I wanted to create a topic dedicated to discussing the relationship between the human brain and the soul (based on the soul being eternal or mortal). I believe that with the study of the brain and its capabilities we can somewhat define what is separate from the biological brain and the soul. (A goal with this idea and accessing facts on the subject would be knowing what the soul would be with and without the human brain).
Do you mean ‘either eternal or moral’ or ‘eternal as well as immortal’? Because they are different questions.
Otherwise, I am of the viewpoint that everything which some may consider as ‘soul’ is wholly contained in the brain, as are many physiologists. This is because of the fact that the brain is ridiculously complicated and has incredibly vast and intricate elements to it, so there is no way that we can know everything about it after a couple of hundred years of examination. But the fact is it probably can be explained so that leaves nothing as ‘eternal’.
Can you define “soul” so I know what we’re discussing?
I think that might even be what the substance of the original question was.
Then I should pay more attention. 
There is a slight problem with this view. It does not account for thoughts and experiences that are not brain-based. One might be those times when I wrote, thought, or said something that I never learned or could have known through the brain. One time I thought through a whole complicated scene that was going to happen in my near future, and it played out exactly that way. Other times I have used words or names that I had never heard or come across before. One example was using the name of a Greek sculptor I was completely unfamiliar with, and I had to look it up to see if I had used it correctly. Another time I heard an inner voice tell me to go somewhere, and when I did, I ran into someone significant. This kind of thing happened several times; it was as though we were following each other all over the city.
I guess that’s where we differ Jonquil; I DO think that everything is contained within the brain.
In what way is that not part of the brain? You used your memory to construct a vision in your head of yourself interacting with the environment around you.
-
Do you mean you have used words/names in the right context to mean the right thing? Because in thhat case you probably have come across them but just don’t remember.
-
If you mean instead that you have created new words in your head ‘so how on earth did I do that?’, it’s part of our ability to structure language to be able to construct new words and such from phonetics or symbols.
Coincidence/subconscious.
If so, as I said before, you will still have to account for those experiences which a solely brain-based teleology cannot explain. Of course, you can always go into denialism and not admit that they happen, which is what a lot of logical positivists do in order to make their paradigm work.
My memory had nothing to do with it. This was an inner narrative of a FUTURE scenario that played out exactly as thought. Now, even if the thought played out in or through my brain, exactly where did that thought come from?
That was not the case though. Those names were completely unfamiliar to me at the time. So… where did they come from?
No, I’ve done that, but I was referring to the usage of actual names and words that I had never come across before.
That is possible, but how are two people or brains linked that way? Explain the telepathy, mind sharing, and the whole series of weird synchronicities.
Oh, and let me add. Also explain how a person in the late 20th c. could describe his early life in a way that the names in his family and the caretaker eerily matched those created by a novelist a little less than a century earlier, while at the same time someone I knew, the one of all the synchronicities, was acting in the play version of that novel? That must have been one of the weirdest experiences of my life hearing that.
Oooh I see what you mean now. Tell me mmore about your prophecy and I’ll try and explain why it is contained wholly in the brain.
I’ve studied a lot on the Philosophy of Mind, and it never ceases to amaze me how incredible the brain really is. I once learnt about a guy (I can’t remember his name for the life of me) who had autism that could, after having suffered an epileptic fit, recall pi by something like 22,000 digits off the top of his head. This to a normal person is unbelievable, but we can deduce from this that having only gathered this amazing skill after having had a massive fit, he has lost something rather than gained something. That thing is in actual fact an element in our brain which limits the incredible amount of information and stimulus around us (so basically we ignore an awful lot) - otherwise we would be preoccupied and overwhelmed with it. The young fellow noted how he can’'t go in places like suermarkets, because of the sheer amount of raw stimulus that was around him, his mind had to count it. He was always incredibly tired mentally. Interesing huh?
My point is, our minds take in an AWFUL lot more than we are consciously aware of. So, the most rational explanation for your being unawares to where you learnt a particular word most likely isn’t some otherly force, but it was there in your mind without you consciously thinking about it.
