Do you consider thought to be a 100% physical manifestation?

[WildHorse]

Do you consider thought to be a 100% physical manifestation?

That's exactly backwards.
So many people mistakenly use the words mind & brain as interchangable synonyms. They are not the same. And also, the brain isn't the exclusive seat of the mind, of awareness.

Physical brain & metaphysical mind are incredibly interlinked & fantastically sensitive to each other, but the bottom line is, brain & spine & whole body are just a vehicle for mind.

Mind and awareness exist without physical brain.

Physical brain is a feature of the temporary physical body. Mind is an aspect of the soul.

 

[Ruptga]

Originally posted by: scott

Physical brain & metaphysical mind are incredibly interlinked & fantastically sensitive to each other, but the bottom line is, brain & spine & whole body are just a vehicle for mind.

That's something I've wondered about; there is no physiological line between brain stem and spinal cord, so how does the spinal cord affect our minds, and do even the periphary nerves do some processing? And of course this raises the question, are paralyzed folks essentially brain damaged as well?

 

[bobsmith1492]

I think the most telling physical evidence for the existence of a mind, separate from the physical brain, is that of people who have undergone lobotomies. If half your physical brain is removed but you know you're still the same person, there must be something beyond merely reactions in the brain.

 

[WildHorse]

Originally posted by: bobsmith1492
I think the most telling physical evidence for the existence of a mind, separate from the physical brain, is that of people who have undergone lobotomies. If half your physical brain is removed but you know you're still the same person, there must be something beyond merely reactions in the brain.

there are even some people without a brain
jto see for yourself just click on the p&n forum

 

[verndewd]

my grandfather had a sroke that left him paralyzed and speachless;That is technically braindamaged,If you dont know what a stroke is ,it is a blood vessel that bursts and allows blood to damage the brain,This one form of stroke is considered hemorragic.

The other type is from the blood stopping its flow.

point is that while the stroke limited his function,his eyes told a much different story,he was concious and lucid.My vote is that brain functions limit the body not the values or nature of the thought process.Consider the mind like a cpu and the conciousness like electricity,all a damages cpu can do is limit the amount of data processed.

I had a complex migraine that took my ability to speak and understand spoken language;It was like hearing english spoken for the first time;And while my response was confusing and my ability to understand words was gone except at a very base level,My internalization of the events was extremely articulate.

The friend with whom i was speaking on the phone,said i seemed to be having a stroke,and my mind entered a short loop on what that word meant,i paused at the word trying to imagine its meaning,thinking it sounded very familiar.The episode lasted for about an hour but the horrendous ache lasted for 3 days and redered me copletely useless for work,as it took all my strength ,literally..I tried to work the next day but between the headache and the extremely long pauses to try and understand what was going on....you get the picture.

I never felt as though my intelligence diminished at all,just the knowledge and importance of the world at large,in the respect of the anthill obligations we rise to meet everyday.call it a moment of absolute purity of mind,A high quality canvas is still high quality without the painting.

The quality of the signal is never lost, it is the motor function that deteriorates.

I didnt read all the responses.

 

[imported_iNGEN]

I'm gonna have to go with PhatoseAlpha on this one.

 

[Gatt]

Originally posted by: Gannon

Originally posted by: ADDAvenger

Originally posted by: StopSign

Originally posted by: bobsmith1492

Originally posted by: Gannon
Yes, brain damage pretty much proves that thought is a physical manifestation, without oxygen the brain does not function properly.

Not necessarily; if there were a soul/mind/some non-physical entity that was the center of the thought or decision making process and the brain were the interface with the body, then damage to the brain could prevent the soul from controlling the body effectively...

Hogwash!

Nah, it's a reasonable musing. Though to be fair to all, it is just a musing because there is no way to confirm or deny it scientifically.

It's not a reasonable musing, otherwise you would experience consciousness before you were even born in the Egg that was fertalized to become you. Your thought and consciousness is nothing more then an enormous collective of neurons. There is no "physical-less interface". You have all kinds of contradictory nonscientific nonsense if you believe in such tripe.

