Coherency of mind

[lifegazer]

The coherency and harmony of mind shows that there is a singular whole at work, with sovereignity over the brain.
How else can the mind (and body) work as One if this is not the case?

How can we not reason for the presence of a single 'conductor of the orchestra', so to speak, existing at the heart of our minds, producing the abstract vision of the individual, and overseeing the harmony of the whole brain (and body)?

Rather, how can we argue that the harmony and cohesion which is present , as a whole, emanates from a multitude of random and unconducted events occuring within the countless parts of the brain?

The evidence, I shall argue, is for the existence of a single entity which exists - not just as an epiphenomenon emanating from its parts - but as a real being which is sovereign of those parts.

[RussDill]

Originally posted by lifegazer
The coherency and harmony of mind shows that there is a singular whole at work, with sovereignity over the brain.
How else can the mind (and body) work as One if this is not the case?


Even if it were that simple, that wouldn't be proof of anything, however, in phrasing your argument this way, you make it all too simple.


How can we not reason for the presence of a single 'conductor of the orchestra', so to speak, existing at the heart of our minds, producing the abstract vision of the individual, and overseeing the harmony of the whole brain (and body)?

Rather, how can we argue that the harmony and cohesion which is present , as a whole, emanates from a multitude of random and unconducted events occuring within the countless parts of the brain?


Because when there is disorder, desease, or damage, that cohesion breaks down and we can see the seperate parts.

First, you might be interested in reading this, which talks about commissurotomy, a procedure that seperates the two halves of the brain.


http://www.brain-mind.com/SplitBrain.html

You might also want to check up on multiple personality disoreder terrets symdrome, autism, epilepsy, etc


The evidence, I shall argue, is for the existence of a single entity which exists - not just as an epiphenomenon emanating from its parts - but as a real being which is sovereign of those parts.

go ahead.

[lifegazer]

Originally posted by RussDill
Because when there is disorder, desease, or damage, that cohesion breaks down and we can see the seperate parts.

Actually, the onset of disorder/disease does not necessitate the end of the organism, since the organism tries to repair the integrity of the whole.

First, you might be interested in reading this, which talks about commissurotomy, a procedure that seperates the two halves of the brain.


http://www.brain-mind.com/SplitBrain.html

You might also want to check up on multiple personality disoreder terrets symdrome, autism, epilepsy, etc

I'm no doctor, of course, but am aware of such things. My question to you, is how does sickness - bodily or mental - prove that the organism is not, essentially, singular?

[RussDill]

Originally posted by lifegazer

Actually, the onset of disorder/disease does not necessitate the end of the organism, since the organism tries to repair the integrity of the whole.


Nice strawman, when did I say anything about the organism dying?


I'm no doctor, of course, but am aware of such things. My question to you, is how does sickness - bodily or mental - prove that the organism is not, essentially, singular?

That depends on your definition of singular doesn't it? In this case, your definition is very special, and by singular, you mean, part of the mind (pretty funny definition of singular if you ask me).

The point of this thread was to show that cohency of the human mind proves that we are all part of The mind. I'm pointing you to stuff that shows that the human mind is often not coherent and made up of serveral different functional components.

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Lifegazer said:
The coherency and harmony of mind shows that there is a singular whole at work, with sovereignity over the brain.
Tell that to my ex-wife, who thought she was Jesus Christ reincarnated for two months.

Rather, how can we argue that the harmony and cohesion which is present , as a whole, emanates from a multitude of random and unconducted events occuring within the countless parts of the brain?
Grotesque straw man.

~~ Paul

[lifegazer]

Originally posted by RussDill
Nice strawman, when did I say anything about the organism dying?

Well you mentioned disorder & disease... and unless death results, the singularness of the organism remains intact.

The point of this thread was to show that cohency of the human mind proves that we are all part of The mind. I'm pointing you to stuff that shows that the human mind is often not coherent and made up of serveral different functional components.
I'm not arguing that consciousness is the singularness of the mind - though clearly consciousness is singular. Rather, I'm arguing that there is a singularness of mind conducting the multitude of the brains parts so that the organism can actually function as a single whole.
Even behind 'you' there resides a greater One. That's my point.

