Submitted by theembryo t3_zzitid in explainlikeimfive
interstellargator t1_j2d4zog wrote
Reply to comment by qbookfox in ELI5: How did we realise the mind is in the brain? by theembryo
Do you interpret inner voice, thinking, and dreaming as occurring in the head because you innately know that's where it actually happens, or because you were told that's where it happens?
Plenty of emotions are felt in the chest. Excitement, love, despair, heartbreak. Seems just as reasonable to "intuitively know" that the soul lives in the heart or stomach.
nighthawk_something t1_j2ddv2r wrote
Likely because that's where we see and hear from
54yroldHOTMOM t1_j2ddx8d wrote
It could also be that the brain is simply a receiver and cpu. Like a dial up connection to the internet. But instead it connects to the mind. Which may or may not be present in the body. If the receiver breaks down or the cpu and mem gets damaged, the information downloaded obviously gets misinterpreted and or causes memory fails and bad computations.
SirTruffleberry t1_j2dhe2n wrote
Sure, but ya know, Occam's Razor. Why suppose the brain is the middle man to an unseen object when treating it as the final object works fine?
54yroldHOTMOM t1_j2dj0im wrote
Why philosophy when we all die anyway?
Jkarofwild t1_j2dk45d wrote
That question is one of the ones philosophy is all about.
[deleted] t1_j2dklaq wrote
[deleted]
SirTruffleberry t1_j2dpqw8 wrote
I don't think it reduces the quality or scope of philosophy if one doesn't assume a soul/immaterial mind.
Assuming unnecessary things to explain phenomena does, on the other hand, usually have negative consequences. Every one of your postulates is like a filter through which the truth must pass. More/stronger filters means it's more likely that the truth snags on one of those assumptions.
54yroldHOTMOM t1_j2dvxb3 wrote
What is truth? Are they facts or what someone believes to be true? And what if everything is true? Even the things that “aren’t”. Or if truth is in a state of flux until someone observes it.
SirTruffleberry t1_j2dx0ol wrote
I would say that empirical truths (obviously not mathematical or abstract truths) are statements about an efficient model that seems to agree with sensory data and predicts incoming data. That's pretty streamlined but hits the biggest points, I think.
54yroldHOTMOM t1_j2e9iz9 wrote
Thanks that’s a nice definition.
Ken_Field t1_j2divzy wrote
Recently read a theory like this, that consciousness is more of a universal field that our individual bodies “pick up on” with our brains acting as the sensing object, similar to how our ears might hear a noise in the distance but that doesn’t mean our ears are the object that generated that noise.
I don’t think it’s true tbh, but it’s an interesting thought experiment in the goal of understanding consciousness.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments