we can 'see' brain, but we can not 'see' mind, this does not make mind cosmic...its an assumption that since we do not know the boundaries of mind, we call it cosmic..but there are no boundaries of mind actually..mind is an experience, not a physical entity..hence, it is concentrated and is felt by the organism only who possesses it..in order to be cosmic, my mind must be connected to your mind in meta-physical manner, because cosmicity is a physical concept...but i can not see any such connection other than some perceptions and language links..

as far as past, present, future extensions are concerned, that is all nature of mind to conceptualize..in thinking about past, mind doesn't actually moves into the REAL past that one once had..and similarly for future also...mind only KNOWS (semantics) that something like past, present, future exists, so it imagines about it and connects it through memory to give a FEEL that it actually has traveled in past…this again doesn’t make mind cosmic…and future, in this sense, is again only an imagination of reconstructions of mental images to be able to fit into the CONCEPT of future thought…so PAST, PRESENT, FUTURE are all ILLUSIONS of mind…mind has only concepts which can be defined by Cognitive Psychology, no need to bring any COSMICity relating concept here…

these are not the ways to define mind’s COSMIC nature…if mind has to be cosmic, we must first understand and define properly what we mean by COSMIC, then we can see whether our definition of COSMIC can be sensed with evidence in experience of mind also…because what we are doing here is proving mind equivalent (if not equal) to a CONCEPTION of term COSMIC…but what exactly is COSMIC ?

can we prove mind’s cosmicity (I have, for current purposes of discussion, devised this term as I didn’t know any other relevant term) by assuming it to be a physical entity (having past, present, future and having extensions beyond our reach, like we have of our universe/cosmos) ? if yes, then it implies, we humans are always metaphysical in a sense that we have some non-localized existence, other than our localized existence of physical body…oh, this makes one feel schizophrenic (split identity)…

but when we experience mind inside us, we never feel ourselves inside the BODY all the time, but in some metaphysical realm of mental phenomena…so mind must have an existence which can’t be explained by BEING in the BODY only…we do wander in our minds but still stay at the same place in reality…

but what I see is that whatever we do in our MINDS, is only a nature/kind of THINKING, which can easily be explained by Cognitive Psychology…I mean mind consists of thinking and thought forms CONCEPTS, so whatever we experience is only a form of concept..so if there I am in some distant land in my mind, this is just a thought, been made possible by a concept…

so mind works through thinking of which concepts are a part…we are only thinking all the time…we only have different and fast running thoughts which we define as mind…since the flow of thoughts is so rapid (along with other contents like emotions etc.), I get engrossed in thinking and start calling it mind.. I somehow begin to feel that the succession of thoughts is mind…I can’t take pauses and gaps and hence WANDER in mind…so much of mess is out there between concepts, thoughts, memories, emotions that I get stressed by the whole process and assume that “I am running out of my mind.” Mind is only a term to describe the observation of this whole rapid process..

Does this solve the initial question then? What is the nature of these thoughts then? Are they not the units of MIND? Because if mind is a succession of thoughts, and mind does have a metaphysical existence felt other than body, then thoughts must have a metaphysical nature too…we must analyze this whole question then at the level of thoughts alone, and not mind…because mind is a WHOLE, made up of PARTS of thoughts…if we can understand what a thought is, we can solve what mind is…

Now I can come to the conclusion that mind does not have a COSMIC nature because it can be reduced to the level of thoughts…and no one can say that thoughts are cosmic by way of the previous conception of the term COSMIC…

Brain and Mind. Organ and expression. Memory and rememberence.

What’s difference between we remember the things as in exams and what’s when we drive.

Everybody grows, everybody has a different life expectancy, means everybody has different body viability, means everybody’s organs has diff strength, as well as everybody’s vision, hearing is different.

Now why this everybody. Because brain is biology whereas mind is cosmic.

If we take two babies and rear them in two different environments. What will happen? If you will teach one baby to eat directly by mouth along with you, he will do that forever. As our body and mind over thousands of years has been adapted the best and easiest way to live.

Our body has two parts. One that is basic, shared by all animals and the other secondary part that is shared only by human being. Basic part only knows about food, protection and reproduction. Other part is our history, our culture, environment, which made us as we are. As our body, our brain is growing means degenerating. The cycle of day and night is revolving around us and our organs are degenerating. Our brain lives a lifetime and record a lifetime on it. It records all those things that we see, hear, taste, feel etc. according to the intensity of the things which is connected to the basic part of human body as well as secondary part. As well as our brain records those things more better that we need to keep our basic and secondary needs up to optimum. As we think or remember a thing more and more time it is recorded newly on your brain. It is degenerating and hence old person’s CT scan brain shows cortical atrophy and hence we forget most of the childhood thing. Thus some events in childhood those repeatedly remembered by you get recorded repeatedly as present day.

One important thing, is it only brain that works for memory? We know brain control all the body. What about the brain dead body that breath, who’s liver, heart and cells work? Isn’t that memory?