And though I acknowledge the existence of disordering sicknesses, I don't see how this affects my argument.

[RussDill]

Originally posted by lifegazer

Well you mentioned disorder & disease... and unless death results, the singularness of the organism remains intact.


Really, did you even read the link?:


"Another patient experienced difficulty while shopping, the right hand would place something in the cart and the left hand would put it right back again. Both patients frequently experienced other difficulties as well . "I want to walk forward but something makes me go backward. ' A recently divorced male patient noted that on several occasions while walking about town he found himself forced to go some distance in another direction. Later (although his left hemisphere was not conscious of it at the time) it was discovered (by Dr. Akelaitis) that this diverted course, if continued, would have led him to his former wife's new home."


Does that sound singular to you? Also, where do siamese twins fit in on your singular organism chart?


I'm not arguing that consciousness is the singularness of the mind - though clearly consciousness is singular. Rather, I'm arguing that there is a singularness of mind conducting the multitude of the brains parts so that the organism can actually function as a single whole.
Even behind 'you' there resides a greater One. That's my point.


Ok, and ants act as a cohesive unit too, how does this prove or show anything?


And though I acknowledge the existence of disordering sicknesses, I don't see how this affects my argument.

You claim a cohesive force beyond organisms that keeps their singularity, I ponited out that many disorders show that the singularity of organisms is only due to their parts working as one.

[lifegazer]

Originally posted by Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Tell that to my ex-wife, who thought she was Jesus Christ reincarnated for two months.

I could argue that this was the sanest time of her life, but I won't.

But sickness/disorder of the parts, if this is what your wife had, does not infer that the individual is not whole nor One in essence.
Furthermore, it appears your wife recovered. If there was no (re)ordering principle at the heart of her organism, how could she have recovered?

Grotesque straw man.

?
I'd really like to know how you think the harmony of wholeness and singularness is achieved and maintained by a multitude of parts that are not overseen by a singular force/entity.
I'd really like to hear a solid hypothesis to explain this.

[Jet Grind]

Originally posted by lifegazer
I'd really like to hear a solid hypothesis to explain this.

Then I'd highly reccommend you read How the Mind Works by Steven Pinker and/or Consciousness Explained by Daniel Dennett in conjunction with Phantoms in the Brain by V.S. Ramachandran. The explanation for such a phenomenom is something scientists lack a concrete consesnus on and the hypotheses of individual scientists often require (sometimes extravagant) book-leingth summaries.

[lifegazer]

Originally posted by RussDill
"Another patient experienced difficulty while shopping, the right hand would place something in the cart and the left hand would put it right back again. Both patients frequently experienced other difficulties as well . "I want to walk forward but something makes me go backward. ' A recently divorced male patient noted that on several occasions while walking about town he found himself forced to go some distance in another direction. Later (although his left hemisphere was not conscious of it at the time) it was discovered (by Dr. Akelaitis) that this diverted course, if continued, would have led him to his former wife's new home."


Does that sound singular to you? Also, where do siamese twins fit in on your singular organism chart?

I've already acknowledged the existence of disorder and disease. All you are doing here is listing the symptoms of particular disorders/diseases. But what does this show? Does it show that a singular organism is not singular at essence? Why? How?

An entity can be singular and subject to disorder of its parts.
If the disorder is great, the entity will cease to exist as a bodily-organism. If the disorder is irreparable but regional, the entity will survive as a faulty individual. If the disorder is minimal, the entity will regain its initial harmony and order.

You claim a cohesive force beyond organisms that keeps their singularity, I ponited out that many disorders show that the singularity of organisms is only due to their parts working as one.
The point is: how do all those countless parts work as one without any force to maintain such order?

[RussDill]

Originally posted by lifegazer

I've already acknowledged the existence of disorder and disease. All you are doing here is listing the symptoms of particular disorders/diseases. But what does this show? Does it show that a singular organism is not singular at essence? Why? How?


You claimed:

How can we not reason for the presence of a single 'conductor of the orchestra', so to speak, existing at the heart of our minds, producing the abstract vision of the individual, and overseeing the harmony of the whole brain (and body)?

I gave you examples where this is CLEARLY not true.


