How Can Molecules Think?

[Yaaten]

What makes you think there needs to be a "why"?

Why do you ask?

 

[Yaaten]

And we know that humans have a huge problem seeing agency (intent) where there is none. Learning to filter out false agency and meaningless "meaning" is important to a healthy mind and society.

Rain on your wedding day is not only not "ironic", but it is not a sign from anyone or thing. Rain is a weather phenomenon driven by the physics and chemistry of the atmosphere. It is not a sign from any being, karmic retribution, etc.

Au contraire, meaning is EVERYTHING! Why do you, for example, bother to engage us all here in these discussions? If life itself isn't meaningful, if there's no point to it all, if all we are is nothing more than chemistry and electricity in motion and we don't have souls, then why bother even getting out of bed in the morning? What's it all for?
I mean, I'm going to assume you don't believe in anything beyond what we have here on this Earth (i.e. no afterlife, reincarnation, God and so on), so all we have then is complex chemistry that somehow, by some miracle, became sentient and self-aware, but which is nonetheless doomed to oblivion, and it makes no difference whatsoever if tomorrow I choose to end it all. After all, that's where we'll all end up anyway, so why delay it? Why hang around?
NOTE: I am NOT recommending that anyone take their own life here. I'm just making a point.

 

[Yaaten]

Learning to filter out false agency and meaningless "meaning" is important to a healthy mind and society.

I'd rather not though. Meaning is what makes life worth living, for without it we are all lost. Besides, who are you to decide what a "healthy mind" entails? Are you a psychiatrist?

Rain on your wedding day is not only not "ironic", but it is not a sign from anyone or thing. Rain is a weather phenomenon driven by the physics and chemistry of the atmosphere. It is not a sign from any being, karmic retribution, etc.

Yes, it's the weather, but how do you know it isn't more than just that? Just asking.

 

[Yaaten]

And science wont give us the "why".

Exactly. It's very good at telling us how something works, but not why, which is actually the more interesting question that most people would prefer to have an answer to.

 

[Yaaten]

So how about you write about them and we can discuss them. To see if they're odd and unexplainable. Which is exactly the bone of contention as we stand.

I'm not sure I want to discuss something personal with a complete stranger over the internet. Although I'm new to social media, I've seen enough of the internet (ex. YouTube, blogs) to know that quite often when a person reveals something that to them is meaningful, others will usually come along and cynically dismiss it out of hand and try to explain it away.
In any case, what I do believe isn't primarily due to personal experiences, but the end result of attempts to figure out just what we're all doing here on Earth, and why it even matters.

 

[doubtingmerle]

I don't think that I can adequately explain why you are wrong about this, for it would require more space and time than I have at the moment, but there is one point that I would like to make, and that is in response to the paragraph that begins with the words, "Your brain does the thinking"... it is quite a leap of faith to suggest that one causes the other (that is, correlation does not equal causation; that is an assumption that doesn't logically follow).

Uh, before you explain why I am wrong, why not first look at what I had to say? Proverbs 18:13 says, "He that giveth answer before he heareth, It is folly and shame unto him. " Do you agree that it is wrong to give an answer before you hear it?

You are responding to the OP where I say,

As I wrote at Is There Life after Death, there is abundant evidence that the physical brain is indeed the thing that thinks. There is no soul inside running the show. The brain is in control. Your brain does the thinking.
​

So you are responding to a place where I tell you there is abundant evidence, and I give a link to a place where I have described that evidence in in detail. And how is it that you knew that this was simply a leap of faith for me? For that is the exact opposite of what I said. And how is it you knew I was wrong? Since you represent me as saying the opposite of what I said, my guess is you never read it. How can you give an answer without hearing it?

So, would it be too much to ask that you read what I say before declaring publicly that I am wrong and declaring publicly that my reasoning is the opposite to what I actually say?

 

[Yaaten]

Philosophical "debate" about the mind isn't going to figure out how it occurs. That's what was suggested and I rejected.

Maybe, maybe not. One thing is certain though, and that is that a method of enquiry that was only ever meant to be used in order to account for purely physical phenomena won't manage it.

 

[Yaaten]

Uh, before you explain why I am wrong, why not first look at what I had to say? Proverbs 18:13 says, "He that giveth answer before he heareth, It is folly and shame unto him. " Do you agree that it is wrong to give an answer before you hear it?

You are responding to the OP where I say,

As I wrote at Is There Life after Death, there is abundant evidence that the physical brain is indeed the thing that thinks. There is no soul inside running the show. The brain is in control. Your brain does the thinking.
​

So you are responding to a place where I tell you there is abundant evidence, and I give a link to a place where I have described that evidence in in detail. And how is it that you knew that this was simply a leap of faith for me? For that is the exact opposite of what I said. And how is it you knew I was wrong? Since you represent me as saying the opposite of what I said, my guess is you never read it. How can you give an answer without hearing it?

So, would it be too much to ask that you read what I say before declaring publicly that I am wrong and declaring publicly that my reasoning is the opposite to what I actually say?

I actually downloaded your linked article yesterday, so that I could go over it properly. I'll have another look at it before responding to this response, because it is of course possible I missed something.

 

[doubtingmerle]

I actually downloaded your linked article yesterday, so that I could go over it properly. I'll have another look at it before responding to this response, because it is of course possible I missed something.

For the record, in the section titled, "Have you got soul", I list 7 reasons why we know that it is the brain that thinks.

It is difficult to understand how someone can respond to a list of 7 reasons why I believe something, with the suggestion that I believe it simply as a leap of faith without reason. I have reasons for believing what I believe. If I am mistaken, please explain why I am mistaken, rather than pretending that I gave you no reasons.

