A THEORY OF INTELLIGENCE Part Two (Identity)

by David Turell , Saturday, June 30, 2018, 17:57 (2121 days ago) @ dhw

dhw: New thought results in brain change, as proven by modern science. (See “pitch control”). But you keep claiming that the dualist’s brain has to be changed/enlarged each time BEFORE new thoughts can be initiated. If the dualist’s soul is the only initiator of the thought, the initiation of the thought does not depend on the size of the brain! If it does, you have materialism, which may well be true. Hence my reconciliation theory.

You keep ignoring or missing the main thrust of my theory. The soul/consciousness/I initiate a thought, but the start of a thought is never a complete thought. To initiate is to begin. The soul then refines the thought using the brain networks Which are passively used in the process. The completed thought is then announced through the brain. To repeat, initiation is only part of the process of thought.

dhw: How does the passive brain receive the soul’s output (or its instructions) if the soul doesn’t dictate to it?

DAVID: When I type on my computer I initiate all thoughts, and the computer is passive. Same with soul and brain, but the more complex the computer the more complex operations I can perform on it. Same with soul and brain.

dhw: Precisely. Your dualist’s soul initiates your thoughts and dictates them to your computer/brain, which expresses them materially. If your computer/brain is already equipped to express your thoughts, it doesn’t need to change. If your soul has new thoughts which are beyond the capacity of your existing computer/brain to express, you need a more complex or, in the good old days, a larger computer/brain. The initiation of your thoughts does not depend on the complexity/capacity of your computer/brain. The computer/brain has to increase its complexity/capacity in order to accommodate the thoughts initiated by your soul. Thank you for this clear example.

See my thoughts above for a more complete discussion of the whole process of thought. It is more than just initiation but refinement and completion. Refinement and completion must have a more complex network for more complex thought, and can not have that complexity without a more complex network available. Think genius brain like Hawking or Einstein as obvious examples. The more complex computer producing a more complex output is a perfect example.

dhw: ...at various times you have agreed that the “two different mechanisms” refer to the means of observation and communication, not to the “separate consciousness mechanism”. In life the soul and brain are interlocked, but in your own words the soul is a “SEPARATE consciousness mechanism” which resides in and works with the material brain. I keep reproducing your own words which present precisely the same concept of dualism as my own, so why do you keep disagreeing with yourself?

DAVID: You keep missing the points I've made above about the soul brain relationship. My thoughts are unchanged. Since no brain is present in death, the soul uses telepathy by being joined to the universal consciousness of God.

dhw: That is what I keep telling you! Your “separate consciousness mechanism” remains unchanged, but without a brain the soul has to use psychic powers (e.g. telepathy) in order to observe and communicate. According to you, the soul is already a piece of your God’s consciousness when it’s inside the brain, and that is the unchanging mechanism for thought. I don’t understand why you keep agreeing and making it sound as if you disagree.

The use of brain's networks to initiate and refine thought is not the same as initiating a refining thought by psychic mechanisms. I do not view the soul as to be a complete thought mechanism in life: it needs the brain networks; in death it needs God's universal consciousness for complete operation. But since the soul is the initiator at all times it has free will.