You're starting out with a significant miscalculation.

Memory is stored within brain cells, memory is a collective storage of a set of information and sensory data. Memory is physical, this is effectively proven through numerous experiments demonstrating that stimulating some parts of the brain immediately causes a re-experiencing of said information.

As such, even with conciousness, you could not store memory without the physical storage medium(The Brain). As you so note, A baby is most certainly alive and independent on it's happy trip through the birth canal, but it does not store that information in the brain. Were it nothing more than a collection of neurons, that data would be stored in some number of individuals at a minimum. Many people have photographic memories, I've yet to hear of a single one that reliably can report they remember the act of birth. Yet they were alive and concious, with a fully functioning brain.

As far as evidence goes, almost our entire research efforts on pretty much every subject we "Know" about is completely limited to what exists within our realm of senses throughout history, excepting only math. If we cannot sense it, it does not exist regardless of what evidence is raised. Our research efforts are completely limited by the assumption that the only things that exist are the things that fall within our range of senses. The idea of a kind of energy that cannot be seen, touched, heard, tasted, or smelled is completely alien to almost all scientific study until the last few decades. We've still made no major effort in attempting to pursue research that falls beyond our immediate senses.

Which is why we don't understand thought, conciousness, or the "Mind". It's also why the vast majority of our assumptions about Physics and the universe will eventually prove to be false.

The evidence for a "Mind" independent of the body is present, simply through occum's razor eliminating the counter-arguements. But since we don't think about things that exist outside of our range of senses, we remain happily ignorant.

Edit: Just have to point out, partical research is the culmination of following our senses and investigating the nature of Matter. Same thing with electricity following sight, waves and radiation following our curosity about light we see, etc. Everything we know is soundly based in investigating our senses, not what's outside of them.

 

[verndewd]

Well the spiritualist in me says that memory is stored in the quantum conciousness.
Man can niether prove or disprove the theories of mind and spirit.Why else would he lable grace "phenomenon"?

I believe there will be sufficient evidence one day of quantum spiritual existence.In the effect that it becomes a reality;this topics subject matter from all cold calculating scientific minds will be flipped upside down.

Imho all the body can do is relay what the spirit has gathered.no formula will ever convince me otherwise;as mathematics cannot substantiate what is called psychic ability.
Or miracles.among the long list of impossibilities and improbabilities in the views of cold science.

To be fair lets attempt to describe psychic abilities by scientific means.

1The mind generates a form of bioelectric pulses to recievers in the brain,some people have very developed sending and recieving capabilities so we could liken Psychic abilities to the inherent WIFI existent in all living things,but does that describe the ability to translate the info to its base value and decode the signal?
2.what makes the human WiFi developed in some and not in others?Is it purely genetic?a leftover from neanderthal times and earlier?is it an overenhanced survival instict.And why would it be needed to the degree that it is found?
Is the ability to predict the future just a survival instinct?How about the ability to speak with the dead?
The human WiFi is not so much different from the animal WiFi;as science would describe it as a bioelectrical reception and delivery system;so would that make animals prophetic?
I have had dreams that were factual representations of things that did not transpire for years,but finally came to be;Things I had no reason to know at the time.
Why would a simple survival tactic tell me my band was going to break up ,in a dream?
over a year before it happened?and the dream was vague enough and descriptive of everything else at the time of the occurrance.
Now science would have to become injected with highly criticized quantum theorem to explain that.But as we know thing do also exist in a quantum state,but beyond that we can only speculate.

 

[verndewd]

here is a great experience that science and psychology could attempt to explain,among the several that I have had.

