I agree with the assertion that the brain is behavior if it is assumed that the brain is the seat of the mind, or consciousness, and that the mind is capable of directing the behavior produced by the brain. That is to say, that within the brain there is a mechanism of some complexity that we refer to as the "mind" that serves, in cognitive terms, as a central executive in organizing and directing behavior.

The nature of the mind as such is not well understood either biologically or psychologically. The mind, therefore, cannot be dismissed as an archaic conception used to explain something we cannot yet fully understand in purely biological terms, as were the "evil spirits" once believed to cause seizures. As was mentioned in class, the "evil spirits" hypothesis has not been disproved; the understanding of seizures in terms of their apparent neurophysiological causes and effects is simply more conducive to modern methods of research and treatment. The same egotism in attempting to reduce the mind to a physical entity that can be conquered by scientists is narcissistic and probably foolish.

Nice idea, that maybe "mind" is a subset of (contained within) the brain. We'll certainly be looking in that direction as the course proceeds. And into the question of the extent to which it is "a central executive", as opposed to simply one of the many "boxes". (And we'll try and do it all as little narcissisticly as possible). PG