The Mind is a Physical Thing

[Veritas Aequitas]

Lately there were controversies on whether the mind is physical or not.

What is Mind?

• The mind is the set of faculties including cognitive aspects such as consciousness, imagination, perception, thinking, intelligence, judgement, language and memory, as well as noncognitive aspects such as emotion and instinct. Under the scientific physicalist interpretation, the mind is produced at least in part by the brain.
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mind

The mind is physical within Physicalism & Property Dualism.

• Property dualism describes a category of positions in the philosophy of mind which hold that, although the world is composed of just one kind of substance—the physical kind—there exist two distinct kinds of properties: physical properties and mental properties. In other words, it is the view that non-physical, mental properties (such as beliefs, desires and emotions) exist in, or naturally supervene upon, certain physical -substances (namely brains).
  -wiki

The 'physical' mind is studied via empirical evidence in the following subjects;

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mind#Scientific_study
  8.0 Scientific study
  8.1 Neuroscience
  8.2 Cognitive Science
  8.3 Psychology
  
  All the above are of the scientific FSK, thus rely on empirical evidence to infer their conclusions with reference to the real mind [as defined] or non-physical things in existence.

However confusions arise in the following scenario;

What empirical evidence do you have for the existence of any so-called non-physical or abstract thing? [in reference to the mind]

What is interpreted by Peter Holmes as 'mind' is of Cartesian Dualism which postulates the mind is independent of the body, as a non-physical entity, spirit and the likes.

The confusion arise when PH imposed his bastardized definition of mind [Cartesian Dualism] and its counters
onto my definition of 'what is mind' as above.

I have already proven the mind of Cartesian Dualism leading to the existence of an independent soul and God are illusory and an impossibility to be real.
God is an Impossibility
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=24704


The physical mind is synonymous with the physical brain but there is a slight difference as presented in Property Dualism in terms of effective in communication and consequential utilities.

Note in the following statements when there is a serious issue;
1. What is wrong with your mind?
2. What is wrong with your brain?

If there is something wrong with the mind, it is very practical and effective to first direct the question in 1 to a psychiatrists or psychologists and the likes. Subsequently the problems with the mind may be traced to the physical parts of the brain.

If there is something wrong with the brain, e.g. brain damage, brain tumors, etc. then the problem will first be referred to be brain specialist who specializes in the physical parts of the brain. At times, the physical damage of the brain may also be caused by the mind, e.g. as in psychosomatic cases.

If the difference between the physical brain and physical-mental mind is not useful at all, then a brain-surgeon can also be labelled a psychiatrist.

The differentiation between the physical mind and the physical brain will also enable effective improvements associated with the different terms.

From another perspective and for effective sake, the mind is a physical things which is part and parcel of the brain.

[Age]

Lately there were controversies on whether the mind is physical or not.

What is Mind?

• The mind is the set of faculties including cognitive aspects such as consciousness, imagination, perception, thinking, intelligence, judgement, language and memory, as well as noncognitive aspects such as emotion and instinct. Under the scientific physicalist interpretation, the mind is produced at least in part by the brain.
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mind

The mind is physical within Physicalism & Property Dualism.

• Property dualism describes a category of positions in the philosophy of mind which hold that, although the world is composed of just one kind of substance—the physical kind—there exist two distinct kinds of properties: physical properties and mental properties. In other words, it is the view that non-physical, mental properties (such as beliefs, desires and emotions) exist in, or naturally supervene upon, certain physical -substances (namely brains).
  -wiki

The 'physical' mind is studied via empirical evidence in the following subjects;

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mind#Scientific_study
  8.0 Scientific study
  8.1 Neuroscience
  8.2 Cognitive Science
  8.3 Psychology
  
  All the above are of the scientific FSK, thus rely on empirical evidence to infer their conclusions with reference to the real mind [as defined] or non-physical things in existence.

However confusions arise in the following scenario;

What empirical evidence do you have for the existence of any so-called non-physical or abstract thing? [in reference to the mind]

What is interpreted by Peter Holmes as 'mind' is of Cartesian Dualism which postulates the mind is independent of the body, as a non-physical entity, spirit and the likes.

The confusion arise when PH imposed his bastardized definition of mind [Cartesian Dualism] and its counters
onto my definition of 'what is mind' as above.

I have already proven the mind of Cartesian Dualism leading to the existence of an independent soul and God are illusory and an impossibility to be real.
God is an Impossibility
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=24704

When are you going to FULLY realize and accept that what one can "prove" to their own self, like you do here, is NOT necessarily what is actually 'proven' true to "others", nor is even in relation to what is actually True and REAL, Itself, anyway?

The physical mind is synonymous with the physical brain but there is a slight difference as presented in Property Dualism in terms of effective in communication and consequential utilities.