I woke from a sleep state to find I was paralyzed and without the ability to speak.
I looked to my left and a shadow form materialized,and then another.
One was tall and had the shape of a man,the other was shorter and had a shape similar to a dog.The dog walked around to my right side and growled.My vision was transported to the source of the growl and the growl was actually every lost soul in hell moaning and screaming.The growl was like a transportation device for my vision,If you can imagine it my vision traced the growl through the host ,through its throat ! and once inside the source of the growl became clear as the voices of a countless sea fo souls.

At this point I was getting mad for bieng held still ,and was wishing I had the infinite power to crush these beasts.

Thats all fantastic and crazy as a dream but here is the clincher;As i said i was awake,i could see the level of light from the sun bieng just below the horizon,I could see my room in averagely vivid detail.

I decided to call on divine intervention to relieve me of these bindings,and was able to barely speak the word help.Instantly a small pure voice in my conciousness expressed a joy and delight with a sound i didnt hear but came from the center of my bieng.
Instantly i arose,pissed of like mad that i was made powerless.

but the point is there was no phasing of eye opening or waking up or anything of that matter between the start and my release and instant rising from my bed.

Now the scientists will say its a psychological issue,And the psychologists will say it was most likely a pure dream state representing alot of inner issues.

But do they actually know?No. The point of psychology is to stabilize and define perameters for normality.Similarly science will only quantify what is commonly proven and provable.Without that approach men would sink into insanity.

heres a radical theological thought.
:lol: this is funny,whip this one out on your visiting jehovas witness or mormon missionary.

What if technology is the persuit of satan to use mans ability to learn,as a platform to enter heaven by learning how to manipulate space/ time and dimension? :lol:
Talk about making a person crawl,rather run back to the stone age.

 

[BitByBit]

The problem with answering such philosophical questions is that thought on the subject often reflects contemporary philosophy. We live in an age of hard science and hard fact that tends to deny the existence of anything that cannot be proven in the lab, or by other physical means. Little wonder then, that the idea of consciousness as a separate entity from the brain is denied, and sometimes ridiculed.

My current thoughts on the relationship between consciousness and the brain is that the brain functions as a sort translation medium between the physical world and pure conscious thought, continually providing our minds with feedback. We think a thought and our brain responds with an answer, which in turn alters the original thought and so on. Perhaps our minds learn to stimulate different regions of the brain as we progress through childhood, to the point where our minds have full control when we reach adulthood?

One story I read a while back which reinforced the idea of a separate consciousness was of a professor who suffered from a disease (I forget which) that destroyed most of his brain. After his recovery, he was able to continue his work as he did before, but with less than half his brain left. Conventional science would suggest that he should not be able to function, or that his personality should have been 'deleted' in the process of losing most of his brain. At the very least, the fact that this did not happen suggests that there is more to consciousness than neurons and synapses.

Edit:
Here's a site discussing 'quantum consciousness', which appears to have been created by Emperor Ming.

 

[NanoStuff]

Originally posted by: verndewd
The quality of the signal is never lost, it is the motor function that deteriorates.

I didnt read all the responses.

If you had read all the responses, you might have realized what you said is idiotic.

Originally posted by: verndewd
Man can niether prove or disprove the theories of mind

If by man you're referring to Anandtech forum hippies, you're probably right. If you're referring to man as a whole, you might want to at least glance at neurology research.

Originally posted by: verndewd
as mathematics cannot substantiate what is called psychic ability

Actually it can and has 'substantiated' that psychic ability is a matter of probability based on circumstantial information.

Originally posted by: verndewd
Or miracles

Miracles as in rare events that delute feeble minds into accepting a higher power?

Originally posted by: verndewd
To be fair lets attempt to describe psychic abilities by scientific means.

This might be better left to a scientist.

Originally posted by: verndewd
Why would a simple survival tactic tell me my band was going to break up ,in a dream?

'Surivival tactics' are not all immediately identifiable as such, only through extended reasoning do they begin to make sense, such as love. But what you 'experienced' was either dejavu, or a coincidental event. Your band broke up because it sucked, you were likely on some level aware of this fact and only in your dream has that awareness expressed itself.