Memory is a part of mind which i stated is cosmic. What are other parts of mind? Mind is a way of living for a human body to fulfil his/her basic as well as secondary needs with the help of experience and biological ability and by organizing it in a specific manner. And memory is just part of mind which is a part of experience and the thing your body will get some help to survive. A 12th std student knows biology as well as maths. A Medical student only knows human biology. A post graduate in General Medicine will forget Obs and Gynae. An experienced clinician can make quick diagnoses. Why? Because he is a doctor to fulfil his basic and secondary needs and remember only those things needed to make the diagnosis of patient forgetting all maths and physics, but he again knows maths when his son asks him to teach and as his son is everything for him.

http://www.researchgate.net/topic/Brain_Physiology/post/Brain_and_Mind?ev=fe35_pt

this is an interesting discussion going on in the Neuroscience section relating the difference between brain and mind, covering topics of consciousness, mind, brain etc. you can get varied views from many different persons working in associated fields..

very crude and incomplete points by PW but an interesting point also in the beginning about that 'everybody'. when life reaches and extends from 'one-body' to 'everybody' mind comes into light. but diversity can't be called the basis of mind or cosmic-ness..what PW describes mind's cosmicness as, is just a variation brought about by various physical factors than the cultural ones...then talking in similar context, do variations in animals point to any such 'cosmic mind theory' ? the differences in rearing (a sort of behavior) or individuals can be better explained by genetic influences, as through time people have brought differences in them as a result of growing up in different geographical environments..and culture can also be explained in similar manner, as a consequence of having different values formed in different ''physical environments'' as a mode of survival..so any cultural or social or individual influence can be easily explained by ways and mechanisms of ''biological evolution''...no need to conceptualize 'mind' in the above said manner arises..so PW, please explain your point in a fashion, ruling out the physical and genetic influence that can lead to individual differences, thus, giving a concrete conception of what mind is, how it differs from brain in its composition, and how it can have a distinct identity of its own with no effect of any 'biological organ i.e. brain'

.............memory is not stored in any other organ, other than brain............what is brain for, then?

and what PW called memory, when brain is dead, is actually an autonomous activity in body which can work through spinal cord also.. if brain dies, CNS and PNS can still function...though it is not known clearly why it happens for variable durations for various people..but no cosmicity is involved here..

if one doesn't agree to this, please answer why do we sleep then, what works under sleep, how come we find ourselves alive every morning after waking from sleep??? doesn't sleep resemble an autonomic activity not under our control?? though brain doesn't die then, but we do lose control over our body and brain also seems to be inactive during those periods..similarly, when brain is dead, some of the functions which come under the definition of 'LIFE' die out, but rest of the inner body can function by way of neural networks that nerves have built during the life span..

there must be other explanations also of which I have no knowledge right now.......

A very abstract discussion. I am even more intrigued.What I could understand is that we are treating brain and mind to be separate entities. But i am confused as i thought mind belongs to the terminology of psychology and brain to that of physiology. but if we consider the both together arent they the two faces of the same coin?if they are can there be any way in which we can see both the faces together at a moment or can it be compared to the physics terminology of heisenberg's uncertainity principle..wherein momentum and velocity cannot be measured simultaneously.

Well , another thing that i want to ask (probably a very layman question) how is mind related to cosmic theory? we know that there are electromagnetic waves throughout the universe and we being a part of it probably interact through the same with the universe. But we just know that . is science able to describe the mode and way in which the so called mind can be connected to the cosmic universe? these things seem to me too abstract till their biological bases or broadly scientific bases is not explained..

BRAIN ....its never dead .... even in sleep, till its biological death. infact what i know the EEG waves during a phase of sleep is similar and even more desynchronised as compared to that of waking state. even sleep is another topic of immense mystery. we sleep so that our brain could sort out things...in scientific terms to consolidate memory in terms of synaptic contact. i have read that now we define memory in terms of synaptic strength. but again that definition is certainly incomplete in most of senses.

well this point has just projected me to think about another point what is also a hot topic of discussion. we say brain is the ultimate control of our body...in that we are just mere puppets controlled by our brain. in that way we again come to the point already described by Sigmund Freud i..e, free will is an illusion. we think that we think in a certain way because we want to think but its not about what our conscious mind thinks but it is because of what our unconscious mind thinks.... again how do we describe what our unconscious mind thinks??

Abstract. Yes. Because nobody till now has revealed the mind thing. So along with this, all other theories might also be abstract. Mind is cosmic. What is mind? Simply, brain is only an organ. As well as, we have make memory thing very narrow, that is, when somebody ask that when Gandhiji died, your answer will be your memory. In fact memory is the things we do in everyday life, the way we talk, eat, even sleep. Your each step to any problem or enjoyment is based on your memory. Why mind is cosmic? Universe is endless. Life on the earth has begun and has end. Cosmic thing is not only telepathy. You can see the aeroplane flying hundreds of kms away from you, you need not to touch it or need any telepathy.

Mind is only one thing that can wander in past, present and future. Is there any other thing like mind? Brain stays only in present. Definitely synaptic strength is related to memory.

One more thing, even in brain dead body other body functions are controlled at spinal level. But whether is it known that spinal cord has any role in memory. All body functions are controlled by brain, PNS, nerves then if we cut any major nerve of body then that part should die remaining other body alive. Means, if a person died today and experimentally we cut any nerve of some other’s body then the biological consequences in the dead body and denervated body part should be same. But this is not true. On the other hand, if you stop the blood supply of one limb and cut nerve of the other limb, i think devascularised limb will get gangrenous within 12 hrs. Denervated body gets atrophied over a long period because nervous system checks the nutrition, sense and movement.

