Philosophy Now Forum

Posted: **Mon May 25, 2020 11:31 am**

bahman wrote: ↑Sun May 24, 2020 9:50 pm
Sculptor wrote: ↑Sun May 24, 2020 3:41 pm
bahman wrote: ↑Sat May 23, 2020 8:47 pm
I mean. I don't know what is wrong with my argument. Perhaps you could enlighten me.

What is the mind in your opinion? Where is its location in your opinion?
Why don't you ask yourself what you do with your mind?
You are not making any sense!

HAHA.

Posted: **Mon May 25, 2020 8:18 pm**

bahman wrote: ↑Sat May 16, 2020 9:50 pm In here we discuss that the reality is made of two things, minds and ideas. Minds are not due to/subjected to ideas. Therefore, they have no location.

I don't know if minds have no location. All I can say is that my mind never seems to be very far away from the rest of me.

Posted: **Wed May 27, 2020 7:55 pm**

Harbal wrote: ↑Mon May 25, 2020 8:18 pm
bahman wrote: ↑Sat May 16, 2020 9:50 pm In here we discuss that the reality is made of two things, minds and ideas. Minds are not due to/subjected to ideas. Therefore, they have no location.
I don't know if minds have no location. All I can say is that my mind never seems to be very far away from the rest of me.

That, where you are, is the position of experience.

Posted: **Thu Oct 01, 2020 6:16 am**

Before attempting to address such a subject, would not the occasional wise and thoughtful philosopher first define exactly what a mind is?

GL

Posted: **Thu Oct 01, 2020 8:52 am**

Greylorn Ell wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 6:16 am Before attempting to address such a subject, would not the occasional wise and thoughtful philosopher first define exactly what a mind is?

In one thread you insist upon solving Metaphysical problems with modern tools, and then you go and make exactly the same mistake as every philosopher ever.

Indeed, the occasional, wise and thoughtful philosopher would define exactly what mind is.

You are playing the "define it...!" game. The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.
Without paying any attention to the metaphysical problem: What is a definition, exactly?

Posted: **Thu Oct 01, 2020 6:26 pm**

Skepdick wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 8:52 am
Greylorn Ell wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 6:16 am Before attempting to address such a subject, would not the occasional wise and thoughtful philosopher first define exactly what a mind is?
In one thread you insist upon solving Metaphysical problems with modern tools, and then you go and make exactly the same mistake as every philosopher ever.

Indeed, the occasional, wise and thoughtful philosopher would define exactly what mind is.

You are playing the "define it...!" game. The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.
Without paying any attention to the metaphysical problem: What is a definition, exactly?

A good definition should be a function of the thing being defined.

I propose that a worthy definition of mind would be much like the definition of an automobile engine, and would include

A description of function.
Working principles, e.g. basic thermodynamics in the case of an engine
A list of essential components
At least some notion of how those components might be integrated,
Purpose, if applicable.

There's no point trying to get a useful definition of mind from either a psychologist or neurosurgeon.
GL

Posted: **Thu Oct 01, 2020 6:53 pm**

Greylorn Ell wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 6:26 pm A good definition should be a function of the thing being defined.

So, is it, or is not a function of the mind to synthesise definitions?

Posted: **Thu Oct 01, 2020 8:34 pm**

Greylorn Ell wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 6:16 am Before attempting to address such a subject, would not the occasional wise and thoughtful philosopher first define exactly what a mind is?

GL

Mind is an irreducible substance with the ability to experience, freely decide, and cause.

Posted: **Fri Oct 02, 2020 1:20 am**

Skepdick wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 6:53 pm
Greylorn Ell wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 6:26 pm A good definition should be a function of the thing being defined.
So, is it, or is not a function of the mind to synthesise definitions?

Yes! Unless you know of some other mechanism capable of doing so. The human mind is the only mechanism on the planet (except for whatever ancient aliens one believes in) capable of studying itself.

However, I do not think that "synthesizing" is likely to yield a useful conclusion. Old ideas about the nature of mind should be discarded, so we can start from scratch.

GL

Posted: **Fri Oct 02, 2020 1:21 am**

bahman wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 8:34 pm
Greylorn Ell wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 6:16 am Before attempting to address such a subject, would not the occasional wise and thoughtful philosopher first define exactly what a mind is?

GL
Mind is an irreducible substance with the ability to experience, freely decide, and cause.

And that substance is....???

Posted: **Sat Oct 03, 2020 9:42 am**

Skepdick wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 6:53 pm
Greylorn Ell wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 6:26 pm A good definition should be a function of the thing being defined.
So, is it, or is not a function of the mind to synthesise definitions?

It is. However, minds have yet to effectively define the nature of a mind.
GL

Posted: **Sat Oct 03, 2020 9:45 am**

Greylorn Ell wrote: ↑Fri Oct 02, 2020 1:21 am
bahman wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 8:34 pm
Greylorn Ell wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 6:16 am Before attempting to address such a subject, would not the occasional wise and thoughtful philosopher first define exactly what a mind is?

GL
Mind is an irreducible substance with the ability to experience, freely decide, and cause.
And that substance is....???

Why ask me? The sentence you quoted is not mine, unless I was horribly drunk and stupid one night.

Posted: **Sat Oct 03, 2020 3:38 pm**

Greylorn Ell wrote: ↑Fri Oct 02, 2020 1:21 am
bahman wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 8:34 pm
Greylorn Ell wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 6:16 am Before attempting to address such a subject, would not the occasional wise and thoughtful philosopher first define exactly what a mind is?

GL
Mind is an irreducible substance with the ability to experience, freely decide, and cause.
And that substance is....???

Foundation of any reality.

Posted: **Sat Oct 03, 2020 3:38 pm**

Greylorn Ell wrote: ↑Fri Oct 02, 2020 1:21 am
bahman wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 8:34 pm
Greylorn Ell wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 6:16 am Before attempting to address such a subject, would not the occasional wise and thoughtful philosopher first define exactly what a mind is?

GL
Mind is an irreducible substance with the ability to experience, freely decide, and cause.
And that substance is....???

Foundation of any reality.

Posted: **Sat Oct 03, 2020 4:00 pm**

Greylorn Ell wrote: ↑Sat Oct 03, 2020 9:42 am It is. However, minds have yet to effectively define the nature of a mind.
GL

How about minds are computers?

Pick your favourite model of computation...

Philosophy Now Forum

Mind has no location

Re: Mind has no location

Re: Mind has no location

Re: Mind has no location

Re: Mind has no location

Re: Mind has no location

Re: Mind has no location

Re: Mind has no location

Re: Mind has no location

Re: Mind has no location

Re: Mind has no location

Re: Mind has no location

Re: Mind has no location

Re: Mind has no location

Re: Mind has no location

Re: Mind has no location