Posts tagged with mindfuck...
Untitled///106
If you had a portrait of yourself made in the Harry Potter universe while still alive; which would be the real you? And if you died, would you truly be dead if your consciousness survives in the painting?
Red pill, blue pill Red pill, blue pill Red pill, blue pill Red pill, blue pill Red pill, blue pill Red pill, blue pill Red pill, blue pill Red pill, blue pill Red pill, blue pill Red pill, blue pill Red pill, blue pill Red pill, blue pill Red pill, blue pill Red pill, blue pill Red pill, blue pill Red pill, blue pill Red pill, blue pill Red pill, blue pill Red pill, blue pill Red pill, blue pill
Longish head essay ahead, and I know how easy it is to overlook these long posts, but this may get your brain thinking. Or is it your mind? Fuck knows.
Concerning the existence, and indeed location or nature of the mind, philosophers have attempted with varying degrees of success to form any infallible conclusion. Many theories and beliefs have been postulated, one of the foremost perhaps being Substance Dualism, a view proposed by René Descartes. Descartes believed that phenomena such as the soul or mind could be subjected to scientific and logical investigation, even supposing that the pineal gland in the brain was the “seat of the soul”. According to Substance (or Cartesian) Dualism, the universe is composed of two distinct and separate qualities: physical matter and non-material substance I.E the mind. These qualities exist separately - yet harmoniously – leading to the conclusion that the mind can exist without the brain. This is supported by the argument that the mental and physical realms have contrasting properties. Subjective mental events are known as qualia: ‘the internal and subjective component of sense perceptions, arising from stimulation of the senses by phenomena’. In Thomas Nagel’s paper “What Is It Like to Be a Bat?” the existence of qualia, and Substance Dualism, is defended by the idea that if ones consciousness entered the body of a bat, we would still never understand what it would be like to be a bat, only what it is to be a bat. Therefore, the mind and its qualia exist independently of the body. This makes Substance Dualism indeed quite appealing, as “you” as an entity exist, and are not merely physical matter responding to stimuli. However, Dualism has been refuted, due to the fact that it cannot be said how interaction between the mind and brain occurs. As the brain (part of the physical realm) and the mind (part of the immaterial realm) are two separate and distinct substances, there is no physical, and therefore conceivable force, which causes them to interact. Compared to the causation of physical objects, where enough momentum or force may cause something to move, we can find no such cause when neurons fire in the brain, causing movement in the body.
A contrasting view of the mind, also known as the “Brain” or “Scientific Reductionism” theory simply state that the mind is the brain, and indeed that all mental activity can be accounted for via brain activity. As modern neuroscience progresses, we gain a deeper understanding of the complex workings of the human brain, observing when certain parts “light up”, behavior can be observed. We have even reached the levels of sophistication where by simply observing brain activity, we can work out what numbers a person is looking at. The view that the brain is synonymous with the mind is particularly convincing from a scientific and empirical standpoint, as it can be easily surmised that when the brain undergoes transformation (e.g through the use of hallucinogens) or damage, mental activity changes, or simply put, the mind changes. This would therefore suggest that the brain is indeed the mind. However, despite the fact mental activity and behavior are correlated, it is still only a correlation, not identity. Moreover, neuroscience reduces complex human emotions, such as love, down to mere brain activity. Studies have found that different parts of the brain activate when we see a friend, and then when we see a lover. However it is obvious to say that love is a far more complicate psychological phenomenon. Secondly, the “Brain” theory also essentially removes free will from the human condition. If we are merely animals with brains reacting to physical stimuli, we’re trapped in a physical world, where our mental activity is comprised of predictable neurons, free will no longer exists. Finally, the Chinese Room though experiment composed by John Searle concludes that we are capable of reproducing data without understanding it. To understand something, a mind must exist, or we would be zombies. However, we are capable of interacting with data we don’t understand, like a language we don’t understand (as if we machines); yet we are also capable of understanding a language. Where does “I” exist? This therefore proposes the existence of the mind as something more than the brain. Following on from this, it has been argued that the mind exists as a property of the brain. Without a brain, the mind and consciousness cannot exist, and is therefore dependant on the physical realm. Indeed, some things cannot exist until it used in a certain context. A video game is not a video game until it is put into a console is played, such as the mind is not the mind unless it has a brain to function in. The mind exists, but we are not much more than a brain.
Any thoughts?
