Philosophy Now Forum

Is consciousness just a function of the brain, like digestion is a function of the digestive organs. When the digestive organs die, then there will be no more digestion. Similarly, when the brain dies, there will be no more consciousness. Therefore, there is no afterlife. What do you think?

pineal glands are happy

-Imp

Jori wrote: ↑Tue Jul 20, 2021 8:12 am Is consciousness just a function of the brain, like digestion is a function of the digestive organs. When the digestive organs die, then there will be no more digestion. Similarly, when the brain dies, there will be no more consciousness. Therefore, there is no afterlife. What do you think?

There is no after anything, or before anything. There is only here now present. The present doesn’t move.

Only the mind moves as and through conceptual language known, by consciousness itself. A movement within the stillness..like a movie on a screen.

Yes, consciousness is a brain function, the external world that appears to be “out there” is really in your brain…the “out there “ is literally like walking through your own brain, or mind map, whatever you want to call reality.

When the brain dies so does the consciousness go with it, like an ice cube melting in water. The brain is the ice cube and the consciousness is the water, metaphorically speaking, just illustrating the knowledge using conceptual models.


.

Jori wrote: ↑Tue Jul 20, 2021 8:12 am Is consciousness just a function of the brain, like digestion is a function of the digestive organs. When the digestive organs die, then there will be no more digestion. Similarly, when the brain dies, there will be no more consciousness. Therefore, there is no afterlife. What do you think?

Consciousness is a semantic error exploited by philosophers to drag people into pointless debates.
I haven't figured out whether Philosophers do this intentionally (in which case they are just assholes); or if they do this because they are ignorant (in which case I am happy to set them straight).

Trivially - it is an epistemic error. A manifestation of Meno's paradox.

I don't know what consciousness is!
If I don't know what consciousness is how could I possibly assert whether I am conscious or not?

Rather than asking "What is consciousness?" ask ... IF consciousness exists how would I know whether I am conscious or not?

What consciousness is, is a manner of speaking about ourselves. It's a description of what we seem to be able to do that no other entity on Earth, or the universe is capable of doing. Autonomy. THinking. Using/building tools. Using/inventing language.

That sort of stuff.

Jori wrote: ↑Tue Jul 20, 2021 8:12 am Is consciousness just a function of the brain, like digestion is a function of the digestive organs. When the digestive organs die, then there will be no more digestion. Similarly, when the brain dies, there will be no more consciousness. Therefore, there is no afterlife. What do you think?

No, consciousness is a state of affair, being aware. It is a property of mind.

Jori wrote: ↑Tue Jul 20, 2021 8:12 am Is consciousness just a function of the brain, like digestion is a function of the digestive organs. When the digestive organs die, then there will be no more digestion. Similarly, when the brain dies, there will be no more consciousness. Therefore, there is no afterlife. What do you think?

The brain is so humungously complex, that it's a reasonable guess that it will be generations before we really get a handle on everything it does, and exactly how conscious experience derives from it. That doesn't stop us making modest advances, but it is a warning against trying to defend sweeping claims.

Consider the partial analogy with "life". Science gave up on looking for a vital essence, and instead focused on particular characteristic capabilities of living things, and began understanding the enormously complex structures which makes each capability possible. Can we be sure that consciousness is a single thing, and not, like life, a number of different things that tend to happen at the same time? In my post viewtopic.php?f=10&t=33407 I've picked out one of the capabilities of consciousness and tried to describe what is special about it.

Consciousness is a reaction, and it is a full-bodied consciousness. The body is consciousness, and it was the body that created the brain/mind, not the other way around. In the statement, "Subject and Object stand or fall together" it is an elemental observation that there can be no true separation between the two, but a relation, within the context of a whole. The physical world is cause, other beings, being part of your physical reality are also cause to you the subject, the subject is that which reacts and the reaction is consciousness, the whole process of perception cognition and understanding are all reaction. The full readout of all reactions we call apparent reality, as opposed to ultimate reality, to which we have only limited access. The great elemental soup of ultimate reality is only partially available to our senses. Consciousness is reaction and the understandings thereof, for even the understandings, are themselves reactions.