An entity can be singular and subject to disorder of its parts.
If the disorder is great, the entity will cease to exist as a bodily-organism. If the disorder is irreparable, the entity will survive as a faulty individual. If the disorder is minimal, the entity will regain its initial harmony and order.


You mind explaination does not explain any of these disorders. The mind functioning as interacting parts does explain the disorders. Also, it doesn't matter if the disorder is minimal, the brain still may never recover. If you have damage to one little nerve near your spine, you may never be able to move your arm again.


The point is: how do all those countless parts work as one without any force to maintain such order?

In my computer, there is no special force that makes all the countless millions of parts maintain order. Why should biological systems be any different? Also, in biological systems, perfect, or even near perfect order is never acheived, but biological systems are very fault tolerant.

[Zero]

We debunked this idiocy 2 years ago at Physics Forums...get some new material, lifegazer.

[Dancing David]

Nice post Lifegazer:
I understand the sentiment that the mind behaves as a unitary body. I respectfuly disagree and point out that some of us has terrible inner struggles. It would have been easier for me if the mind that I am engaged in was always unified.

[Zero]

Originally posted by Dancing David
Nice post Lifegazer:
I understand the sentiment that the mind behaves as a unitary body. I respectfuly disagree and point out that some of us has terrible inner struggles. It would have been easier for me if the mind that I am engaged in was always unified. I don't think anyone has the experience that he describes...except maybe sociopathic mass murderers.

[Dancing David]

Originally posted by lifegazer

I could argue that this was the sanest time of her life, but I won't.

Please don't then I would have to stand on the soap box.



-snip-
?
I'd really like to know how you think the harmony of wholeness and singularness is achieved and maintained by a multitude of parts that are not overseen by a singular force/entity.
I'd really like to hear a solid hypothesis to explain this.

This is truely a great question and one that is at the center of the intelligent design theory. I would say that I disagree with the premise that the brain operates in harmony with itself. That has some testable hypothesis.

basicaly I feel that you can try to unify as much of your life as possible, but the unity of mind is an illsuion.

It is a great vision however.

Do perhaps you mean that the unity of consiousness is the unity of mind? I disagree with that too.

[Dancing David]

Originally posted by Zero
I don't think anyone has the experience that he describes...except maybe sociopathic mass murderers.

Very funny, but I disagree, i feel that the experience of mindfullness is very close to what he describes.

You are right though in that anti-socials don't not seem to have any respect for social mores and are not plauged by a sense of guilt.

[Janus]

So in light of this revelation: Is a well-tuned automobile a philosophical impossibility? I am sure that my Holden isn’t possessed by a unifying conductor. Perhaps I can get $10 of my next service.

[Zero]

Originally posted by Dancing David


Very funny, but I disagree, i feel that the experience of mindfullness is very close to what he describes.

You are right though in that anti-socials don't not seem to have any respect for social mores and are not plauged by a sense of guilt. No, I'm serious...we are always conflicted, our minds never give us just one answer to every question. We are certainly divided.

[Mercutio]

Does a consistent foreign policy (hypothetically, of course!) imply a coherency of the population, in a democracy? Of course not! There are times when it does not even represent coherency in the majority! "Coherency of mind" (which is a delightfully ambiguous cluster of ambiguous terms), even if it could be demonstrated (which is far from a given), absolutely does not imply a coherency in the actions of the brain which give rise to what you might call mind.

Sorry, but the premise is flawed, the assumptions are flawed, and the whole shooting works is a waste of time and effort.

Try again, Lifegazer.

[Dancing David]

Originally posted by Zero
No, I'm serious...we are always conflicted, our minds never give us just one answer to every question. We are certainly divided.

I certainly agree , mindfulness approaches unity but will never attain it, ....

[c4ts]

Coherency of mind...


is not apparent in lifegazer.

[Wudang]

Originally posted by lifegazer


The point is: how do all those countless parts work as one without any force to maintain such order?

Because evolution forced that - the combinations of parts and interactions that didn't work well enough didn't survive long enough to reproduce.
And anyone familair with computer architecture - even the glorified interrupt handlers that pass for an OS in some circles - can tell you about disparate parts working together well enough to appear as a single system to the observer.