Originally posted by: verndewd
and the dream was vague enough and descriptive of everything else at the time of the occurrance.

For this reason alone I'm willing to conclude it was dejavu.

Originally posted by: verndewd
Now science would have to become injected with highly criticized quantum theorem to explain that.

No, I just did with plain logic.

Originally posted by: verndewd
If you can imagine it my vision traced the growl through the host ,through its throat ! and once inside the source of the growl became clear as the voices of a countless sea fo souls.

This is what's called lucid dreaming. Look it up.

Originally posted by: verndewd
Now the scientists will say its a psychological issue

No, scientists will say it's lucid dreaming.

Originally posted by: verndewd
But do they actually know?No.

Yes they know. You don't know. Hopefully with time you will get to make sense of it.

Originally posted by: BitByBit
Little wonder then, that the idea of consciousness as a separate entity from the brain is denied, and sometimes ridiculed.

It's denied and ridiculed because it doesn't make sense to anyone wise enough to make sense of most propositions.

Originally posted by: BitByBit
Perhaps our minds learn to stimulate different regions of the brain as we progress through childhood, to the point where our minds have full control when we reach adulthood?

The brain learns to 'stimulate' different regions of itself, until we reach 'full control' when we reach adulthood.

Originally posted by: BitByBit
One story I read a while back which reinforced the idea of a separate consciousness was of a professor who suffered from a disease (I forget which) that destroyed most of his brain.

The only idea this reinforces is that the brain is a resiliant machine.

Originally posted by: BitByBit
At the very least, the fact that this did not happen suggests that there is more to consciousness than neurons and synapses.

It suggests that no functionally critical parts of the brain were destroyed.

I hope I just spared you two a long life of unfullfilled searching for invisible men and spirits. So what have we learned? If you don't understand it, grab a book and read about it.

 

[BitByBit]

I made it clear in my post that what I was submitting regarding my ideas on consciousness was just that - IDEA. Nowhere in my post did I claim or imply my ideas to be fact, and the way you attacked them was childish. People who attack others for having views different to their own are known as bigots, and if you wish to avoid being labelled as such, I suggest you practice a little restraint in your future posts.

 

[nortexoid]

As philosophers might say, the mind "supervenes" on (or is "realized" by) variously different physical stuff. But it's all physical, in that sense, even if it is described in terms of "higher-order" properties - e.g. as "patterns" of physical phenomena or processes.

Some believe that even though everything is at substance physical, mental properties are not reducible to physical ones. This is confusing. What is often meant is that mental predicates as they occur in some psycho-linguistic theory are not eliminable by solely physical predicates (as they occur in some fundamental physical theory, like QM). Thus psychology talk is not reducible to physics talk. Ok, no big deal. But maintaining that everything is at substance physical while mental properties are not reducibly physical is nonsense, at best. At worst, it is a fry supreme from Taco Bell.

In any case, suppose mental phenomena are not physical. Then how do the two interact, as is assumed by most people (since our desires/thoughts/etc. move us to action)? Sure, magic is an answer but not a very enlightening one for epistemology.

Maybe mental phenomena are "epiphenomenal" in that they sort of arise as complexes from simpler things to which they are not reducible. Moreover, these mental phenomena are causally inert, in the sense of being inefficacious. These sorts of theories are great games in rhetoric from the armchairs of philosophers. But none of them hold their weight.

 

[PooBeetle]

"there is no way to confirm or deny it scientifically. " ??
do a google, physics many worlds. that easy.