Note in the following statements when there is a serious issue;
1. What is wrong with your mind?
2. What is wrong with your brain?

If there is something wrong with the mind, it is very practical and effective to first direct the question in 1 to a psychiatrists or psychologists and the likes. Subsequently the problems with the mind may be traced to the physical parts of the brain.

If there is something wrong with the brain, e.g. brain damage, brain tumors, etc. then the problem will first be referred to be brain specialist who specializes in the physical parts of the brain. At times, the physical damage of the brain may also be caused by the mind, e.g. as in psychosomatic cases.

If the difference between the physical brain and physical-mental mind is not useful at all, then a brain-surgeon can also be labelled a psychiatrist.

The differentiation between the physical mind and the physical brain will also enable effective improvements associated with the different terms.

From another perspective and for effective sake, the mind is a physical things which is part and parcel of the brain.

[Walker]

Lately there were controversies on whether the mind is physical or not.

E-prime thoughts from a folksy pov:

I find it interesting, and you likely do too, that the world quickly manipulates some definitions, but not others. A common-denominator interpretation of human sensory perception shapes universal, acceptable notions and definitions of physicality, but this leaves huge swaths of human experience unexplained, so the unexplained gets the label of non-physical, and because everyone knows of this realm, it receives quasi-scientific mind studies.

Folks call rioting, peaceful demonstrations. Crude expulsions become humour. A slap becomes love. War becomes peace and peace has a knack of becoming war. Pain becomes pleasure. Ignorance becomes wisdom and flag-burning becomes patriotism. The house that exists in mind becomes so real that it transforms into other realms ... written and spoken words, pencil sketches, brick and mortar. It can become so real that identity becomes subsumed, and transformed into an agent that transforms the house into many forms of physicality.

Just as the above definitions change, change the definition of physical. Call the non-physical, physical, and believe it for the purposes of understanding. Observe how explanations of this and that, in memory and when transforming from thought realm to dust realm, change as a consequence. Don’t worry. It won’t hurt, at first.

[Impenitent]

lobotomies work...

-Imp

[Eodnhoj7]

Lately there were controversies on whether the mind is physical or not.

What is Mind?

• The mind is the set of faculties including cognitive aspects such as consciousness, imagination, perception, thinking, intelligence, judgement, language and memory, as well as noncognitive aspects such as emotion and instinct. Under the scientific physicalist interpretation, the mind is produced at least in part by the brain.
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mind

The mind is physical within Physicalism & Property Dualism.

• Property dualism describes a category of positions in the philosophy of mind which hold that, although the world is composed of just one kind of substance—the physical kind—there exist two distinct kinds of properties: physical properties and mental properties. In other words, it is the view that non-physical, mental properties (such as beliefs, desires and emotions) exist in, or naturally supervene upon, certain physical -substances (namely brains).
  -wiki

The 'physical' mind is studied via empirical evidence in the following subjects;

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mind#Scientific_study
  8.0 Scientific study
  8.1 Neuroscience
  8.2 Cognitive Science
  8.3 Psychology
  
  All the above are of the scientific FSK, thus rely on empirical evidence to infer their conclusions with reference to the real mind [as defined] or non-physical things in existence.

However confusions arise in the following scenario;

What empirical evidence do you have for the existence of any so-called non-physical or abstract thing? [in reference to the mind]

What is interpreted by Peter Holmes as 'mind' is of Cartesian Dualism which postulates the mind is independent of the body, as a non-physical entity, spirit and the likes.

The confusion arise when PH imposed his bastardized definition of mind [Cartesian Dualism] and its counters
onto my definition of 'what is mind' as above.

I have already proven the mind of Cartesian Dualism leading to the existence of an independent soul and God are illusory and an impossibility to be real.
God is an Impossibility
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=24704


The physical mind is synonymous with the physical brain but there is a slight difference as presented in Property Dualism in terms of effective in communication and consequential utilities.

Note in the following statements when there is a serious issue;
1. What is wrong with your mind?
2. What is wrong with your brain?

If there is something wrong with the mind, it is very practical and effective to first direct the question in 1 to a psychiatrists or psychologists and the likes. Subsequently the problems with the mind may be traced to the physical parts of the brain.

If there is something wrong with the brain, e.g. brain damage, brain tumors, etc. then the problem will first be referred to be brain specialist who specializes in the physical parts of the brain. At times, the physical damage of the brain may also be caused by the mind, e.g. as in psychosomatic cases.

If the difference between the physical brain and physical-mental mind is not useful at all, then a brain-surgeon can also be labelled a psychiatrist.

The differentiation between the physical mind and the physical brain will also enable effective improvements associated with the different terms.

From another perspective and for effective sake, the mind is a physical things which is part and parcel of the brain.

The mind observing the mind follows a cyclical pattern. This cyclical pattern is not physical.

