News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Is there life after death? John Cleese discusses with panel of scientists. Parent comment

Re:Is there life after death? John Cleese discusses with pan... by fivea on Tuesday December 28, 2021 @06:12AM (#29712569)
> 'The mind is the brain' -- his very first premise is a controversial assumption, one that's a long way from being universally accepted. Without that assumption, the rest of his argument falls apart.

You wrote a rather lengthy post saying you disagree, mixed with an empty appeal to authority, but you provided no counterpoint or evidence or rationale or hypothesis refuting or contradicting the assertion that the mind is the brain.

If the mind is not the brain then what is it, then?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Is there life after death? John Cleese discusses with pan... by Winsaucerer on Tuesday December 28, 2021 @07:18AM (#29713033)
I would not have considered my post lengthy by any stretch. Sean Carroll offered nothing in that short video other than an assertion that the mind is the brain, and then some consequences that follow from that raw assertion. I have done no worse than him.

As for what the mind might be if it is not the brain, that is not a short discussion. As a pointer, take a look at various substance or property dualist views, or monist views such as that of George Berkeley.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Is there life after death? John Cleese discusses with pan... by MadcapJake on Tuesday December 28, 2021 @09:46AM (#29714240)
> If the mind is not the brain then what is it, then?

We have no external experience so we have no way to truly know the answer.

Could the brain be a conduit for some external interface for each mind?

Could the brain be an interface for some larger shared mind?

Could the brain be a vessel that carries the mind while the brain is alive?

Could the brain be a figment of the mind?

Just because science can't yet describe subjective post-death experiences doesn't mean they don't occur.

That being said, I'm personally in the rational constructivist camp wherein I think that our mental "scaffolding" obscures our ability to be objective when we try to reason about this. Though I am hopeful we find some answers someday!

[ Parent | on HN ]