logic and mind

[davidsmith73]

The operations of logic are mental operations. Physical things are composed of logical behavior so must also be of the mind.

Do we all agree with the first sentence ?

 

[triadboy]

Physical things are composed of logical behavior so must also be of the mind.

Do we all agree with the first sentence ?

The 1st sentence I understood. The 2nd one I didn't.

 

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Nope. The names given to logical operations are mental. The operations themselves can happen physically.

~~ Paul

 

[Mercutio]

I disagree vehemently with the first sentence, and find the second meaningless.

 

[DangerousBeliefs]

The operations of logic are operations that can occur in the brain (although other physical devices can also perform logical operations). If we damage the brain, it is possible to damage or change these operations.

How's that for a re-write?

 

[Dancing David]

The operations of logic are mental operations. Physical things are composed of logical behavior so must also be of the mind.

Do we all agree with the first sentence ?

I agree to "The operations of logic are some sort of mental operation."

But yeehaw! There are many things in the physical world which are totaly illogical. Gravity for one.

 

[PogoPedant]

Here I was thinking logic was a set of tools for describing things like relations and truths. Boy was I wrong.

So logical operations are the building blocks of physical things' behaviours? Is that what you're trying to say?

 

[davidsmith73]

I disagree vehemently with the first sentence, and find the second meaningless.

I often hear of the assertion that mathematics (and therefore logic) is a construct of the mind. If so, then we can perhaps resolve the problem of the apparent difference between the mental and physical realms. If the first sentence is correct then physical processes exist in the mental realm since they exist in the form of logical, mathematical relationships.

 

[Tricky]

I often hear of the assertion that mathematics (and therefore logic) is a construct of the mind.

Then someone has misspoken, or perhaps you misinterpreted. The things we call mathmatics, physical science are our understanding of the universe. But the universe, and math and physics exist whether or not we understand them. That is pretty evident in the fact they have existed far longer than we.

Logic is a tool for dealing with evidence, but it is not the evidence itself.

If so, then we can perhaps resolve the problem of the apparent difference between the mental and physical realms.

The boundary between the mental and physical realms becomes more tenuous every day, as we discover ever more about how our mental processes are the result of physical processes. "Happy" is in the mental realm, but it can be manipulated by "Prozac" which is in the physical realm.

If the first sentence is correct then physical processes exist in the mental realm since they exist in the form of logical, mathematical relationships.

But alas, the first sentence is completely wrong. We shouldn't mistake our model of the universe to actually be the universe. There is a succinct cliché for this realization: "Don't eat the menu."

 

[davidsmith73]

Then someone has misspoken, or perhaps you misinterpreted. The things we call mathmatics, physical science are our understanding of the universe. But the universe, and math and physics exist whether or not we understand them. That is pretty evident in the fact they have existed far longer than we.

If maths, logical relationships and the models of objective reality we build from them are the map then how can they simultaneously be the territory ?

I am raising the issue of where logic belongs - in the realm of the mind (which you may view as not existing in a real, objective sense) or in the realm of the objective physical universe.

Logic is a tool for dealing with evidence, but it is not the evidence itself.

My point is that the evidence you refer to above exists universaly in the form of observed logical relationships. Put crudely, the physical world is made of logic which we view to be a tool of the mind. Perhaps the physical world really is mental.

 

[Mercutio]

If maths, logical relationships and the models of objective reality we build from them are the map then how can they simultaneously be the territory ?

I am raising the issue of where logic belongs - in the realm of the mind (which you may view as not existing in a real, objective sense) or in the realm of the objective physical universe.



My point is that the evidence you refer to above exists universaly in the form of observed logical relationships. Put crudely, the physical world is made of logic which we view to be a tool of the mind. Perhaps the physical world really is mental.

I'm really trying, honest I am...but I did not understand a word of this. Perhaps you could start by defining what you mean by mind.

 

[Wrath of the Swarm]

Using Conway's Game of Life, we can construct a configuration of dots that acts as a Universal Turing Machine.

So how can this configuration be a computer if it's just data in a computer?

There is no difference between information and substance. The concepts are invalid dualities. You must free your understanding from the shackles of convention to reach the truth.

 

[davidsmith73]

I'm really trying, honest I am...but I did not understand a word of this. Perhaps you could start by defining what you mean by mind.

In this context, I am refering to things we regard as being of a mental nature rather than any concept of an individual entity called "mind". Indeed, I think we would agree that the common usage of the word "mind" as refering to an individual entity is mistaken. However, I'm also sure we would agree that the feeling of pain exists as a mental thing and can be indentified as having a different quality to a physical thing, regardless of our differing views on the objective nature of subjective experience. Another example would be any analytical mental operation. For that reason, I would place the rules of logic in the category of "mental" things since logic comprises a large part of analytic mental operations. Perhaps you would disagree with that placement and put the rules of logic firmly in the realm of objective reality. If so, I would like to see your reasoning.

Hope that helps!

 

[Tricky]

I'm also sure we would agree that the feeling of pain exists as a mental thing and can be indentified as having a different quality to a physical thing, regardless of our differing views on the objective nature of subjective experience.

I don't agree to this. I observe that the "feeling of pain" is simply our bodies engaging in physical and chemical reactions. The evidence for this is that you can block certain types of pain by the use of chemicals or by physically removing pathways.

The only case that can be presented that the mind is separate from the body is that "it feels like it is", and that case is purely philosophical.