[Walker]

lobotomies work...

-Imp

Surgery, chemical, propaganda.

[commonsense]

Of course it’s a physical thing. When it’s blowing you can feel it on your face. When it’s calm you can feel it’s calmness.

[FlashDangerpants]

Is a society a physical thing?
Is an economy a physical thing?

If the answers are no, then what sense does it make to call a quite loose term for a bunch of things such as perception and understanding but which might or might not be considered to include memory for instance as a particular physical thing at all?

If the answers are yes, then sure, call the mind a physical thing if you like, it just has the consequence that the term "physical thing" just became too fuzzy to serve much of a purpose.

[Walker]

Only the physical can kill you.
Bad news can kill you.
Bad news is a thought.
Therefore, bad news is physical.

Insert "society," or "economy," in place of "bad news." Better yet, insert gubberment.


Is the punctuation correct?

[Veritas Aequitas]

Is a society a physical thing?
Is an economy a physical thing?

If the answers are no, then what sense does it make to call a quite loose term for a bunch of things such as perception and understanding but which might or might not be considered to include memory for instance as a particular physical thing at all?

If the answers are yes, then sure, call the mind a physical thing if you like, it just has the consequence that the term "physical thing" just became too fuzzy to serve much of a purpose.

What is Physical?

The general idea is that the nature of the actual world (i.e. the universe and everything in it) conforms to a certain condition, the condition of being physical.
Of course, physicalists don't deny that the world might contain many items that at first glance don't seem physical — items of a biological, or psychological, or moral, or social nature.
But they insist nevertheless that at the end of the day such items are either physical or supervene on the physical.
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/physicalism/

Classifying the mind as "physical" is the first line of defense to eliminate the possibility there is a soul that survives physical death and its linkage to an illusory God.
In this sense, the mind is also empirical.

Labelling the mind 'physical' is not a contentious issue in terms of realism versus anti-realism, since in this case 'what is mind' falls within the anti-realism category, i.e. it cannot be independent of human conditions.

As I had stated, recognizing the term 'mind' as the mental aspect of the human brain had been very beneficial to humanity as used psychology, psychiatry, and others.
Noted this point in Rorty's Mirror of Nature;

I argue that when extended in a certain way they let us see truth as, in James's phrase, "what it is better for us to believe," rather than as "the accurate representation of reality."
Or, to put the point less provocatively, they show us that the notion of "accurate representation" is simply an automatic and empty compliment which we pay to those beliefs which are successful in helping us do what we want to do.
-page 10

I believe there are other definitions of "mind" which ultimately must be empirical, e.g. where mind is one with the body.

But obviously the above must be overseen and encompassed by serious open ended critical philosophy.

'Society' and 'economy' are not physical things but rather they are mental concepts represented by neural processes entangling with other physical things, humans, materials, etc.

[Terrapin Station]

Is a society a physical thing?
Is an economy a physical thing?

Yes to both (although noting that I'm basically ignoring "thing"--I'm not sure why we'd need to add that term).

If the answers are yes, then sure, call the mind a physical thing if you like, it just has the consequence that the term "physical thing" just became too fuzzy to serve much of a purpose.

Physicality is simply matter in dynamic relations. Societies, economies, and minds are all matter in dynamic relations. So are rocks and shoes and stars and automobiles.

[commonsense]

Only the physical can kill you.
Bad news can kill you.
Bad news is a thought.
Therefore, bad news is physical.

Insert "society," or "economy," in place of "bad news." Better yet, insert gubberment.


Is the punctuation correct?

Intriguing, very intriguing. But I wonder what it is that actually kills in the case of bad news. Is there something physical that leads to a fatal physical heart attack?

Punctuation is correct except that “gubberment” should be in quotes.

[Walker]

Intriguing, very intriguing. But I wonder what it is that actually kills in the case of bad news. Is there something physical that leads to a fatal physical heart attack?

Punctuation is correct except that “gubberment” should be in quotes.

That could very likely be a nearby link in the chain of causation, as could a stroke.

“It’s a, it’s a, it’s a …”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HIyvl7EAJ7s

It’s a petard.

[bahman]

Lately there were controversies on whether the mind is physical or not.

What is Mind?

• The mind is the set of faculties including cognitive aspects such as consciousness, imagination, perception, thinking, intelligence, judgement, language and memory, as well as noncognitive aspects such as emotion and instinct. Under the scientific physicalist interpretation, the mind is produced at least in part by the brain.
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mind

These are mental activities, activities of mind rather than mind itself.

The mind is physical within Physicalism & Property Dualism.