 

[Yaaten]

...so scientism is a derogatory term used by those who are annoyed that they are expected to produce facts and evidence for their claims. You never do so it's a suitable fail safe you can use.

It can be used in a derogatory manner, but the word itself is more than just an attempt at an insult; it's a very real problem for many who seem to think they can just summarily dismiss a belief/concept/proposition simply because, by their standards, a certain level of evidence (which is rarely, if ever, laid out) hasn't been met.
It is also true that there are many people who practically worship what they believe to be "science". Science is a methodology, a tool, and nothing else. It is not materialism, scientific reductionism, cynicism, scepticism, or any other state of mind, belief system or ideology.

 

[Yaaten]

For the record, in the section titled, "Have you got soul", I list 7 reasons why we know that it is the brain that thinks.

Okay, I'll examine that section right now then.

 

[Yaaten]

From the linked article at the beginning of this thread (i.e. "Is There Life After Death?")

"They see the brain as something that gathers information from the senses and feeds it to the soul. There the soul stores memories, makes decisions, and drives the body. The soul issues commands to the brain, which then controls the muscles in the body. They say the soul is in charge and will continue to be in charge long after the body is gone."

Yeah, no, this is wrong. The soul is that which, in spite of all else about us changing over time (ex. our mind, physical body) provides us with our sense of continuity, perspective, and what makes me who I am. It is the 'I' in 'I think, therefore I am' (Descartes). It isn't the mind, it isn't something that "issues commands to the brain".

 

[Yaaten]

More from "Is There Life After Death?"

"First, there is amnesia. When elderly people suffer a stroke, or when trauma occurs to the brain, patients often lose the ability to remember things that happen after that tragic event. Now why does this happen? The thinker lost an important mental function–the ability to remember new things. But the soul has not been damaged. The brain was damaged. Somehow damage to the brain causes that person to lose the ability to efficiently store new memories. Why would damage to the brain affect the functioning of the soul?"

Okay, look, you clearly have gone off the rails here. You began with a faulty belief that the soul was somehow equivalent to the mind, and went from there, basing everything after this upon that misconception.
Yes, people suffer from amnesia and all sorts of other ailments of the mind (or 'brain', if you prefer, and are like Daniel Dennett who seriously thinks we don't have minds), but even someone with schizophrenia or senility is still basically the same person underneath. Take away the problem, and they'd return to their clear, lucid self.
Sure, brains get damaged, and then the person in question has difficulty understanding or remembering something, but that does not change who they fundamentally are.

 

[doubtingmerle]

If life itself isn't meaningful, if there's no point to it all, if all we are is nothing more than chemistry and electricity in motion and we don't have souls, then why bother even getting out of bed in the morning? What's it all for?

I bother to get up because it matters to me. My life has meaning because I choose to give it meaning.

 

[Yaaten]

More from "Is There Life After Death?"

"You might argue that the brain stopped giving the soul new data, so the soul had nothing to remember. But that is clearly not what is going on here. For the essence of the person is still communicating with us. That person sees us, recognizes us, and communicates. The mind’s senses are still working. The mind is still able to communicate and observe.
But the person forgets about the communication. Why? The brain is damaged. And this damage prevents the mind from storing new memories efficiently. So, it is the brain that is remembering. When the brain is affected, the mind is affected."

Okay, most of us know about how damage to the brain will result in issues like memory loss, but what does any of what's within the above paragraph have to do with the soul? Your understanding of the concept is horribly flawed, it is false, for you seem to believe it has something to do with how the mind works, and that, in turn, is a function of the brain and ergo the soul isn't real, only the brain is.

"Second, when conditions prevent a brain from developing properly, the personality does not reach maturity. If the soul is distinct from the brain, how can this happen? Why wouldn’t the soul go on to maturity?"

Simply because the mind is not the soul.

"Third, if the brain slows down and goes to sleep at night, the soul also sleeps. Suppose your soul is something different from the brain. Why does the soul go to sleep when the brain sleeps? Why can’t it just keep on being your soul, even though the brain goes to sleep and has stopped giving it input from the world? Why isn’t your soul still awake? It doesn’t work that way. When the brain is affected, the mind is affected."

Seriously? The soul sleeps at night because the brain is asleep? There is just SO much that is wrong with that single sentence alone. I mean, don't you dream when you're asleep? And yes, our "soul is something different from the brain"!

 

[Yaaten]

I bother to get up because it matters to me. My life has meaning because I choose to give it meaning.

But if life is inherently meaningless, aren't you just deluding yourself?

 

[AV1611VET]

.

 

[doubtingmerle]

Yeah, no, this is wrong. The soul is that which, in spite of all else about us changing over time (ex. our mind, physical body) provides us with our sense of continuity, perspective, and what makes me who I am. It is the 'I' in 'I think, therefore I am' (Descartes). It isn't the mind,

Wait, what? Your soul is the "I" that thinks, but it is not your mind?

So, not only do you not think with your brain, but you don't think with your mind? You think with something that is not your mind?

Weird.

it isn't something that "issues commands to the brain".

You wrote a post. What is it that directed the muscles in your fingers to type the message? Most of us think it is the brain that controls those muscles. What do you think did it?

And what told the brain to move the muscles in such a way that you typed the words you wanted to write? If the soul is the "I" that thinks, then surely the soul must have commanded the brain to direct the hands to write what they wrote. If it wasn't your soul, then what commanded your brain to guide your hands to do that?

 

[doubtingmerle]

But if life is inherently meaningless, aren't you just deluding yourself?

No.

 

[Yaaten]

Philosophers are to the right of the mathematicians in that cartoon.