While it is true that our understanding of how we perceive pain, thoughts, or any sensations, is poorly understood at this time, each step we make towards objectively understanding them is rooted firmly in the physical world. I expect this trend to continue.

 

[Mercutio]

Dang...how am I ever going to convince people of my genius, if Tricky gets there quicker and says it better? If I keep agreeing with him, I may have to stop spreading all those nasty rumours...

Anyway, I agree with what Tricky has just said, and was reminded of a part of a discussion on the "what is emergence of mind" thread. Several posters there found This site's tutorial to be a very helpful introduction to the radical behaviorist's position on "mind" and all things "mental". I warn you, though, that even though it is the most concise introduction I have ever seen, it is still quite a bit of a slog. Enjoy!

 

[Tricky]

Several posters there found This site's tutorial to be a very helpful introduction to the radical behaviorist's position on "mind" and all things "mental". I warn you, though, that even though it is the most concise introduction I have ever seen, it is still quite a bit of a slog. Enjoy!

Quite a slog indeed, but well worth it. I had no idea that I was such a radical!

Thanks, Merc.

 

[Dancing David]

I am raising the issue of where logic belongs - in the realm of the mind (which you may view as not existing in a real, objective sense) or in the realm of the objective physical universe.
Logic is soley a thought tool it has no meaning whatsoever in the material world.
It is also influenced by culture and personal belief.

The statement if p then q and it's correlary if Notp then Notq have no real correlates in the physical world.
My point is that the evidence you refer to above exists universaly in the form of observed logical relationships.

they may be systematic but they are not logical, gravitation and quantum jumps for example.
Put crudely, the physical world is made of logic which we view to be a tool of the mind. Perhaps the physical world really is mental.

Lack of cohesion in the chain of causation there, perhaps the underlying order is actualy chaotic.

 

[davidsmith73]

I don't agree to this. I observe that the "feeling of pain" is simply our bodies engaging in physical and chemical reactions. The evidence for this is that you can block certain types of pain by the use of chemicals or by physically removing pathways.

That's your view on the objective nature of subjective experience which can be discussed separately from the characteristics which primarily lead us to identify and label subjective (mental) versus objective (physical) things. In other words, regardless of whether you think the "feeling of pain" is simply a physical process, you have made it necessary to distinguish to two in order for your argument to make sense. You have the "feeling of pain" and you have the physical process. They must have different qualities in order for them to be distinguished.

The only case that can be presented that the mind is separate from the body is that "it feels like it is", and that case is purely philosophical.

I am not trying to say that "the mind is separate from the body". I am trying to argue that the rules of logic and hence mathematics, which are the fundamental routes to knowledge of physical processes, can be more appropriately placed in the same category as the "feeling of pain", i.e., mental. In this way, physical processes become part of the mental world since they exist in the form of observed logical relationships.

While it is true that our understanding of how we perceive pain, thoughts, or any sensations, is poorly understood at this time, each step we make towards objectively understanding them is rooted firmly in the physical world. I expect this trend to continue.

I agree with this. However, I am arguing what the physical world and objective understanding really is.

 

[davidsmith73]

they may be systematic but they are not logical, gravitation and quantum jumps for example.

Do not gravitation and quantum jumps obey mathematical relationships ?

 

[Tricky]

That's your view on the objective nature of subjective experience which can be discussed separately from the characteristics which primarily lead us to identify and label subjective (mental) versus objective (physical) things. In other words, regardless of whether you think the "feeling of pain" is simply a physical process, you have made it necessary to distinguish to two in order for your argument to make sense. You have the "feeling of pain" and you have the physical process. They must have different qualities in order for them to be distinguished.

I disagree. Of course they have different qualities, as do all unidentical things, but that does not mean that the "feeling of pain" is anything other than a physical process. While the "feeling of pain" is a private (i.e. unobservable to others, hence subjective) phenomenon, it can still be physical. Suppose, though, that there were a way to detect and broadcast the exact physical actions of nerves and the brain to others. They could then exerience the exact same "feeling of pain", and it would no longer be subjective.

I am not trying to say that "the mind is separate from the body".

Actually, you are. If you go through that tutorial that Mercutio linked, you'll find that the simple statement that there is a "mental" realm must indicate that it is in some way separate from the body, or physical realm. (I highly recommend that link.)

I am trying to argue that the rules of logic and hence mathematics, which are the fundamental routes to knowledge of physical processes, can be more appropriately placed in the same category as the "feeling of pain", i.e., mental.

Logic and mathmatics are tools designed by our very physical brains for understanding the world around us. They do not exist separately.

Here's a story told to me by a friend of mine. (Yeah, I know, anecdotal evidence ):

He had a friend who was mentally ill, experiencing extreme paranoia. This was back in the 1960's and medicine was much more crude then, but the psychiatrist recommended a lobotomy. The operation was quite successful, by 1960's standards. Her feelings of paranoia mostly went away. Unfortunately, so did her logic. Once, she nearly burnt her house down because the sight of her stove on fire did not make her fearful (they had excised that part of the brain.) So if this story is true (and I have no reason to doubt it because my friend had nothing to gain by lying), even logic is a physical phenomen which can be affected and even eliminated by physical means.

I agree with this. However, I am arguing what the physical world and objective understanding really is.

Yes, I understand. My contention is that everything could be, in principle, objective. I am sure we will never get there, but we keep making strides in that direction. The boundary between physical and mental grows more tenuous every day.