Only quasi-religious physicists who are bad at math believe in the fairy tale land of the copenhagen interpretation.

it is a multi-verse. no doubt. none. zero.
thus every body (body in the pure math, physics definition sense) has their own tiny little bubble, and world. (imagine) this is just maths were talking here, and consistent math at that, a claim unable to be made by any other quantum mechanical interpretation.

dreams prove this beyond all doubt
(in the early 1960's and 70's thousands of ESP experiments were performed by all the reputable western universities. high powered statistics found absolutely nothing.
except for two effects, the marrs effect, and dream communication. it is a perfectly reproducable effect. you can influence the dreams of other reliably and repeatably)

so,
Do you consider thought to be a 100% physical?
don't be silly.
the dream communication proves atoms/strings have more properties than currently described perfectly,
so there are all manner of sticky fingered extra dimensionals egging you on everyday. it's more fun that way. (outside observers in physics speak)

radiohead - just = OW!etc
(ow, ow, ow, ow, ow, ow etc etc )

 

[Gannon]

I don't think people here understand what "physical" is, when I physical I mean ACTUALLY EXISTING in some form (energy, electricity, etc) a "solid" object is "physical" but thats not the definition of "physical" I am using, I'm using it as a form of energy that ACTUALLY EXISTS and could possibly be measured with the right instrumentation.

When people tell me "souls" exist (i.e. consciousness without "bodies" (i.e. solid energy forms) ) I laugh at them because we know the brain needs oxygen to function, if anyone wants to test the disembodied soul hypothesis, go get helium and breath just enough of it to begin to lose consciousness while a friend is around.

 

[PooBeetle]

spreading wave activation theory is the notion that the sum of all the millions of neurons firing creates a wave, ripples on a pond, which is actual consciousness, self awareness. anything below this level is merely dominos falling against each other, zeros and ones so to speak.

just FYI
data
"ACTUALLY EXISTS and could possibly be measured with the right instrumentation."

and this is data,
and has been repeated over and over by researchers

"A team led by one of Britain's leading neuropsychiatrists, Dr Peter Fenwick interviewed people who'd literally been brought back from the dead as soon as they were able to speak.
"have targets in the room that only can be seen from the ceiling, which is where people usually report their viewpoint."
http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/stories/s206217.htm


so the brain may need oxygen to function, but data aquisition by your consciousness continues after death,
(remember, thats been statistically verified by placing targets that can only be seem from the ceiling perspective by these dying patients (patients they know are going to kark it a couple of times, be brought back a couple of times, to be hurriedly questioned by the ghouls of these university hospitals)



so take your pick,
at whatever level you choose,
macdonalds blandness (which kiddies love) or a nice thai green curry with umpteen exotic ingredients (which may be more than you bargained for)


Do you consider thought to be a 100% physical?
are you sure you're asking me?

cause my answer is still the best modern physics can provide, mathematically astoundingly more advanced than the cave man copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics, ie. many worlds = outside observers, that simple.

so
thought is a combo deal,
the outside observers influencing,
other entities influencing your dreams,
and the dominos falling,
all influencing the ripples of a pond (the electomagnetic waves trapped in the 4 dimensions inside your brain) you call consciousness.


this is all repeatable science. so google if in doubt.

 

[blackllotus]

Originally posted by: PooBeetle
so the brain may need oxygen to function, but data aquisition by your consciousness continues after death,
(remember, thats been statistically verified by placing targets that can only be seem from the ceiling perspective by these dying patients (patients they know are going to kark it a couple of times, be brought back a couple of times, to be hurriedly questioned by the ghouls of these university hospitals)

Actually, according to the article, they have not even tried the target experiment yet.

And we need to do what was one of the key experiments and that is to look at people who say they leave their body and have targets in the room that only can be seen from the ceiling, which is where people usually report their viewpoint.

If they can see the targets and nobody in the room knows what they are, but yet they can bring back that information, then one has to seriously consider that brain and mind may be different things.

 

[PooBeetle]

Actually, according to the article, he was talking about designing further studies to support/verify his own findings.

his own results are usually descriptions of the clothing of family members and such facts that could not have been seen by the dying person.

 

[trojan698]

Originally posted by: Gannon
Yes, brain damage pretty much proves that thought is a physical manifestation, without oxygen the brain does not function properly.

The mind could no longer function as it's physically unable to, but you can't deny that their environment plays a crucial role in how someone thinks.

