At our last class, Dr. Grobstein asserted that he believed that the nervous system can be equated with behavior. The class then debated over what the exact definition of behavior is and that perhaps Dr. Grobstein's definition of behavior was more encompassing than those of students. I personally believe that anything that goes on with our bodies or our minds while there is some electrical activity in the nerovus system is behavior. Our state of consciousness itself is behavior. Sleep is behavior, dremaing is, thinking is, just being alive is behavior. We run into problems when we start to think of the soul and what that exactly means to each of us. It begins to tap into the realm of religion and philosophy, things that cannot be proven. As a scientist, I would say that what we call our soul is merely our physical state of consciousness. It is the culmination of every memory, every instinctual drive, every learned act, every connection in the brain that has been and will be in existence from our birth to our death. This intricate set of circuitry is what, when put together, gives our consciousness and what we finally call our soul. I want to think that there is more to humanity than pure science but I do not know how to justify it.

There is, of course, a LOT more to humanity than pure science. The interesting question is whether what science discovers can account for all the richness of humanity. And that, of course, is still very much an open question. If it can, then the richness of course must remain, since it is inherent in what is being accounted for. Is that an adequate justification for your wish? PG