TED Conversations

Vera Nova

Director Research Analysis, NOVA Town Futuristic Development


This conversation is closed.

What are our minds? Are they ephemeral clouds created by energies produced by physical brains which are controlling all sensations?

What are our minds? Are they ephemeral “clouds”
created by some energies produced by physical brains which are controlling all our sensations and thinking?

Or are our minds sophisticated masters developing playhouses of our unique realities and therefore allowing us to see our universes, trees, water, bodies and brains with neurons, as well as our dreams, that are coming out of fantastic landscapes of deep subconsciousness?

Is a mind an ingenious Producer of everything we can observe, measure and touch?

How other living creatures with no brains can sense and communicate? Do they need those minds?

From Heraclitus' Flux and Protagoras' Limitaions of perceptions, to Berkeley and Kant, and then to Maurice Merleau-Ponty and W. Heisenberg we learn how very illusive and deceiving our perception of sight may be.

Also lets remember - no researcher, scientist or butcher has ever seen any image or thought in someone's brain.

What shall we research within ourselves looking for great discoveries?

What is something so absolutely ironic that persistently leads many postmodern mundane, and scientific minds back to 19th-century "mechanical materialism" - matter as random molecules interacting per the laws of mechanics ?

This still popular mentality fits the solution that Lenin and Engels proposed as "dialectical materialism”. This mentality, called in philosophy the "vulgar materialism”, and expressed in this statement:

"the brain secretes thought in the same way as the liver secretes bile"

Well, the neuroscientists, for example, did not go anywhere from that statement.



Topics: body-mind

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • thumb
    Mar 3 2014: About our superficial belief in objective reality that we might "reflect" in our BRAINS.

    Jung was fantastically intuitive, however was very confused in categorizing experience and ideas. I would not bother to interpret his labeling… He was absolutely outstanding in describing his intuitive mind and the facts when he was true to his own experience.

    I trust that whatever we imagine as "collective truth" we believe that it is floating somewhere outside our personal minds... or brains.

    These presumable states are simply presumable ideas and can exist only as ideas in each of our mind - they do not really exist "out there" on their own.

    Symbols and terms - such as "a mind" or "a brain" - cannot exist anywhere but in our imagination. We use symbols, language, special terminology, numbers, for sharing our personal imagination and experience with others by abstracting our personal experience. Categories, symbols, languages or numbers is not real experience.

    When we manufacture shoes almost none of them can perfectly feet a real person. So are our categorizations and ideas. They must be interpreted and adjusted to one's reality, or they mean nothing. Jung, when he writes honestly about his very personal self he is a genius psychologist. When we try to describe our own experience without MIXING it up with conventional beliefs, which is not an easy task, we might make some interesting discoveries.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.