stuff.

[Grumpy]

harvey1

That's actually my point. The mind is something "other" than sub-atomic stuff.

And what would that be, what's it made of if not matter. You've got a lot of proving to do on this one.

The mind is the gestalt of all the chemical and electrical activity of all those atoms and particles in our brain. How do we know this? Because if we send a large electric current through the brain disrupting this chemical and electrical activity, but carefully enough not to kill the host, the mind is destroyed and does not regenerate to the same configuration(though some recovery of autonomic function may occur).

Grumpy

[harvey1]

The mind is the gestalt of all the chemical and electrical activity of all those atoms and particles in our brain.

Okay, how does this "gestalt" enterprise work exactly? If all there is are atoms and particles, where is the mental stuff among the atoms? Why does even one mental image form inside the mind?

[Grumpy]

harvey1

Okay, how does this "gestalt" enterprise work exactly? If all there is are atoms and particles, where is the mental stuff among the atoms? Why does even one mental image form inside the mind?

Here you are sitting in front of a computer, which is nothing more than a collection of switches(yes/no/and etc.) and glowing phospor dots, yet we get useful information out of it.

Well the greatest supercomputers now extant are but a patch on the enourmous capacity that is our brain. The number of possible connections in our brain is in the trillions, and then we have the chemical aspects of memory, etc.

Turing posited that man would one day be able to construct a computer that would be able to "think" like a human(and be indistinguishable from a human), I believe that day is still a long way off. But if enough computer chips are put together we will eventually have to face a mind of our own construction.

Grumpy

[Cathar1950]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/space/20060818/ ... eacomputer

I just thought I would share this.
So the mind is just gas like a babies smile which is natures way of tricking us into loving the little things.

Your Brain Boots Up Like a Computer
"The thinking part of the brain is applying a sort of stencil to the information coming in and what the nitric oxide is doing is allowing more refinement of that stencil," says Dwayne Godwin, an associate professor at Wake Forest University and lead author of the study, which was funded by the National Eye Institute.


The little two-atom molecule, it seems, is partly responsible for our ability to perceive whatever it is we're sensing.


The finding, published last week in the journal Neuroscience, changes the way scientists understand nitric oxide's role in the brain, and it also has them rethinking the function of the thalamus, where it is released. The thalamus was thought to be a fairly primitive structure, sort of a gate that could either open and allow sensory information to stream into the cortex, the higher functioning part of the brain, or cut off the flow entirely.


Godwin says the new research shows it's more accurate to think of the thalamus not as a gate but as a club bouncer, who doesn't simply allow a huge rush of people to go in or no one at all, but picks and chooses whom to let in and out.


"Instead of vision being a process going straight from eye to cortex, it's more of a loop," Godwin explained. "This constitutes a new role for the thalamus in directing, not just modulating."


While this study is the first to identify nitric oxide's role in the thalamus, elsewhere in the body it was already known to have an important, if somewhat different function. The molecule is actually integral to controlling blood flow and is, in fact, the molecule Viagra targets in order to increase blood flow to the penis.


The teeny molecule might have other medical uses.

[The Persnickety Platypus]

Okay, how does this "gestalt" enterprise work exactly? If all there is are atoms and particles, where is the mental stuff among the atoms? Why does even one mental image form inside the mind?

What do you purport? That there is a little man behind a window in there that plays tape recordings of past memories?

Have you ever considered the brain's seemingly uncomprehendable array of functions just in terms of scale? One or two electrical circuits can light a light bulb. A few thousand can power a calculator. A million or so may result in a computer. What do you think can by done with 100 trillion (the approximate number of synapses in the human brain)?

It's not hard to imagine how something such as a mental image might be accomplished by material means. Lets say I see an elephant in my front lawn. The eyes percieve the sun's electromagnetic radiation in relation to the matter comprising the elephant. This information is relayed to the brain through a vast array of neurons (like pixels on a screen, I like to think), and is interpreted. The information is then inscribed in memory for safe keeping. Later that day when my boss asks me why I was late for work, the synapses fire up again, and a mental image of the elephant is retreived from memory, and I may explain that I had to call an elephant corraler to come remove the extra stubborn pachyderm from in front of my car. Tada, a mental image, no magic required.

There is a lot of mysticism surrounding the brain. I feel this is mostly because we have yet to come to terms with the scale and nature of it's vast array of circuitry.

That's actually my point. The mind is something "other" than sub-atomic stuff.

And until this "other" something is discovered, sub-atomic stuff the brain shall remain.

[charles51]

Platy,

Your statements might go unquestioned if humans were merely complex biological automatons demonstrating complex behavior. Such would not require a conscious mind. It's the mind itself that Harvey is inquiring about. Where exactly is this phenomenon we call 'consciousness' within the brain's atomic structure, and why does it arise in the first place? If it's not the atomic particles themselves, and not the empty spaces between the particles, what is it? And where is it?

[The Persnickety Platypus]

I have difficulty understanding why this is such an issue.

Conscious: Having an awareness of one's environment and one's own existence, sensations, and thoughts.

Is this the definition we are operating under? Seems pretty straightforward to me. The brain collects data on the body's surroundings via our various modes of sensory pathways (eyes, ears, nose, ect). It then stimulates the proper mental/physical response. While these necessary responses may require relatively little brain input in most organisms (eat, run from predator), they take upon a different form in humans. We have evolved in an environment where there is a need for highly complex decision making; our brain has responded by evolving a much larger scale of informational pathways, lending us the amount of sensory input which makes what we call "awareness" possible. Humans are able to ponder more complex issues (e.g. the meaning of life, the nature of reality) merely because of the vast scale of our brains informational pathways and related functions (as I was saying before).

No, of course you can't "see" the mind. What we call the "mind" is merely our outward perspective of the brain's collective functions working in unison. The mind, therefore, is a subjective concept with no material counterpart.