• Yohan
    679
    Brain function is clearly not more fundamental than brain. For brain function, you need a brain. The opposite is not true.Kenosha Kid
    I think this is your argument, which kind of reads in a confusing way...:
    1. The mind is a brain function.
    2. For a brain function you need a brain
    3. However a brain doesn't require a brain function to exist. (not relevant)
    4. Therefor the mind requires a brain.

    Can you see what is wrong with this argument? If you want to convince anybody of your argument, you need to start with a premise that is self evident or easily testable so that everyone will agree at the starting point. Otherwise you have offered a valid argument but not a sound one.
  • Kenosha Kid
    3.2k
    Can you see what is wrong with this argument?Yohan

    Nope, seems pretty solid. If you accept premises 1 and 2, 4 follows. 1 is, as I say, the neuroscientific definition of the mind. 2 is self-evident.
  • Yohan
    679
    An acceptable definition must be clear, plausible, and internally consistent. It must also either be in correspondence with our intuitions or be supported by arguments that show our intuitions are mistaken.
    source https://aphilosopher.drmcl.com/2008/01/04/argument-by-definition/
  • Kenosha Kid
    3.2k
    Again, ticks all the boxes for me. I think you're confusing ' an argument that yields a conclusion I dislike' with 'an invalid argument'.
  • Harry Hindu
    4.9k
    You don't read people's posts, do you? Yohan's post said nothing about disliking your argument. You also keep avoiding difficult questions.

    1. The mind is a brain function.
    2. For a brain function you need a brain
    3. However a brain doesn't require a brain function to exist. (not relevant)
    4. Therefor the mind requires a brain.
    Yohan

    Nope, seems pretty solid. If you accept premises 1 and 2, 4 follows. 1 is, as I say, the neuroscientific definition of the mind. 2 is self-evident.Kenosha Kid

    from a physicalist point if view, we do not have brain function *and* mind; they're the same thing.Kenosha Kid
    If mind and brain are one and the same then how can you say that you need one to have the other? Is the mind an effect of the brain? If so, then the mind and brain are not the same thing.
  • Kenosha Kid
    3.2k
    from a physicalist point if view, we do not have brain function *and* mind; they're the same thing.
    — Kenosha Kid
    If mind and brain are one and the same then how can you say that you need one to have the other?
    Harry Hindu

    I'm looking for the phrase... Oh yes!

    You don't read people's posts, do you?Harry Hindu
12345Next
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.