Mind, that wander in past, present and future. If we think it’s because of serial recording in brain, we can think of past, then in fact we can also think about the past in which we have not lived as well as we can think about future. That’s why; mind is a way of living for a human body to fulfil his/her basic as well as secondary needs with the help of experience and biological ability and by organizing it in a specific manner.

we can 'see' brain, but we can not 'see' mind, this does not make mind cosmic...its an assumption that since we do not know the boundaries of mind, we call it cosmic..but there are no boundaries of mind actually..mind is an experience, not a physical entity..hence, it is concentrated and is felt by the organism only who possesses it..in order to be cosmic, my mind must be connected to your mind in meta-physical manner, because cosmicity is a physical concept...but i can not see any such connection other than some perceptions and language links..

as far as past, present, future extensions are concerned, that is all nature of mind to conceptualize..in thinking about past, mind doesn't actually moves into the REAL past that one once had..and similarly for future also...mind only KNOWS (semantics) that something like past, present, future exists, so it imagines about it and connects it through memory to give a FEEL that it actually has traveled in past…this again doesn’t make mind cosmic…and future, in this sense, is again only an imagination of reconstructions of mental images to be able to fit into the CONCEPT of future thought…so PAST, PRESENT, FUTURE are all ILLUSIONS of mind…mind has only concepts which can be defined by Cognitive Psychology, no need to bring any COSMICity relating concept here…

these are not the ways to define mind’s COSMIC nature…if mind has to be cosmic, we must first understand and define properly what we mean by COSMIC, then we can see whether our definition of COSMIC can be sensed with evidence in experience of mind also…because what we are doing here is proving mind equivalent (if not equal) to a CONCEPTION of term COSMIC…but what exactly is COSMIC ?

can we prove mind’s cosmicity (I have, for current purposes of discussion, devised this term as I didn’t know any other relevant term) by assuming it to be a physical entity (having past, present, future and having extensions beyond our reach, like we have of our universe/cosmos) ? if yes, then it implies, we humans are always metaphysical in a sense that we have some non-localized existence, other than our localized existence of physical body…oh, this makes one feel schizophrenic (split identity)…

but when we experience mind inside us, we never feel ourselves inside the BODY all the time, but in some metaphysical realm of mental phenomena…so mind must have an existence which can’t be explained by BEING in the BODY only…we do wander in our minds but still stay at the same place in reality…

but what I see is that whatever we do in our MINDS, is only a nature/kind of THINKING, which can easily be explained by Cognitive Psychology…I mean mind consists of thinking and thought forms CONCEPTS, so whatever we experience is only a form of concept..so if there I am in some distant land in my mind, this is just a thought, been made possible by a concept…

so mind works through thinking of which concepts are a part…we are only thinking all the time…we only have different and fast running thoughts which we define as mind…since the flow of thoughts is so rapid (along with other contents like emotions etc.), I get engrossed in thinking and start calling it mind.. I somehow begin to feel that the succession of thoughts is mind…I can’t take pauses and gaps and hence WANDER in mind…so much of mess is out there between concepts, thoughts, memories, emotions that I get stressed by the whole process and assume that “I am running out of my mind.” Mind is only a term to describe the observation of this whole rapid process..

Does this solve the initial question then? What is the nature of these thoughts then? Are they not the units of MIND? Because if mind is a succession of thoughts, and mind does have a metaphysical existence felt other than body, then thoughts must have a metaphysical nature too…we must analyze this whole question then at the level of thoughts alone, and not mind…because mind is a WHOLE, made up of PARTS of thoughts…if we can understand what a thought is, we can solve what mind is…

Now I can come to the conclusion that mind does not have a COSMIC nature because it can be reduced to the level of thoughts…and no one can say that thoughts are cosmic by way of the previous conception of the term COSMIC…

this also implies that mind is LOCAL, because thoughts are local..the thoughts that i have in my mind right now, you are not having the same thoughts..when i sleep and you don't, then also i am out of my mind, in a sense that i am not thinking anything, but you are thinking many things...so your mind is functioning independently of mine..and same for everyone...we can't say there are MULTIPLE COSMOSes that everyone is in a unique cosmos with his/her own thoughts...that seems absurd...if mind has to be COSMIC, we must be connected by way of single threads where all can be considered a part of SINGLE COSMOS and not multiples........in a similar way that every thought is connected to every other thought in MENTAL COSMOS...mind is a cosmos of thoughts...

You might want to read "The New Executive Brain," by Elkhonen Goldberg and/or "Mindsight," by Daniel J. Siegel.

You can also have a look at : Edelman Gerald,"Bright Air, Brilliant Fire", 1992, Basic Books

"Now I can come to the conclusion that mind does not have a COSMIC nature because it can be reduced to the level of thoughts…and no one can say that thoughts are cosmic by way of the previous conception of the term COSMIC…"

But thoughts are formed via electrical and chemical activities of neurons and these electrical impulses can never be created nor destroyed only transformed.., thus thoughts "mind" are a part of the whole cosmos??? or i prefer the term UNIVERSAL.

You might want to read Ken Wilbur "Brief history of everything" or "A theory of everything..."

Mind is a way of living for a human body to fulfil his/her basic as well as secondary needs with the help of experience and biological ability and by organizing it in a specific manner.

Definitely mind is evolution of the thinking. As the days are passing, your needs, emotions and their expression are changing.

Where from this mind came from? Where from this human being came from? Where from this life came from? According to hypotheses, as a result of chemical reactions. Chemical reactions need physical material. Thus, physics followed by chemistry followed by biology. Then this body start thinking and then there is evolution of mind.

Illusion is a false interpretation of the things. What our mind thinks regarding past and present is definitely not the false interpretation of the things.

