Philosophy Now Forum

How does a typical mind look like? Can we give a list of a range of typical aspects about the mind? Please offer your opinion.

EDIT: My interests may be better summarized as asking people what they figure their minds to be like

EDIT2: I desire to get inspiration for how I shall describe an actual mind in words, thinking about its practical features and not its faculties. Practical features are actual thoughts, actual emotions, given context and magnitude.

A list of aspects of the mind, typical... or otherwise ?
First thought: 'It's all in the mind'
Then a google to see what is out there on 'Aspects of the Mind':
Found 5 here - http://www.bikramyogarichardson.com/aspects.shtml

Faith, Self-control, Determination, Concentration, and Patience

My thoughts?
Are these apparently positive features, really distinctive or typical of a human mind...

Is this what you had in mind ?

So, following on from what I wrote - it seems that my 'mind' offered up an immediate reaction - then a thought pulsed through - then curiosity - a quick survey - superficial not deep - finally, an attempt to respond. Then an analysis of that !
Pick your adjective...and perhaps you can see that a typical mind is as typical as a body...

I was thinking more in the direction of permanent faculties. I'm unsure whether patience is really an attribute of the mind or if it's not simply a modification of those attributes that are already there (modifying things to take longer).

I'm thinking more in the direction of kinds of passions, kinds of emotions, kinds of thoughts, and so forth...

OK, not my opinion as asked for, but an 'offering' re permanent faculties ?
http://www.fbrt.org.uk/pages/essays/ess ... lties.html

3 main faculties:
Memory, imagination, reason.
related to:
Wisdom and knowledge
Divinity and philosophy
Bacon associates the three faculties of the mind with what he refers to as the three parts of human learning: history, poetry and philosophy. These three build the three-sided tetrahedral 'Pyramid of Philosophy', with history forming the base, philosophy the superstructure, and poetry the 'ladder' by which the mind is uplifted from earth to heaven so as to grasp the higher laws. The three sides relate to the three 'Worlds' - Natural, Human and Divine - that are the subject of enquiry.
For knowledges are as pyramids, whereof History is the basis. So of Natural Philosophy, the basis is Natural History; the stage next the basis is Physique [Physics]; the stage next the vertical point [apex] is Metaphysique. As for the vertical point, opus quod operatur Deus à principio usque ad finem ['the work that God maketh from the beginning to the end' - Eccles. 3:11.], the Summary Law of Nature, we know not whether man's enquiry can attain unto it.
Francis Bacon, Advancement of Learning (1605), Bk II.
Complementing the Pyramid of Philosophy is the 'Pyramid of Divinity'. In this case the three parts of human learning are history, poetry and divinity, where history is the history of the 'church' (or religion in a general sense) and prophecy, poetry is parabolic (i.e. parables) and divinity is holy doctrine or precept, divinely inspired and revealed. Like the Pyramid of Philosophy, the Pyramid of Divinity has three sides relating to the three 'Worlds'.
The two Pyramids form the temple of the mind or soul, otherwise known in tradition as Solomon's Temple. They can be understood as analogous to the twin 'Great Pillars' that stand at the entrance to Solomon's Temple, with the Pillars themselves acting as a guide to understanding the Pyramids.
I am not raising a capitol or pyramid to the pride of man, but laying a foundation in the human understanding for a holy temple after the model of the world. That model therefore I follow. For whatever deserves to exist deserves also to be known, for knowledge is the image of existence; and things mean and splendid exist alike.Francis Bacon, Novum Organum, Bk I, Aph.120.
© Peter Dawkins, FBRT, 2006 FBRT home

A bit too much perhaps - would the final phrase answer the question of 'typicality' ?
Things mean and splendid exist alike

And this would move more in the direction of your 'kinds of passions...'
Are you trying to build a 'model' of the mind ?

I would've preferred information quite less than half a millennium old. And I was not thinking of natural philosophy per se but more modern science and modern thoughts on the issue.

I know your preferences !

So what you got so far ?

Does this kind of information add anything to the issue ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embodied_cognition

In philosophy, the embodied mind thesis holds that the nature of the human mind is largely determined by the form of the human body. Philosophers, psychologists, cognitive scientists, and artificial intelligence researchers who study embodied cognition and the embodied mind argue that all aspects of cognition are shaped by aspects of the body. The aspects of cognition include high level mental constructs (such as concepts and categories) and human performance on various cognitive tasks (such as reasoning or judgement). The aspects of the body include the motor system, the perceptual system, the body's interactions with the environment (situatedness) and the ontological assumptions about the world that are built into the body and the brain.
The embodied mind thesis is opposed to other theories of cognition such as cognitivism, computationalism, and Cartesian dualism.[1]

The idea has roots in Kant and 20th century continental philosophy (such as Merleau-Ponty). The modern version depends on insights drawn from recent research in psychology, linguistics, cognitive science, dynamical systems, artificial intelligence, robotics and neurobiology.

Neuroscientists Gerald Edelman, António Damásio and others have outlined the connection between the body, individual structures in the brain and aspects of the mind such as consciousness, emotion, self-awareness and will.
[my emphases]

Seems to chime with my earlier response to your Q 'What's a typical mind like ?'

Pick your adjective...and perhaps you can see that a typical mind is as typical as a body...

and now my mind flies to other things...
Ciao, ciao !

well yes, but Embodied cognition was kind-of an assumption. I don't figure profit in talking as if the mind is separate of the brain. My interests may be better summarized as asking people what they figure their minds to be like, hopefully that may clean up any attempt at playing necromancer with ancient bodies.

.


The mind hides reality from us with a shell of fear.




.

<<My interests may be better summarized as asking people what they figure their minds to be like>>

What a waste of time.

I couldn't had, because I hadn't thought of narrowing it down before your replies. Maybe the use of the word "aspect" brought out the wrong associations. Willpower may very well be an aspect of the mind, but I don't think it says much about the mind unless it's given magnitude and context.

I desire to get inspiration for how I shall describe an actual mind in words, thinking about its practical features and not its faculties. Practical features are actual thoughts, actual emotions, given context and magnitude.

But I'll be editing my original post to note it for people.

marjoramblues wrote:<<My interests may be better summarized as asking people what they figure their minds to be like>>

What a waste of time.

If I've made you angry it was not my intention and I'm sorry. I have a limit at any point of time about what I can foresee.

My reply was ambiguous.
I am not angry.

So inspire us with your own example? What do you figure your mind to be like?
Or is it a case of show ( by type of response) and not tell ( as in give specifics) ?
Do you think you can tell the truth of what is written ?
Or how thoughts are conveyed ?

Is it possible to perceive one's self?

I have no idea what my mind is like.

I do have a certain perception of yours, VOT, and have noticed it has changed gradually over time here.