• Property dualism describes a category of positions in the philosophy of mind which hold that, although the world is composed of just one kind of substance—the physical kind—there exist two distinct kinds of properties: physical properties and mental properties. In other words, it is the view that non-physical, mental properties (such as beliefs, desires and emotions) exist in, or naturally supervene upon, certain physical -substances (namely brains).
  -wiki

A property is not a thing that can experience, decide and cause.

The 'physical' mind is studied via empirical evidence in the following subjects;

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mind#Scientific_study
  8.0 Scientific study
  8.1 Neuroscience
  8.2 Cognitive Science
  8.3 Psychology
  
  All the above are of the scientific FSK, thus rely on empirical evidence to infer their conclusions with reference to the real mind [as defined] or non-physical things in existence.

You cannot investigate the mind but just observes its activities.

However confusions arise in the following scenario;

What empirical evidence do you have for the existence of any so-called non-physical or abstract thing? [in reference to the mind]

What is interpreted by Peter Holmes as 'mind' is of Cartesian Dualism which postulates the mind is independent of the body, as a non-physical entity, spirit and the likes.

The confusion arise when PH imposed his bastardized definition of mind [Cartesian Dualism] and its counters
onto my definition of 'what is mind' as above.

I have already proven the mind of Cartesian Dualism leading to the existence of an independent soul and God are illusory and an impossibility to be real.
God is an Impossibility
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=24704

Change exists. The mind is needed for any change. Therefore, the mind exists.

Mind given the Cartesian Dualism is a fundamental aspect of reality.

The physical mind is synonymous with the physical brain but there is a slight difference as presented in Property Dualism in terms of effective in communication and consequential utilities.

Note in the following statements when there is a serious issue;
1. What is wrong with your mind?
2. What is wrong with your brain?

If there is something wrong with the mind, it is very practical and effective to first direct the question in 1 to a psychiatrists or psychologists and the likes. Subsequently the problems with the mind may be traced to the physical parts of the brain.

So, there is a set of changes that you cannot possibly have without mind. Yet, you argue that there is a set of changes in properties of physical which they are synced to appear properly and in order. What guarantees such an order?

If there is something wrong with the brain, e.g. brain damage, brain tumors, etc. then the problem will first be referred to be brain specialist who specializes in the physical parts of the brain. At times, the physical damage of the brain may also be caused by the mind, e.g. as in psychosomatic cases.

If the difference between the physical brain and physical-mental mind is not useful at all, then a brain-surgeon can also be labelled a psychiatrist.

The differentiation between the physical mind and the physical brain will also enable effective improvements associated with the different terms.

From another perspective and for effective sake, the mind is a physical things which is part and parcel of the brain.

You are again mixing things. Mental activities are different from the mind.

[Veritas Aequitas]

Lately there were controversies on whether the mind is physical or not.

What is Mind?

• The mind is the set of faculties including cognitive aspects such as consciousness, imagination, perception, thinking, intelligence, judgement, language and memory, as well as noncognitive aspects such as emotion and instinct. Under the scientific physicalist interpretation, the mind is produced at least in part by the brain.
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mind

These are mental activities, activities of mind rather than mind itself.

As I had stated the above definition of "mind" is recognized for the practical positives that can be generated for the individuals and humanity from within the various framework and system of knowledge [FSK] or reality [FSR], e.g. listed below;
8.0 Scientific study, 8.1 Neuroscience, 8.2 Cognitive Science, 8.3 Psychology, philosophy, Academic, intelligences, etc.
Do you deny the existence of the above practical positives?

What positive benefits do you have for the individual and humanity for your definition of what is mind?
I can tell you, the only benefit for your definition of what is mind is merely a very selfish psychological benefit as a consonance to relieve the pains of cognitive dissonance.


Just as it is crazy to insist to define a symphony-orchestra by its individual instruments every time it is referred to, it would be crazy to describe every mental activities which we collectively and efficiently called the 'mind'.

The 'physical' mind is studied via empirical evidence in the following subjects;

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mind#Scientific_study
  8.0 Scientific study
  8.1 Neuroscience
  8.2 Cognitive Science
  8.3 Psychology
  
  All the above are of the scientific FSK, thus rely on empirical evidence to infer their conclusions with reference to the real mind [as defined] or non-physical things in existence.

You cannot investigate the mind but just observes its activities.

The existence of the empirical mind is inferred from its empirical activities.
What is critical is that such an inference has contributed significant practical positives to the individuals and humanity as explained above.

You are again mixing things. Mental activities are different from the mind.

That is because you have defined 'what is mind' in a very selfish mode.
You should read Rorty's Mirror of Nature, where he critiqued that is no 'mind' that exist independently and can be mirrored with representation of words and rigid meaning.

Note Wittgenstein's,
-what is the meaning of a word is in its use, i.e. the language-game that is played.

I had defined 'mind' empirically of its use and that 'mind' is essentially related to how efficiently it can contribute practical positives to the well being of the individuals and humanity.