We usually know that, a human use only few percent of his brain. We usually read, you can do, what you think.

How can i think of the universe? How can i know about the universe? Imagination. Is it false? Universe is infinite and so your mind.

What is universe? Sun, Galaxies, Stars, Planets. All localised as well as in motion. Everything in the universe influences other thing, but only in its arc. Our Sun can influence Earth, Mars, Jupiter but can’t influence the planets from other galaxies. This influence is via the gravitational forces.

Our mind is connected with others to whom we know. Our body or brain is not connected to other’s. We cry for the person who is our family member but feel bad for neighbourer and just read that Maoist killed 50 people in Jharkhand and took a bite of breakfast. Influences have been changed. Imagine your mind is local then what? Then you will be an animal. Local. You have to eat, sleep. Don’t have to think about environment. No need to wear clothes.

Actually cosmo is not only Stars, Moons, Planets. It also includes molecules, atoms, electrons. Electrons revolve around nucleus. And this universe is made up of uncountable atoms.

What is metaphysical? Is it connection between Sun and the Earth, which is without physical contact. What about the mother thinking of her son fighting at border. Metaphysical?

Thought and Mind. Thought is processing where as mind is the ultimate expression.

Dear Therese, you are theoretically combining two different facts from two different fields of science. Though this does give some insights, but we do not reach anywhere when we tend to follow these facts together. We need to integrate the two facts in such a way that we get a concrete conception of how the two facts operate simultaneously in a coherent manner.

A few thoughts over the criticism of your comment. In Logic, we have propositional logic in the form:

If A implies B and B implies C, then automatically A implies C. But this does not establish the causality among the two. ‘Implies’ refers to a relation ‘infered’, no ‘cause’ is meant here. ‘Causality’ is one of the gravest problems in science still. In any research we never develop the causality by way of such direct implications among variables. Only by ruling out the insignificant, one can come to the conclusion of the ‘real cause’ of something. But then again, that causal agent is only a ‘cause’ until new evidence to disprove it has not been gathered. That means, new evidence gathered against the established causality can eliminate the previous causal agent/variable.

In statistics also (which is a tool of analysis and no science ever claims anything without proper analysis through a statistical tool/method), specifically in psychology, we never say we have found the cause. A relation only satisfies the test of significance (that whether it is significant enough to be of any inference), and is set under a chosen confidence interval, so that the relation is valid for either 95% of the cases or 90% or 99% etc…the relation might not be true for the rest of 5% or 10% or 1% cases, respectively. Beyond this interval, relation is insignificant to be worthy of any inference. Hence, no causality is established here. Statistics is more scientific, it seems. It never says 100% relation, i.e. perfect, i.e. absolute.

Now coming to your point. You say mind is thought and thought is an electrical signal. Since electricity is UNIVERSAL, so this means that mind is UNIVERSAL by way of thoughts. These relations are not scientific. First of all, a point against your ignorance. Scientists (and not just philosophers) know for centuries that something like ENERGY exists in all of us. This energy is UNIVERSAL, and hence it extends the physical and the chemical. This thermodynamic principle (energy can neither be created nor destroyed, only transformed from one form to the other) is around 2 centuries old. Then do you think that scientists are that much fool as not being able to infer this simple relation that - since everything is energy, hence mind is also energy and since energy is UNIVERSAL therefore mind is universal.

This logic is Aristotelian, some 2500 years old. Nothing new being concluded here. Anything conceptualized, can be inferred through this system of logic. We can prove or disprove any relation like this. By way of core logic we never experience that conclusion ourselves. Or putting differently, logic never PROVES anything substantial. That is why in earlier days, only logic was preferred as the basis of discovering truth. But logic failed subsequently as we did not reach anywhere through it. We didn’t discover the ‘real truth’ by way of logic alone. Hence, SCIENCE was created. Simple.

Hence, your argument fails.

Well I suppose Karishma must be wandering at this time, what has become of her original question here. Not even a single comment seems any close to her question. So not diverting any further, I would like to comment on two of her points in the question she asked.

One is about the learning pattern in brain - that brain must be having some way of organizing the knowledge about learning so that it can be retrieved in the SAME manner everytime we move into our memory. Is there a psychic pattern, corresponding to the pattern in brain? Or if there is really a pattern, how is it ‘put’ in brain?

In order to answer this question, we have to look at another conception of brain constitution - neural networks. Because conventionally, brain was thought to be made of neurons and any inter-neural communication was possible by way of neurotransmitters. This is still the fact, but neuroscience now talks about networks more intricate and specific, that it can be thought that each neuronal connection might be contributing to a specific function. Earlier, brain regions were held responsible for controlling and regulating functions. Cytoarhcitecture in brain is one such fact. You must have heard about Broadman’s areas in brain, which are supposed to regulate certain functions (and researches do confirm this). They are actually cytoarchitecturally recognized areas, each having its own arrangement of neurons, such that a particular configuration of them must be controlling a function by way of its structure.

But neural networks explain intra-regional specificities of brain’s functions. This concept is more studied in relation to artificial neural networks, computing and models from both sciences – neuroscience and computer science – are developed to increase the understanding about neural networks, so that both fields can benefit.

