Afterlife and the brain

[SerenelyBlue]

My understanding is that our mind is not simply software in the physical brain.  With learning brain structure physically changes.  Therefore the brain is not like a computer because your experience is partly as a result of your physical brain make up.  Your software will not be able to be uploaded once you die.  You need a unique brain to think.  When you die you really cease to be.  To live on you need more than just electrical signals.  You need the physical brain.   Not to mention that at its very core the brain has evolved to be an electrochemical device.  For example, no neurotransmitters, no electronic activity.  How is it going to to be recreated in thin air when you float above your body after you die?  Afterlife is a primitive religious fantasy which is not practical.

 

Am I right?

[sdelsolray]

I like your point that the brain physically changes over time (e.g., synapse connections, neural nets, etc.) and is linked to the person's mind (i.e., brain functions of consciousness, memory, reasoning, emotions, muscle memory, etc.).  I agree that this strongly infers that those mental functions are caused by the brain and not only correlated.  This also leads to a reasonable conclusion that concept of dualism (brain and mind are separate things which can exist and function apart from the other) is not correct.

[MOHO]

When my mother came home from the hospital after having shock treatment for severe depression (they did that in the 70's) she was a totally, completely, different person! She was never the same after that. 

 

If even PART of our behavior is the result of something spiritual this condition would not have occurred.

 

The concept of a spirit, or duality, is simply a primitive/middle-ages attempt at explaining consciousness.

[Jedah]

I know this may be besides the point, but computer software changes are technically physical too.

[disillusioned]

2 hours ago, Jedah said:

I know this may be besides the point, but computer software changes are technically physical too.

 

This is true, which is why I'm not sure that it follows from this line of reasoning that the brain cannot be simulated. In principle, I think that it should be possible to reverse-engineer a brain. We're just not that good at stuff.

 

I agree that there's no reason to think that there is a brain-mind duality.

[pantheory]

18 hours ago, SerenelyBlue said:

My understanding is that our mind is not simply software in the physical brain.  With learning brain structure physically changes.  Therefore the brain is not like a computer because your experience is partly as a result of your physical brain make up.  Your software will not be able to be uploaded once you die.  You need a unique brain to think.  When you die you really cease to be.  To live on you need more than just electrical signals.  You need the physical brain.   Not to mention that at its very core the brain has evolved to be an electrochemical device.  For example, no neurotransmitters, no electronic activity.  How is it going to to be recreated in thin air when you float above your body after you die?  Afterlife is a primitive religious fantasy which is not practical.

 

Am I right?

 

Yup, you're right.

[MOHO]

21 hours ago, Jedah said:

I know this may be besides the point, but computer software changes are technically physical too.

 

Only the floppy disc. 

[Geezer]

At my age my brain is showing signs that it needs an upgrade, or at least a reboot. My memory chip is apparently full & its refusing to store new information or to retrieve old information. 

 

 

 

[Joshpantera]

I bought the movie, "Ghost in the Shell" which is pretty interesting to consider. Especially concerning his consciousness leaving his brain and going into the network. Another good one was Transcendent with Johnny Depp. 

 

Another consideration that I had when I was younger, which isn't this sophisticated, was simply to question how in the world a ghost or spirit surviving death "sees?" Without physical eyes there's no vision of anything. And if there was vision of anything without physical eyes, then there's no reason for physical eyes to ever evolved in the first place. 

 

A more recent thought is that ego consciousness necessarily means perceiving and observing through a 'centralized point' of awareness, looking outward from center. 

 

Now after dying, or leaving a body, the 'centralized point' of reference has been left. Therefore any type of ego consciousness has also been left upon leaving behind the 'centralized point' of experience. Everything we consider to be "us" is attached to that 'centralized point' of experience. All of our memories are there, everything we consider to be ourselves is there. 

 

So what's the point? 

 

Even if consciousness drifted off, it seems more probable that it would cease an ego perspective and get absorbed back into some larger scale experience, which, wouldn't be anything that we consider "us" anyways. 

 

It's just one of those things. Probably nothing happens. And if something does happen, then it's probably nothing like what any one anticipates or expects....