 

[Gannon]

Originally posted by: trojan698

Originally posted by: Gannon
Yes, brain damage pretty much proves that thought is a physical manifestation, without oxygen the brain does not function properly.

The mind could no longer function as it's physically unable to, but you can't deny that their environment plays a crucial role in how someone thinks.

Uhh of course but you do realize that the mind is just a feedback circuit? A series of processing nodes that reflects information back on itself. I don't understand what you're trying to say here "the mind" is the "soul", the soul "died" at death, it goes back to unconsciousness. Like I said before EVERYONE before they were born was dead as atoms of other animals and plants strewn across the planet, you are just a focusing of different fields and arrangements of energy into a particular pattern my cellular life. That is all, you will not exist after death, everything you learned will be forgotten once brain death occurs, it will he like you never were.

The only people that espouse souls are religious and we know how well traditional religions and science mix.... Not at all.

Here's some quotes from the bible for all the religious out there:

Ecclesiastes 9:10
Whatever your hand finds to do, do it with all your might, for in the grave, where you are going, there is neither working nor planning nor knowledge nor wisdom.

Does it sound like the writer of ecclesiastes believes he has a soul? If there is no work, nor any planning, nor wisdom, there cannot be though, since the very act of thinking implies planning and previous elements of knowledge and data that have accrued over the years in someones mind.

You can find a whole heap of people who distort information that is clearly presented in many holy texts. http://users.aol.com/bible4/chrastoc.htm

The only reason soul mythology exists is because of religion and incorrect philosophical ideas from plato. Plato's ideas about the immortal soul infected original christianity, but the old testament does not teach immortal soulism at all.

 

[Xdreamer]

Back to the main question... is thought a 100% physical manifistation?
This question steps on a lot of idealogical toes and is impossible to answer without a consensus on the opperative definitions of "thought" and "physical". I wont touch that debate. I also will not touch the debate surrounding "soul", "mind", "conscious vs awareness", and "spirit".
As a scientist I assume that 'thought' is 100% physiological else how could it be studied? Therefore thought consistes of the structure and current activity of the brain. My religous beliefs tend to countradict this. Nevertheless there is evidence that 'thought/consiousness/awareness/soul/mind' has significant physical substance and is not localized but rather divided amoung many structures. Science leaves the door open to 'supernatural' possiblities.
1. Physical damage to specific areas of the brain produce specific and predictible loss/impairment of function.
2. If the impairment of function is not obviously related to physical motion or sensation, the individual is often unaware or slightly aware of the impairment.
3. Specific drugs can create predictible and hightly specific conscious effects while creating wide ranging physiological changes.

A question I would like to ask is this: Can the brain ever be fully understood? Is the brain complex enough to understand its own complexity or are we 'physically' incapible of comprehending the the complexity of our own brain.

 

[brian0918]

Originally posted by: hellokeith
Some wrinkles on the brain, some bio-chemical and bio-electric interactions. So it is only a matter of research, technology, and time until thought will be completely measurable, correct?

We still know very little about the brain, so to say it's simply "some wrinkles, some bio-chemical and bio-electrical interactions" is an extreme oversimplification. That said, there's no evidence for anything but a physical explanation (can there even be non-physical evidence???) so there's no reason to believe otherwise.

 

[verndewd]

Originally posted by: NanoStuff

Originally posted by: verndewd
The quality of the signal is never lost, it is the motor function that deteriorates.

I didnt read all the responses.

If you had read all the responses, you might have realized what you said is idiotic.

Originally posted by: verndewd
Man can niether prove or disprove the theories of mind

If by man you're referring to Anandtech forum hippies, you're probably right. If you're referring to man as a whole, you might want to at least glance at neurology research.

Originally posted by: verndewd
as mathematics cannot substantiate what is called psychic ability

Actually it can and has 'substantiated' that psychic ability is a matter of probability based on circumstantial information.