Neural networks concepts is the same, but every neuron is now given importance and is meant to be studied. That implies, any function can arise from a single neuron or some specific inter-connections in some or the other way. And models are developed to understand the working of neural networks for a particular function. These neural networks may consist of neurons fom different brain regions. For eg. A visual experience of face can be seen arising from the excitatory activity of 20-30 neurons in specific brain regions-primary visual cortex, associated areas of parietal lobes to perceive the contours of face and temporal lobe to associate the memory with it, including the limbic areas to associate emotions. So a group of 20-30 neurons have to be studied in order to account for the whole visual experience of face. Any damage in any specific connection can then be known to be causing a specific deficit in visual perception.

So we are already over with the identification of just ‘brain areas’ to explain the functioning of brain. We have seen that any activity in brain is performed by inter-connections of many neurons in different brain regions. Now we wish to study those specific connections and how they contribute to specific functions in brain and body.

So answering your question to some extent, brain forms many such neural networks (patterns) which store information in the form of ‘connections’, which are temporary if used for short term and permanent if used frequently (many other explanations also possible). If brain is receiving messages in a similar fashion (same stimulus) again and again, such connections strengthen and are ‘saved’ as memory, which can be retrieved later – since the route of connection will be easier and smoothened. How they are stored and saved – neurotransmitters store them as chemical messages (as chemical activity is always initiated during any neural activity) and hence electrical signals are patterned (since they follow the chemical routes).

Now this seems quite extraordinary that how a few number of similar neurons are patterned in brain to bring about so many varied functions of the organism. But this is a reality then. Because after all, we always see a neural and chemical (hence electrical) activity in the brain corresponding to a function performed by the organism. And always similar brain regions are stimulated in everyone during a particular function. So brain does has the potential to establish the strengthened connections so that similar patterns or connections are stimulated everytime a similar function is performed.

Please anyone give some alternative explanations too. This discussion would be quite interesting then.

PW, I honestly 'dislike' your previous comment..too primitive and childish.

I liked what Therese commented but i guess it has no experimental evidence...to connect two things--one abstract and one factual

Well i really appreciate your comments Tarun Sir. Infact my question was just to initiate a discussion . No stringency in answering. Infact I enjoyed reading that thread of 'brain and mind' .

regarding the patterns , i dont really think similar brain areas would be activated with same stimulus...as i just had an interaction with a professor who had worked on cognitive science . according to some of his experiments different people respond differently to the same stimulus but again that would lead the topic to another aspect that of sociophysioneuroscience...so to say.

i have a bit knowledge about specific neurons getting activated in response to a specific stimulus in a person ...but i really wonder how does that specific interaction takes place. most of the neurons use the same set or similar set of neurotransmitters to interact then how come two neurons know they have to interact at a particular stimulus or is it random( which i dont think would be the case as nothing in universe is random till we understand the purpose) or are there ab=ny landmarks or scaffolds formed forming the base for interaction of neurons?

Similarity of brain areas and corresponding stimuli did not imply in a strict sense as they seem in the comment..i only generalized the concept to make it expressible..

And it did not imply the specificity / variability of responses due to individual differences ..it meant stimulus-brain localization interaction, not the impact of any individual differences on the response patterns..when there is a stimulus, a common area is activated in all, irrespective of individual differences..that is how we have come to attribute specific brain areas for various functions, found common in all..response selection is another area of study..may be a particular brain area is responsible for 'response selection tendency' which again can be common in all..

though the later part of your previous comment can be better explained by a Neuroscientist, I do feel the roots to the answer can be found in our evolutionary inheritence of species-typical behaviors..we are already predisposed to certain inbuilt 'connections', which are activated in similar pattern in all (belonging to a particular culture, society). these can act as blueprints for further connections. the specific information shared among neurons is programmed at the genetic level..no other valid reason I can think at present..though learnings in later life do matter, but again such interactions can be regulated at the genetic level of general patterned information sharing...

Coming to the original discussion. Can we connect brain and mind? Question has few different meanings. First, we want to connect, can we? Second, is there any relation between brain and mind? Third, is there any physical, chemical or biological relation between brain and mind?

Simply, our body has nervous system consisting of CNS and PNS. CNS consists of brain and spinal cord.

Mind? Assume you are doing an activity or sitting with open eyes or closed eyes. We’ll first consider that you are sitting in your study room with opened eyes. Now, first, you are observing the things in your room with your eyes. Second, you are hearing some sounds in your environment. Third, you have pen in your hand. Fourth, you are sitting on foam. Fifth, you are filling hungry. Sixth, you are thinking of ordering Domino’s. Seventh, you are thinking about utensils in the basin. As well as, just before coming home you have strange experience. All these information, at a time, is getting analysed in one brain. Observing, hearing, touching, thinking. Your brain which has specific representation for specific function is doing it. But, all at the same time. Forget brain, amalgamate all these by yourself and form a confluent image. Now observe that image. This is mind. Coming to the theoretical part, visual cortex will form image. This image formation is help by visual association cortex and then information is send to temporal cortex for analysis. Wernicke’s area is for audition. Ascending reticular activating system helps in arousal and day-night cycle. Thalamus is relay centre for pain and sends information to the sensory cortex. Balance is maintained by cerebellum, which sends information to the motor cortex. Thus final analysis is being done in cortex. After analysing, information is send to specific organs, like, if somebody call, on the basis of experience you will respond or not. If you see some object coming towards you, your brain will tell whether to catch it or to give the way. Thus, this very much vast neurology. Ultimately, amalgamation of all the influences, their analysis and responses constitute the mind. Thus, mind is a way of living for a human body to fulfil his/her basic as well as secondary needs with the help of experience and biological ability and by organizing it in a specific manner. And thus, mind is your body’s feel and response by the brain to the environment.

