Mind is a field

[Sriram]

Hi everyone,

Scientists normally think of the mind as electrical impulses and chemical reactions in the brain.

Contrary to this is the philosophical idea that the mind is a field. Something that exists on its own but connects to the brain and functions like a radio.

Any views?

Sriram

 

[Stranger]

Any views?

Follow the evidence.

[Outrider]

Scientists normally think of the mind as electrical impulses and chemical reactions in the brain.

Neuroscientists, whilst conducting neuroscience, think of the mind as electrical impulses and chemical reactions because that's the level of brain activity that they're working at. Psychologists view the mind in a very different way because they're operating on the mind's interactions with the world and itself.

Contrary to this is the philosophical idea that the mind is a field. Something that exists on its own but connects to the brain and functions like a radio.

That's a philosophical conceptualisation, but unfortunately for its proponents it's one that fails to match up reliably with real-world evidence. We see no evidence for brain activity - whatever level that we look at - which is spurred by something 'other', we see evidence of this 'connection', and we don't see any gaps in the activity of the brain which would necessitate including such an idea.

O.

[Sriram]

It is a philosophical conceptualization. By and by we might find that it is true....provided we keep the idea in mind and try to do some research on it. 

There is lot of experiential evidence for it though....if we care to notice it.

[Stranger]

It is a philosophical conceptualization.

You seem to use this a lot to mean "blind faith" or "guess".   

There is lot of experiential evidence for it though....if we care to notice it.

If there was a lot of experimental evidence for it, it would be mainstream science.

[jeremyp]

Hi everyone,

Scientists normally think of the mind as electrical impulses and chemical reactions in the brain.

Contrary to this is the philosophical idea that the mind is a field. Something that exists on its own but connects to the brain and functions like a radio.

Any views?

Sriram

 

If your hypothesis were true, the electrical impulses and chemical reactions would be changed by this hypothetical field and we would be able to detect that.

We don’t. There’s no evidence it exists.

[Sriram]

There is no evidence that Strings exist or parallel universes exist and yet these ideas are seriously discussed and investigated. Not so the idea of the mind field.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Sriram,

There is no evidence that Strings exist or parallel universes exist and yet these ideas are seriously discussed and investigated. Not so the idea of the mind field.

Yes, and rightly so. Why do you suppose that is? 

[Udayana]

There is no evidence that Strings exist or parallel universes exist and yet these ideas are seriously discussed and investigated. Not so the idea of the mind field.

Probably because it gets confused with "mine fields".

Anyway, if it is so interesting ... you can investigate it yourself?

[Stranger]

There is no evidence that Strings exist or parallel universes exist and yet these ideas are seriously discussed and investigated. Not so the idea of the mind field.

It's seriously weird that you capitalise "Strings" and refer to "parallel universes" as if it was just one idea. But I digress, yes string theory is taken seriously and so are some ideas that include what you might loosely describe as 'parallel universes'.

Blue has asked an excellent question ("Why do you suppose that is?"), I strongly suggest that you consider it before reaching for another of your rather lazy stock responses, you might actually learn something...

[jeremyp]

There is no evidence that Strings exist or parallel universes exist and yet these ideas are seriously discussed and investigated. Not so the idea of the mind field.

I don't know if they are seriously discussed. They are not part of mainstream physics precisely because there's no evidence for them. People who want them to be part of mainstream physics are looking for evidence for them. If you want us to accept your ideas, find the evidence.

[Sriram]

Sriram,

Yes, and rightly so. Why do you suppose that is?

Because of the 'Two boxes syndrome'......that is why!

https://tsriramrao.wordpress.com/2018/03/03/the-two-boxes-syndrome/

[Stranger]

Because of the 'Two boxes syndrome'......that is why!

https://tsriramrao.wordpress.com/2018/03/03/the-two-boxes-syndrome/

No, it's got nothing to do with any of the rather childish ways in which you try to caricature those who disagree with you.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Sriram,

Because of the 'Two boxes syndrome'......that is why!

https://tsriramrao.wordpress.com/2018/03/03/the-two-boxes-syndrome/

You cling to that fiction as a drowning man clings to a concrete lifebelt. Actually it's because in science a hypothesis is a coherent and cogent proposed explanation for an observed phenomenon that could in principle at least be tested and verified.

“Soul” on the other hand isn’t coherent, isn’t cogent and has no means of testing even in principle. It’s just white noise. Woo. Epistemically equivalent to the Tooth Fairy. 

In other words, you’re making a category error.