1

" We are all comfortable using terms to refer to things that seem non-physical objects, such as "Tuesday," "justice," and "luck." These things seem to be able to affect physical things, e.g. "Tuesday" can determine when I go to class. Is the concept of "mind" any different than these other abstract concepts? If so, how? If not, why do we think there is a mind-body problem but not a Tuesday-class problem?

It's ok if you don't have a definite answer! Just think about it and do your best. "

~Johnathan Frome (Professor at UTD)

Note: ** I have already responded to this question, I am kindly looking to see others points of view.**

  • I will ad my response after 48 hours before giving my opinion – Shaakasu808 Oct 29 '14 at 7:20
  • Also the response doesn't have to be very long preferably at least a paragraph. NO ONE SENTENCE ANSWERS!! – Shaakasu808 Oct 29 '14 at 7:58
1

The concept of the "mind" presented in the documents provided is a qualified agreement that splits ones thinking. On one side (let it be known as the left) if one is to consider conciousness logically it comes out as a simple and systematic vocalization of experience. This experience is produced as a more concrete and systematic approach to reality that allows one to classify an experience in a secular fashion that stems from a possible evolutionary base to produce a efficent survial method. As a result we entitled the systematic and secular orginization of experiences/sensations, reactions, and behavioral patterns as the conciousness, as to replace the lack of a provisional or colloquial term. On the other and (as it sahll be known as the right) we developed an abstract theoretical approach to mental configuration and secular behavior. This approach is best represented by the Cartesian dualism. This the concept that the "mind/soul/intellect" is in fact seperate from the body. THis approach is greatly used by sects of religious practives in order to produce effiecient inspiration to be followed or correct a moral statue by instating a supposed emotion of guilt or "concious reactions" to improper behavior as seen by those in the religion. As a result the concept of the "mind" or consiousness belong to a basis of philosophy in which the mind exist in a seperate plane form the physical, in the same way the sun exist in a different spatial position than the Earth at all times yet they still interact by some form or fashion as an "unknown" force. I use the term unknown loosely because as modern physics would ahve it we are held in orbit by a relative gravitational force and are subjected to multiple centripetal forces as per reactions of radial and radiational energy produced by chemical reaction that are being undertaken constantly in both the sun and the planets. As such in an attempt to qualify the issue at hand i presented the concept in realtion to the brain with its split hemisphere which are prescribed in psychology to act in different ways. With the left hemisphere appearing logically and the right hemisphere being abstract and creative. As such the perspective can be seen in a non-linear position and the issue at hand which is the attempt to bridge the gaps can be viewed as the corpus callosum in which we can view small connections between both sides but are unable to determine the exact nature for which it exist.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.