Originally posted by: verndewd
Or miracles

Miracles as in rare events that delute feeble minds into accepting a higher power?

Originally posted by: verndewd
To be fair lets attempt to describe psychic abilities by scientific means.

This might be better left to a scientist.

Originally posted by: verndewd
Why would a simple survival tactic tell me my band was going to break up ,in a dream?

'Surivival tactics' are not all immediately identifiable as such, only through extended reasoning do they begin to make sense, such as love. But what you 'experienced' was either dejavu, or a coincidental event. Your band broke up because it sucked, you were likely on some level aware of this fact and only in your dream has that awareness expressed itself.

Originally posted by: verndewd
and the dream was vague enough and descriptive of everything else at the time of the occurrance.

For this reason alone I'm willing to conclude it was dejavu.

Originally posted by: verndewd
Now science would have to become injected with highly criticized quantum theorem to explain that.

No, I just did with plain logic.

Originally posted by: verndewd
If you can imagine it my vision traced the growl through the host ,through its throat ! and once inside the source of the growl became clear as the voices of a countless sea fo souls.

This is what's called lucid dreaming. Look it up.

Originally posted by: verndewd
Now the scientists will say its a psychological issue

No, scientists will say it's lucid dreaming.

Originally posted by: verndewd
But do they actually know?No.

Yes they know. You don't know. Hopefully with time you will get to make sense of it.

Originally posted by: BitByBit
Little wonder then, that the idea of consciousness as a separate entity from the brain is denied, and sometimes ridiculed.

It's denied and ridiculed because it doesn't make sense to anyone wise enough to make sense of most propositions.

Originally posted by: BitByBit
Perhaps our minds learn to stimulate different regions of the brain as we progress through childhood, to the point where our minds have full control when we reach adulthood?

The brain learns to 'stimulate' different regions of itself, until we reach 'full control' when we reach adulthood.

Originally posted by: BitByBit
One story I read a while back which reinforced the idea of a separate consciousness was of a professor who suffered from a disease (I forget which) that destroyed most of his brain.

The only idea this reinforces is that the brain is a resiliant machine.

Originally posted by: BitByBit
At the very least, the fact that this did not happen suggests that there is more to consciousness than neurons and synapses.

It suggests that no functionally critical parts of the brain were destroyed.

I hope I just spared you two a long life of unfullfilled searching for invisible men and spirits. So what have we learned? If you don't understand it, grab a book and read about it.

I see nothing profoundly brilliant in your reply.It sounds like regurgitated garbage from a narcicisstic classroom.

 

[verndewd]

Originally posted by: Xdreamer
Back to the main question... is thought a 100% physical manifistation?
This question steps on a lot of idealogical toes and is impossible to answer without a consensus on the opperative definitions of "thought" and "physical". I wont touch that debate. I also will not touch the debate surrounding "soul", "mind", "conscious vs awareness", and "spirit".
As a scientist I assume that 'thought' is 100% physiological else how could it be studied? Therefore thought consistes of the structure and current activity of the brain. My religous beliefs tend to countradict this. Nevertheless there is evidence that 'thought/consiousness/awareness/soul/mind' has significant physical substance and is not localized but rather divided amoung many structures. Science leaves the door open to 'supernatural' possiblities.
1. Physical damage to specific areas of the brain produce specific and predictible loss/impairment of function.
2. If the impairment of function is not obviously related to physical motion or sensation, the individual is often unaware or slightly aware of the impairment.
3. Specific drugs can create predictible and hightly specific conscious effects while creating wide ranging physiological changes.

A question I would like to ask is this: Can the brain ever be fully understood? Is the brain complex enough to understand its own complexity or are we 'physically' incapible of comprehending the the complexity of our own brain.

Honestly I would have to say yes and no,the material meaning of thought is detached to a degree from conciousness.They work together in optimal circumstances but can be independant of each other.

 

[HVAC]

The brain is an interface and housekeeper.