Conventional wisdom holds that the human mind is nothing more than the human brain. This belief derives from materialism. By "materialism" I don't mean the mania to shop unceasingly at the mall. Rather, I mean the philosophy that material reality is all that there is. Immaterial or spiritual realities are, in this view, simply epiphenomena of the material world.
We find the materialist view ably expressed in Francis Crick's The Astonishing Hypothesis. What Crick finds astonishing is that our thoughts, emotions and feelings consist entirely in the physiological activity in the circuitry of the brain. Daniel Dennett argues that "mind" is simply a term for what the brain does. And how do we know that the brain and the mind are essentially the same? The best evidence is that when the brain is damaged, the injury affects the mind. Patients whose brains atrophy due to stroke, for instance, lose their ability to distinguish colors or to empathize with others.
But in his book The Spiritual Brain, neuroscientist Mario Beauregard shows why the Crick-Dennett position is based on a fallacy. Yes, the brain is the necessary locus or venue for the mind to operate. It does not follow that the two are the same. Beauregard gives a telling analogy. "Olympic swimming events require an Olympic class swimming pool. But the pool does not create the Olympic events; it makes them feasible at a given location." Far from being identical to the mind, Beauregard argues that the brain "is an organ suitable for connecting the mind to the rest of the universe."
A provocative idea. Beauregard produces several lines of evidence, but there I focus on just one: the placebo effect. The placebo or sugar-pill effect is one of the most widely-attested phenomena in medicine. One medicine journal notes that "the history of medicine is the history of the placebo effect." So powerful is the impact of the sugar pill that today the effectiveness of drugs is measured by the FDA in comparison to the placebo effect.
Yet as Beauregard points out, the placebo effect is an embarassment to the simple-minded conception of the mind as an ephiphenomenon of the brain. The reason is that this effect shows the mind shaping the brain. The mental expectation of being cured leads to an actual alteration in the physical workings of the brain, and the patient experiences a measurable physiological improvement. One doctor who cured a patient through the placebo effect was asked what he gave the patient that produced such an incredible result. His answer? "Hope."
Beauregard also writes about something I didn't know much about: the nocebo effect. "The nocebo effect is the harmful health effect created by a sick person's belief and expectation that a powerful source of harm has been contacted or administered." So if patients are strongly convinced that a particular pill will give them nausea, they frequently become nauseous, even when the pill they have taken is not the one they expected but only a sugar pill.
Materialism is based on the assumption that the only way to alter the mind is to alter the physical operations of the brain. But Beauregard uses the placebo and nocebo effect to show the reverse. The mind can also regulate the operations of the brain. Beauregard writes that he placebo and nocebo effects are not triggered by the sugar pill but rather are "triggered by the patient's mental state. In other words, they depend entirely on the patient's state of belief."
But if minds can control brains, them minds are not the same as brains. This leads to the unavoidable conclusion that there is an aspect of thought and feeling that lies outside the realm of the material. This is what Beauregard calls "the spiritual brain." Atheists too have one, even if they refuse to admit it.
Reader Comments ( Page 1 of 22)
1. If the "immaterial" mind is capable of manipulating the material brain, then why is the brain needed in the first place? This is the question never answered. "Yes, the brain is the necessary locus or venue for the mind to operate." Why? "The brain is an organ suitable for connecting the mind with the rest of the universe?" Huh? Just where is this "mind" floating about? And the Olympic swimming pool analogy is completely irrelevant since the size of such pools is simply a matter of human convention and not inherent nature.
To repeat: if the "mind" is capable of manipulating material reality,then having a brain in addition would seem to be needless duplication and hardly an example of "intelligent design".
emelpe at 11:05AM on May 26th 2008
2. But if minds can control brains, them minds are not the same as brains. This leads to the unavoidable conclusion that there is an aspect of thought and feeling that lies outside the realm of the material. This is what Beauregard calls "the spiritual brain." Atheists too have one, even if they refuse to admit it.
We are not afraid to admit it ... we just don't accept and swallow the sugary pill known as religion. While it may be great to believe that a God will protect us from say the plague ... finding the real cause and cure has been far more effective in stopping it.
JimCO at 11:09AM on May 26th 2008
3. Spirituality does not = god.
brandon at 11:12AM on May 26th 2008
4. ATHEIST
Once again, we see how Christianity makes people STUPID.
The evidence for our personalities being the product of our brains is overwhelming.
Dinesh is a Christian. He doesn't know how to read. He doesn't know how to find the Correct Answer.
I feel sad for the victims of Christianity. They are unable to understand simple concepts, even when given books on the subject.
The rant about "materialism" is the basis for Intelligent Design. Phil Johnston wanted to "destroy the dominance of materialism in Western thought." In other words, he wanted legitimate colleges to teach about "souls" and the supernatural.
Dinesh is a friggin' idiot. As usual. Babbles about this nonsense without being able to figure out the Correct Answer. There is so much data available about how the brain actually works, and instead... he's a dimwit Catholic.