Second question about unconscious, subconscious and conscious mind. Unconscious means comatose. Till now we are defining coma as response to internal stimuli but not the external stimuli, means related to body system functions like urination, metabolism etc.. No thinking, no response to pin prick and no movement. What’s difference between conscious and subconscious mind. You have strong urge to eat Gulab Jamun in the case in the restaurant, is the subconscious mind. But to know that you have no money and that’s why you are unable to do so is your conscious mind. And this has the archaeological basis, as your primitive part of cerebellum is related to balance and neocerebellum is related to the more fine activities.

There is more about this subject in the discussion on "Brain and Mind".

There is a lot of discussion (except for the one about patterns of neurons and memory) that reveals that the replies are based more on conjecture and "common knowledge" rather than on scholarship. As to the relationship between the brain and the mind, there are concepts like "synergy" and "emergence" that are used to label a real phenomenon. This phenomenon is basically the manifestation of intelligent behavior of a sufficiently complex system. The exact behavior cannot be predicted by experts with full knowledge of the component parts nor even the builders of man-made complex systems. For example, the behavior of an ant colony cannot be predicted from knowledge of the behavior of individual ants and their interactions with one another. Likewise, the thoughts or behavior of a human (driven by its mind) cannot be predicted by knowledge of its brain cells and an external stimulus. It is just an inexplicable phenomenon that arises when a system is sufficiently complex. (One, easy to read, reference is "EMERGENCE" by Steven Johnson.)

It is useful to speak about the mind and all its states and abilities, and to be able to associate parts of the brain and its functions with the mind and behavior. Such discussions often help (but sometimes not, if incorrect) to give us simplified models which our brains (or minds) have the capacity to deal with. We must remember that these models indicate a tendency or a partial explanation. (The true explanation is usually too complex and disperse for us to manage, or the models are yet to be defined completely by researchers.) So we need to keep in mind that any model of the brain (or the mind) requires caveats to explain the conditions for which it is applicable.

In any case, we do not have to invoke any supernatural, cosmic being or force to explain the mind-brain relationship - it is just the ultimate manifestation of a common, everyday phenomenon called emergence.

Actually, the word supernatural was never there. But now again, what is supernatural? It is the natural thing that we don’t know. Can 1000 yrs back somebody might have think that you will talk with your friend who is hundreds of miles away from you, or you are flying overseas? Probably imagination of this thing was supernatural at that time. Anything that we assume big, needs two things, one is your thinking and another physical abilities. Wright bros thought of flying but due to physical inabilities plane came to us. Somebody thought of killing a person 100 ft away, but no physical ability, gun was invented. Kungfoo master can take rapid actions and can pierce his finger in your body instead of bullet because he has developed physical abilities for that. This isn’t precise topic of discussion. So, actually, supernatural word was never there.

Dear Prashant Wankhade, I was not referring specifically to your comments, but rather to the general tenor of the discussion. Now having looked more closely at your comments, you are describing a compartmentalized, modular brain. As I indicated before, having models such the ones you described for the brain are useful, but we have to keep in mind that they only indicate a tendency. In reality, for example, the prefrontal cortex is connected to and influences or controls (via suppression and/or by signaling the release of specific arrays of neurochemicals - such as dopamine and serotonin ) most other parts of the brain. (See online "Chemistry of the adaptive mind" by Roshan Cools and Trevor W. Robbins). The brain's functioning is extremely complex; it is not a like a mechanical or even an electronic device, as we commonly think of such devices. Its circuitry has many feedback loops (and feedforward loops). All the parts of the brain are operating at once, in parallel. But depending on the neurochemical environment or control by the prefrontal cortex or influence by other parts of the brain (e.g. the limbic system), the mental state of the individual can change radically. The same person can, at one time be very analytical (elevated dopamine level), but at another time be very intuitive (depressed dopamine level). However, this is just one chemical mechanism; the whole story is yet to be told.

Antonio: " All the parts of the brain are operating at once, in parallel. "

Are you sure about the ALL and PARALLEL? To me, they more show to be interacting...and not generalizing the ALL.

All parts of the brain are operating at the same time, in parallel as well as interacting with each other depending upon the need. In a quiet room you are listening a music and at the same time eating popcorn. Probably no need of interaction. But in case of crossing the road, vision, auditory function, balance etc. needs interactions. This ‘all’ because of specific function attributed to specific brain area. In fact human body, brain, mind all respond to things accordingly. If things are simple, response will be simple only.

Right dear Phrasant Wankhade, recalling the "modular mind" theory and many theory models of processes working serial in one case and parallel in others, the answer is just it dependes what we are talking about. My degree thesis talks just about this. I will asap put on my account the abstract of it, as an example of how it's necessary the parallel and the serial processing

I do understand its a complex interaction but thats what the discussion is all about.. i agree with Antonio Sir.its the subtle interaction and probably we donot understand that at this moment but how according to you could this interaction be studied and what kind of hypothesis one require to make for that? I am asking for a general theme and not specific one.

From what I have read, it appears that all of the systems in the brain are working all the time (or nearly all of the time). At any moment, all these signals are being received by the prefrontal cortex (PFC), but the PFC decides which signals are important and which ones can be ignored. In this limited scenario, the PFC is like an orchestra conductor. The PFC can suppress/attenuate any of the received signals. For decision making, we are usually only aware of those signals the PFC has deemed important or valuable. As an extreme example, consider that you are taking a final exam in solving algebraic equations. Most likely, the PFC has allowed the subsystems that your left brain has stored for solving such problems to be dominant. In the meantime, there may be some noise outside on the street. The subsystems in your brain that hear and interpret sounds and others that warn you of possible dangers are sending signals to the PFC. But, the PFC, suppresses them and, therefore, your consciousness may not even be aware of the noise outside.