I maintain my calls of ‘Coincidence’. It would be weirder to think that these coincidences weren’t possible rather than that they do sometimes happen. I also maintain my calls of ‘subconscious’, which suggests your ‘accidental’ following eachother around the street may be because you were picking up signals as to where eachother were going. Or maybe not, maybe it was a coincidence.
I’m not arguing that the thought scenario might well have occurred in or through my brain. My question for you is: how did it get there and where did it come from? How would that work if all thought were confined to the brain and based on past memory experienced by the sensory faculties?
What happened is that I was with a group of people attending a party one night hosted by the Spanish professors at my university. We drove in the driveway, and got out of the car. I came to the door and as I put my hand on the doorknob, my mind started narrating exactly what was going to happen. There will be a drawing for a doorprize. I will draw number 12. That will be the number chosen, and it will be a booby prize. Well, I then went in and started having fun at the party, watching Mrs. Urrutibeity dance, and later on gathering with the others as Mrs. Cardonas called us to the table for the door prizes. The number I drew from the bowl was indeed number 12, and when my number was called she showed me the prize to pick up. It was one of those cans that when you open it, a springy cloth snake jumps out at you. Weird, huh?
While all that is very interesting, it still doesn’t account for what was at work when I unconsciously or unknowingly chose to use those words or names at the time I did. The timing and context were extremely important, not just the fact that those names came up.
This was definitely not just coincidence, since it kept happening over a long period of time in a big and crowded city. Later on in my life this happened again with someone else to some degree but also a bit differently because sometimes it would seem as though the person would just appear in front of me when he should have been somewhere else. It was bizarre.
What you don’t seem to get is that I do think that things happen in and through the brain; but there are some experiences that cannot be accounted for if all thought and movement stem from wholly separate and enclosed physical brains. Also, the very nature of reality is at stake here.
Oooh I’m more with you now, although our views are still incompatible and i disagree with preety much everything you said. I’m not sure there will be a resolution.
My point was that we may well not know what was at work because the brain is incredibly and beutifully complex, but I can pretty much assure you that it manifested from yourself.
Perhaps if you give me your definition and views on the ‘soul’ in general, Jonquil?
There are some possible resolutions out there, some more plausible than others. But I guarantee you, whatever the answer is, the completely enclosed physical brain that operates according to positivist science is definitely NOT the answer.
I agree with what you say about the brain, that it can be thought of as beautiful and complex; but there is no sense in the conclusion that that is the reason why “we” may not know what was at work. I have some ideas about it based on extensive reading, discussion, and my own thinking.
As for your second statement, that it manifested from myself, I hope you realize the implications of that assumption. It could mean that I literally created and brought about the whole sequence of thought and events, and that says some things to my mind that I don’t really know how to assess. One would be that I am God, think about that. Another would be that my entire reality is filtered eccentrically through my brain, but how that reality is determined or created is not so certain. Is this part of a spiritual contract I entered into before I was born as part of my spiritual evolution through various incarnations? Is it to show me that all of existence and reality – past, present, and future – were determined to bring about my life and all its details down to the nth degree and that experience was designed to make me aware of this? Or was there some sort of energetic anomaly or rift in time at the moment I put my hand on the doorknob and I was able to access the future as a memory? I could go on . . . .
As for soul, I don’t have any definite ideas.
You anticipated a certain narrative of events, and it took place. It could have also not taken place. I don’t see what is so fascinating.