BAD Catholic. Stop trying to FOOL and HURT children with your idiocy.
William Hays at 11:18AM on May 26th 2008
5. DINESH: Beauregard writes that he placebo and nocebo effects are not triggered by the sugar pill but rather are "triggered by the patient's mental state. In other words, they depend entirely on the patient's state of belief."
But how long does this placebo effect work, what happens when the subject realizes that it is only a sugar pill? How long has Christianity be arround and yet nothing changes ... is this not why atheist no longer want to swallow this sugar pill? SO what is exactly the point of this blog ... that we only need to believe in God ... to make one exist? We atheists have believed that point about the religious already ... you have not proved anything new here!
JimCO at 11:20AM on May 26th 2008
6. ATHEIST
Here's a much better book:
(1994) The Astonishing Hypothesis: The Scientific Search for the Soul.
New York: Charles Scribner's Sons. xiv+317pp. Price: $US 12.60 pbk. ISBN:0684801582.
One of the leading biologists in the world, Francis Crick... Noble laureate:
The Astonishing Hypothesis is that "You," your joys and your sorrows, your memories and your ambitions, your sense of personal identity and free will, are in fact no more than the behavior of a vast assembly of nerve cells and their associated molecules. As Lewis Carroll's Alice might have phrased: "You're nothing but a pack of neurons." This hypothesis is so alien to the ideas of most people today that it can truly be called astonishing. (p. 3)
http://psyche.cs.monash.edu.au/v2/psyche-2-18-webster.html
__________
We don't need the supernatural to explain how our brains work.
But we need to shut down the friggin' Catholic fools who want children to be STUPID so they will remain Catholics, instead of moving on.
William Hays at 11:25AM on May 26th 2008
7. DoubleD, are you saying religion (ie: christianity) is a placebo for the masses?
JefFlyingV at 11:33AM on May 26th 2008
8. DD as usual you have struck a nerve with the mind numbed left. Your articles are consistently thought-provoking and spot on. Keep up the great work, this "stupid Catholic" eagerly awaits your next column.
Greg at 11:52AM on May 26th 2008
9.
Renzo hello, I have always enjoyed your facetious arguments.
So Renzo, feathers or Lead?
JefFlyingV at 11:52AM on May 26th 2008
10. The mind is a function of the brain. Without the brain, there is no mind. The question is then, if there is no mind, then is there also no brain. How would you know the difference.
The brain has a purpose. To control the body and to store information for the organism to survive in any given environment. Any other ideas are purely speculative. The mind is just an idea to describe the undescribable.
Using the placebo and nocebo effect as examples only illustrates that the brain is capable of proactively influencing body health.
Trying to differentiate between the mind and the brain is a trivial arguement simply because there is no way to prove any connection between the two. What is the mind? Is it your personality? Is it your thoughts? Is it "god"?
The mind is just you thinking about you.
This article is stupid, It was a waste of time to even post this.
CaptainCack at 12:06PM on May 26th 2008
11. ATHEIST
I'm always amazed at how many Catholics think "Stupid" is a compliment.
You don't have to be Stupid.
You don't have to be a Catholic.
If you get a tiny bit smarter, you can stop being both of them.
How do I get this point across?
Being a Catholic is a BAD thing. It means you don't think.
A Catholic is a victim of an End of the World cult called Christianity or Catholicism.
The world did NOT end. Read 2 Peter to find out what was supposed to happen.
Catholics should be ASHAMED... because it's so easy to STOP being STUPID.
William Hays at 12:35PM on May 26th 2008
12. Dinesh, you never fail to amaze me. To have the chutzpa to write this alone gives me hope- for you. Question is- do you have enough imagination to actually believe such a hypothesis? And I ask- was the dig at the Atheists REALLY necessary? Never mind, rhetorica question.
People, for a long time I have been espousing this idea. It answers a lot of questions that arise from a wealth of personal experience, questions that neither religion or the lack thereof are mature enough to address. I, personally, simplify this concept further, but am loathe to share it with you for lack of desire of your inevitable derision, such as we have already seen in the nasty posts already arriving. I am curious, and will be monitoring, the 'fundies' responses, though. I am truly curious to see their take on this. Let the games begin!
Live long and prosper!
Aloha!
Robert
Robert at 12:41PM on May 26th 2008
13. P.S. Dinesh, I enjoy this blog for a variety of reasons, but "The Spiritual Brain" is that rare gem out of the common pebbles that so often reside here- I am off to buy it today (provided I can find a bookstore open this Memorial Day).
Mahalo!
Robert at 12:46PM on May 26th 2008
14. Yes DD, I could not argue this point with you. Humans do indeed have a spiritual side to them. This also is from the placebo effect: we think that there is a god, therefore we see him.
None of your aticle leads credence to a christian god. Perhaps it's the muslims who have it right, or the jews, or the hindus or........
You get the point?
Agnostic guy at 12:48PM on May 26th 2008
15.
Neshie, baby, just how many martinis did you have this weekend???
FL Chick at 1:04PM on May 26th 2008