The PFC is a very important part of the brain that has only been studied in recent decades. It is the executive part of our brain. The vast array of functions it performs is amazing. It helps explain the relationship among various parts of our brains and the relationship between brain and mind.

It is overestimating the PFC. If somebody is interested I can send references on articles that would not agree with this.

Please send the references.

PFC has a very important role in deciding what is important and what is not, according to what is necessary at the moment, that's called "early selection" and "late selction"

Hello, contrary to what people are telling you, psychologyy anything can't answer the question. We are simply made up of neurons that connect to each other and chemical or neurotransmitters that open or close channels. I've impaled a number of systems to know. My area is brain transplantation, lesioning and behavioral testing. It is not complicated. Ask a specific question and I'll get back to you. Observing behavior is not sufficient. Each area (nucleus) of the brain has a number of things that it does depending on how it is connected. Many of these areas are know today however some are not complete. But, believe it or not its pretty black and white. Let me know if you have a specific question and I'll try to help. I have a number of experiments that I haven't reported as many of us do. We just can't get around to it. Without short-term memory you can't put down long-term memory. How does it work? Just ask. Good luck on your inquests and never stop asking!

Prefrontal cortex is a part of brain like other parts that performs the executive functions like judgement, ideas etc. It differentiates between good and bad as well as relates to functions like future consequences of some activities, goals, social control etc. Our brain works in stepladder pattern. Very basic functions like breathing and circulation are controlled at brainstem level. Ladder ascends and the functions like protection are performed even at the level of spinal cord in the form of reflex arc, as your body touches some hot object, it will be suddenly taken away, it takes place at the level of spinal cord only and need not to involve cortex to analyze the things (so again one issue, weather memory is also stored at spinal cord level because our cord knows about the hot stuff). Thus there are various levels of functions in your brain. Patients who underwent prefrontal lobectomy will become passive and lack all the motivations but still able to perform basic functions. Now we have to decide the importance of prefrontal cortex.

It’s ongoing discussion between brain and mind. Very few have been discussed on memory. Basic question asked was, in which form memory is stored and retrieved? As in case of computer, what we see on screen is different from that which is behind that. In human body, any type of information is stored in the genome. Let’s assume any other system of body e.g. thyroid gland. Your need of thyroid hormone is sensed by the receptors on thyroid gland, pitutary gland, hypothalamus etc. according to its blood level and then these receptors with the help of second messenger sends information to nucleus. Nuclear receptors send information to your chromosome and thus to DNA. Then on a huge DNA the part ascribed for thyroid hormone synthesis gets activated and forms information for the hormone synthesis. This information is formed and transferred in the form of messenger RNA. This information on mRNA is analysed outside the nucleus by the ribosome which forms various proteins and these proteins are then processed by endoplasmic reticulum and thus hormone is formed and extrude out of cell. Thus the information is stored in genome. Again, if we consider our body’s defence system then if you have some infection, these microbe proteins are processed in reticuloendothelial system of your body and antibodies against these microbes are produced. Infection subsides but this information is stored in the genome of these defence cells and whenever in future that same microbe again infect your body, your defence system uses that previous information to produce antibodies (again one issue of memory). Now, coming back to nervous system. It is quiet complex compared to other body parts. We all know that hippocampus, parahippocampal cortex and whole cortex involve in the function of memory. Each part of our body has unique quality, as muscles of your legs will get tired after running 100 metres but heart muscles are working from before we came to this world and still working without tiring. As such these nerve cells are unique in fast processing compared to other body parts. Thus whenever any stimulus comes to your brain in any form like touch, sound or any question asked to you, this information is send to your specific areas of brain then depending upon short term, long term, implicit or explicit, this information is read and processed at DNA level in hippocampus or cortex. Accordingly specific mRNAs are formed and then specific proteins and these specific proteins will constitute the chemical messenger. This chemical messenger will again give rise to specific response and this response will be directed to the part of brain that needs to take action, like if you have to remove your hand then information will be send to motor cortex ascribed to your hand. Again one thing, these whole actions might be so rapid or there might be preformed proteins or chemical messengers for these actions depending upon the need of rapidity of action and stress given for that action.

Dear Prashant, I do not know much about genetics, but the rest of your reply was very interesting, it shows a hierarchy in the types of responses to stimuli. Excellent!

The very interesting characteristic about the brain is that the hierarchies are not strictly compartmentalized, nor are adjacent functional parts of the brain.

In terms of the body-brain relationship, some neurobiologists view the brain as a not being limited to what is in the skull, but rather an extended nervous system in which the brain is connected to remote parts of your body. This, apparently implies that things happening to your body affect your brain. For example, focused attention on your breathing, can induce a sense of tranquility, that is, elevated serotonin levels in your brain.

Antonio, absolutely, THINGS THAT HAPPEN TO YOUR BODY AFFECT YOUR BRAIN. Of course...

here are some references I promissed and you wante. Sorry the book ( ,my book on this subject) is in Spanish and thus I cannot send the chapters for not Spanish readers.

Book: Rutas de salida. Alicia Quaini and Ulises Diego

Title and subject of the chapter:

Scientific basis which justify the modification of the system at a subconscious level.

