Reply to comment

Yes, brain = behavior seems like a pretty good story right now.  The technology of the day has allowed us to witness the brain and nervous system activity in correlation with behavior.  Perhaps is another 100 years there will be some new type of microscope or scanning device that allows us to see something else –something incapable of being seen using the technology that we have today –that we might identify as “mind matter”, but until that day, that equation will suffice, for me.  That is not say however that the equation is perfect.  Brain = Behavior seems far too simplified.  While I do believe, as Francis Crick proposes, that "a person's mental activities are entirely due to the behavior of nerve cells ... and the atoms, ions, and molecules that make them up and influence them", I do not think it is quite as cut and dry as that quote suggests.    I think it is likely that the brain is influenced by other factors?  I am not suggesting that the brain works in conjunction with some sort of ethereal spirit, mind or soul.  Rather, I propose that the environment influences chemicals and/or hormones in the brain and throughout the body that in turn react with neurons that ultimately determine behavior.  We have the technology to monitor chemicals, hormones and brain activity.  It is apparent that something of this nature is going on, yet the debate continues.  Why? 

Perhaps people are unhappy with or disturbed by the thoughts that run through their “mind”, or the voices, emotions and urges that they recognize but suppress rather than act out.  On one hand, it is seems easy to simply write these things off as the result of some supernatural power (mind or spirit).  On the other hand, it seems equally, if not more convenient and legitimate to explains these things by saying that they are the outcome of a chemical imbalance.  One possible explanation is that the latter justification (the chemical imbalance story) makes people feel like they are to blame for their emotions, urges and inner dialogues because they can control their environment which may subsequently determine the release of chemicals and hormones.  My placing the blame on some higher power it leaves people free of guilt.

The theory that mind and body are indistinguishable, and Emily Dickinson’s view that everything is a creation of the mind is somewhat troubling to me.  If everything that we perceive –the sky, trees, computers, food –is all just a creation of the mind, then watching my own hand type this is simply a creation of my mind as well.  Furthermore, it is just down right confusing to think about the implications of seeing an MRI of the brain.

Questions that arise for me while pondering this theory are: If humans do have this thing called a mind, evolutionarily why do we have it?  Genetically speaking, how is it passed on?  If brain=behavior is the entire equation then what sort of impact does that have on things like religion?