The iniquity of the Catholic church

[Alan Burns]

that creates an infinite regress

It is only an infinite regress if you view it in material terms.  If the brain cells are perceived by other material elements, then something has to perceive the state of these elements ...  and so on.

The only feasible explanation which makes sense to me is an entity of perception which is not material, but perceives material things.

[Nearly Sane]

It is only an infinite regress if you view it in material terms.  If the brain cells are perceived by other material elements, then something has to perceive the state of these elements ...  and so on.

The only feasible explanation which makes sense to me is an entity of perception which is not material, but perceives material things.

But you have already used materialist logic to get to the position. If you then ignore it, it's like climbing up a ladder and throwing it away and ignoring that you fall down.

[Alan Burns]

Well, you are moving the goal-posts, as you often do.  You were saying before that there was no connection between thinking and the brain, quote, "Until you can define what a thought is, you can't assert that it requires a functioning brain.  Thoughts may well interact with the physical brain to produce measurable brain activity, but this in no way defines the origin or nature of thought."

Now you seem to be accepting that the brain is involved.   Eh?

What I am trying to explain, though perhaps not very well, is that the thought only exists in conscious perception, not in the brain cells themselves.  The thought may be represented by patterns of brain cell activity, just as the written word is represented by patterns of ink on a piece of paper, but the meaning of them both only exists in the conscious perception of the observer.

[wigginhall]

What I am trying to explain, though perhaps not very well, is that the thought only exists in conscious perception, not in the brain cells themselves.  The thought may be represented by patterns of brain cell activity, just as the written word is represented by patterns of ink on a piece of paper, but the meaning of them both only exists in the conscious perception of the observer.

That sounds OK, but then you are introducing the idea of a soul, which does the work, although apparently no-one can demonstrate this soul, or its workings.

Consciousness research is in its infancy, but there is some interesting stuff coming out.  Well, I expect more from it, than 'soul research'. 

[Sebastian Toe]

We have no knowledge of how thought processes work, how they are perceived or where they originate from in scientific terms.   If you are demanding a scientific explanation of what drives our thought processes you will not find one.  The closest I can get to answering your question is to point to the quantum events occurring in your brain which have no discernible cause, as this could be the gateway for spiritual interaction, be it from your own soul, or the wilful temptation of Satan.

Forget about scientific explanations.

The willful temptation of Satan......

Try non scientific ones for now and see where that gets you?