BASES CIENTÍFICAS QUE JUSTIFICAN LA MODIFICACIÓN DEL SISTEMA EN EL NIVEL INCONSCIENTE

References:

de Vries, M. et al., 2010. The Unconscious Thought Effect in Clinical Decision Making: An Example in Diagnosis. Medical Decision Making.

Wiliam, D., 2006. The half-second delay: what follows? Peda-gogy, Culture and Society, 14(1), 71-81.

Acker, F., 2008. New findings on unconscious versus conscious thought in decision making: additional empirical data and meta-analysis. Judgment and Decision Making, 3(4), 292-303.

Cairns, J., Overbaugh, J. & Miller, S., 1988. the origin of Mu-tants. Nature, 335(8), 142-145.

Custers, R. & Aarts, H., 2010. The Unconscious Will: How the Pursuit of Goals Operates Outside of Conscious Awareness. Science, 329(5987), 47 -50.

Dijksterhuis, A., 2004. Think Different: The Merits of Uncons-cious Thought in Preference Development and Deci-sion Making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87(5), 586–598.

Dimberg, U., Thunberg, M. & Elmehed, K., 2000. Unconscious Facial Reactions to Emotional Facial Expressions. Psy-chological Science, 11(1), 86 -89.

Gutfreund, H. & Toulouse, G., 1994. Biology and computation: a physicist's choice, World Scientific.

Kornhuber, H. & Deecke, L., 1965. Hirnpotentialänderungen bei Willkurbewegungen und passiven Bewegungen des Menschen: Bereitschaftspotential und reafferente Potentiale. Pflügers Archive, 284, 1-17.

Krosnick, J.A. et al., 1992. Subliminal Conditioning of Attitudes. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18(2), 152 -162.

Libet, B. et al., 1983. Time of conscious intention to act in rela-tion to onset of cerebral activity (readiness-potential). The unconscious initiation of a freely voluntary act. Brain, 106(3), 623 -642.

Lipton, B.H., 2008. The Biology of Belief: Unleashing the Power of Consciousness, Matter, & Miracles, Hay House, Inc.

Miller, George A. 1956. The magical number seven, plus or minus two: some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63(2), 81-97.

Murphy, N., Ellis, G.F.R. & O'Connor, T., 2009. Lau H: “Volition and the Function of Consciousness”, en: Downward Causation and the Neurobiology of Free Will, Springer.

Nijhout, H.F., 1990. Problems And Paradigms: Metaphors and the role of genes in development. BioEssays, 12(9), 441-446.

Nørretranders, T., 1999. The user illusion: cutting conscious-ness down to size, Penguin.

Scott, R.B. & Dienes, Z., 2010. Knowledge applied to new do-mains: The unconscious succeeds where the conscious fails. Consciousness and Cognition, 19(1), 391-398.

Schmidt, R.F. & Thews, G., 1989. Zimmermann: “The nervous system in the context of information theory”, in: Hu-man physiology, Springer-Verlag.

Smith, A., 2011. Lipton, analysis of DVD entitled “The New Biology.Where Mind & Matter Meet”. En http://www.pillaroflight.net/Bruce%20Lipton.pdf

Thank you very much. I am fluent in Spanish, so I can read your book too. Thanks again.

Great, Antonio, yes, of course, your name, It is Hispanic. OMG. I was lost. OK I published the complete chapter in RG. The title of the book you already have, it is in Google books. Also in www.rutasdesalida.com

I hope that my humble contribution of the references will create a space to investigate the concepts involved in the supremacy of unconscious (what a poor name for a vast field of knowledge)

The book is being re edited and changed Publisher and will be published soon again.

Kindest regards.

Antonio: Y estas en Mexico. Wow. Estoy en comunicaion y trabajo compartido con UNAM. (For those that do not know, National University of Mexico)

Mi research is on the subject of cousncious /unconscious and the importance of each in the evolutionary process and the processing on cleaning up the brain files that create behaviour and perception disorders. REMA is about that. I will keep you posted on the advances in Queretaro (Research Department on Neruosciences for UNAM with human brain studies.)

Exellent. We have a lot of common interests. If you click on my photo, you can get to my registration under the category of engineering, math, etc. There you should find a question I posed seeking information about the association of serotonin levels in the brain with a mystical experience. I look forward to any light you can shed on this subject.

By the way, your comments on the prefrontal cortex are well received. My description of the importance of the PFC, applies to the normal, everyday activities one is engaged in when awake. People with serious neuroses or psychoses, "normal" people who need to react immediately to a situation, or are lost in their activities (e.g., an artist who loses track of time), or are temporarily overwhelmed with emotion, for example, are not guided in their behavior by the PFC.

What does 'cleaning of brain flies' imply? Is it related to the cleaning up of brain pertaining to sleep? And what about REMA?

Mark Solms and Oliver Turnbull reviewed this topic in a book: The brain and the inner world, 2002

Obviously, you know very little about Freud. I somehow understand we might be tempted to use shortcuts such as stereotyping and commonplaces when trying to make sense of complex revolutionary ideas, but the result is that we miss an opportunity to develop real knowledge.

There may be other explanations for Freud: http://people.uncw.edu/puente/sperry/sperrypapers/60s/144-1969.pdf

You may want to read "mindsight" by Daniel J. Siegal. He also has some videos on the internet.

Hello,

Forget Sig and move on. None of what you have to offer is valid.