I don’t know. It certainly made a big impression on me. Before that I knew that I was telepathic to some degree, but this experience went beyond telepathy. In other words, if I was picking up on the thoughts of the teachers who had planned the drawing and the booby prize, then how could I know that I would pick the number 12 and win a booby prize and that that would be the winning number since they could not have known that themselves? And the same goes from their pov, especially since I had not thought about the way the party would go down until then except for the fact that Mrs. U would really make it pop with her fiery dancing. But we all already knew that. Hence, my conclusion that this was definitely precognition as distinct from telepathy. Two years before, when I walked out of math class and suddenly knew there would be a pop test next class and that I should study for it, and it happened that way, that I could attribute to simple ESP or telepathy. It was nice because I was the only one in the class who passed the test (with an A-). Of course, that -could- have been precognition also, but there was nothing to distinguish that thought and experience as precognition as opposed to telepathy. Life has been very weird and interesting for me, I must say; and those kinds of experience really made me think, and still do.
I get called a non-philosopher despite my genius writing, simply because I present it in aphorisms instead of systematic arguments, and yet you can go on with this shit all you want and no one calls you out on it. I am going back to be in solitude and eat some Oxycodone.
I meant a resolution between me and you. Because of this:
-That is what I am not with you on at all, fundamentally. It’s not worth arguing out in this thread in my opinion. If you wanted to start another thread - be my guest, I’ll get involved in fruitful discussion.
This reminds me a lot of Cartesian crap, which I HATE! Haha. These implications could only possibly be inferred if you did NOT believe that everything that happens in our mind is wholly contained in ourselves, basically in our head. And alas! We hit this barricade yet again.
This is a major and unrelenting problem with philosophy: the first person perspective. Naturally I would present arguments to that perhaps explain the nature of coincidence further, the psychology behind perceived deja vu and precognition and whatnot, how I think that you have deluded yourself into thinking there is more behind it than there is. Hoooowever, I can never see what you see because of the nature of the first person perspective. I can never say ‘Prove it to me, show me what you saw, let me experience…you!’ because an organism can’t do that. You can convince yourself of anything inside your own mind.
Hahaha, I like your input.
I don’t think I’m deluded. What I am is open minded and willing to consider answers or theories that those limited to logical positivism won’t. You don’t really know me, of course. Also, there’s no real way that I can describe the whole nexus of my experiences and the way things interconnect. Thus, whether you agree with me or not is pretty irrelevant to me. I am a very strong-minded individual, and having a mind of my own means being able to look at various modalities of thought and study and then decide which of them describe the inherent nature of humans the best. I don’t think scientific behaviorism or mechanism does that. If it did, then everything I have experienced and learned from and about others would be explained; but clearly it is not explained by those modalities. If it were, there would be no need to look further, would there? I have described experiences that completely defy the views limited by dualism, mechanism, and logical causality. Just throwing out pat pop psych notions and calling me deluded won’t cut it. Besides being demeaning and insulting, it just doesn’t do one thing to add to the growing body of knowledge and wisdom that I already have accrued.
Sure people can convince themselves of things inside their own minds. For example, you can convince yourself that I’m deluded and just an organism. But since I am obviously not deluded and more than just an organism, then maybe it’s time to reconsider exactlly who’s deluded and who isn’t. I know what I think.
First of all, apologies if what I said sounded derogatory, it wsn’t supposed to come accross that way at all. I meant it in the proper sense of the word, to mean you have been misled along the way somewhere. If you read what I said in that way it will probably seem less harsh.
Secondly, I find open mindednessa very commendable thing, and any self respecting philisopher owes it to themselves to have a certain amount of open mindedness. Your point about there being ’ no real way that I can describe the whole nexus of my experiences and the way things interconnect’ was precisely my point of the first person perspective thing. And yet [b]because[/b you say you are strong minded, and I do the same, is the very reason why I said about 3 posts back that there would be no resolution between us.
No matter how you put it, it comes across as demeaning and insulting. I haven’t been misled in any way. I know what I know. The one good thing about me is that I know my own mind, and when I am reasonably certain that I’m on the right path, nothing that anyone can say or do will cause me to waver or to doubt myself. This could be considered quite unusual in a society which functions on the use of brutal conditioning and brainwashing techniques and which has such a “narrow” and often wrongheaded notion of what is “normal” and right.
Then, we’ll just have to agree to disagree and move on.