popeye1945 wrote: ↑Sat Nov 13, 2021 2:49 pm Consciousness is a reaction, and it is a full-bodied consciousness. The body is consciousness, and it was the body that created the brain/mind, not the other way around. In the statement, "Subject and Object stand or fall together" it is an elemental observation that there can be no true separation between the two, but a relation, within the context of a whole. The physical world is cause, other beings, being part of your physical reality are also cause to you the subject, the subject is that which reacts and the reaction is consciousness, the whole process of perception cognition and understanding are all reaction. The full readout of all reactions we call apparent reality, as apposed to ultimate reality, to which we have only limited access. The great elemental soup of ultimate reality is only partially available to our senses.

So Popeye favours (ontic) materialism.

popeye1945 wrote: ↑Sat Nov 13, 2021 2:49 pm Consciousness is a reaction, and it is a full-bodied consciousness. The body is consciousness, and it was the body that created the brain/mind, not the other way around. In the statement, "Subject and Object stand or fall together" it is an elemental observation that there can be no true separation between the two, but a relation, within the context of a whole. The physical world is cause, other beings, being part of your physical reality are also cause to you the subject, the subject is that which reacts and the reaction is consciousness, the whole process of perception cognition and understanding are all reaction. The full readout of all reactions we call apparent reality, as apposed to ultimate reality, to which we have only limited access. The great elemental soup of ultimate reality is only partially available to our senses.

Mind is an irreducible substance. It cannot be created or destroyed.

bahman wrote: ↑Sat Nov 13, 2021 9:13 pm

popeye1945 wrote: ↑Sat Nov 13, 2021 2:49 pm Consciousness is a reaction, and it is a full-bodied consciousness. The body is consciousness, and it was the body that created the brain/mind, not the other way around. In the statement, "Subject and Object stand or fall together" it is an elemental observation that there can be no true separation between the two, but a relation, within the context of a whole. The physical world is cause, other beings, being part of your physical reality are also cause to you the subject, the subject is that which reacts and the reaction is consciousness, the whole process of perception cognition and understanding are all reaction. The full readout of all reactions we call apparent reality, as apposed to ultimate reality, to which we have only limited access. The great elemental soup of ultimate reality is only partially available to our senses.

Mind is an irreducible substance. It cannot be created or destroyed.

Evidently false

Bahman,

What makes you think consciousness cannot be destroyed? It seems painfully obvious that it is easily destroyed.

[quote=Belinda

So Popeye favours (ontic) materialism.
[/quote]

Hi Belinda, yes, I guess your right, I had to go look it up- - -lol!

bahman wrote: ↑Sat Nov 13, 2021 9:13 pm Mind is an irreducible substance. It cannot be created or destroyed.

Irreducibility is an epistemic problem, not an ontological one.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computati ... ducibility

Sculptor wrote: ↑Sat Nov 13, 2021 9:36 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Sat Nov 13, 2021 9:13 pm

popeye1945 wrote: ↑Sat Nov 13, 2021 2:49 pm Consciousness is a reaction, and it is a full-bodied consciousness. The body is consciousness, and it was the body that created the brain/mind, not the other way around. In the statement, "Subject and Object stand or fall together" it is an elemental observation that there can be no true separation between the two, but a relation, within the context of a whole. The physical world is cause, other beings, being part of your physical reality are also cause to you the subject, the subject is that which reacts and the reaction is consciousness, the whole process of perception cognition and understanding are all reaction. The full readout of all reactions we call apparent reality, as apposed to ultimate reality, to which we have only limited access. The great elemental soup of ultimate reality is only partially available to our senses.

Mind is an irreducible substance. It cannot be created or destroyed.

Evidently false

I have an argument for everything that I said. You materialist had non.

popeye1945 wrote: ↑Sun Nov 14, 2021 3:01 am Bahman,

What makes you think consciousness cannot be destroyed? It seems painfully obvious that it is easily destroyed.

I said mind and not consciousness. I have an argument for that. You can find it here.