Philosophy Discussion Forums

Count Lucanor wrote: ↑Yesterday, 3:34 pm

Sculptor1 wrote: ↑October 12th, 2024, 5:22 am

Count Lucanor wrote: ↑October 11th, 2024, 3:06 pm

Sculptor1 wrote: ↑October 10th, 2024, 5:39 pm

I think you are missing the point.
No amount of crushed, burned , or otherwise damaged flesh, bone, skin, or sinew has anything to do with pain.
If it did then I would have to take more care chopping up my steaks. And the minced beef I had today would be a horrorific devastation of hell.
Imagine what open heart surgery would be. No Pain is qualia.

OK then, maybe I should have clarified: when I said body, a meant a living body.

Not even that lets you off. You have heard of anasthesia? It is erfectly possible for a living body to feel no pain.
Additionally people who loose limbs can still "feel" the limb. How would you account for that?
Sensation happens in the brain.

Anesthesia? Guess what, you need a body for that to work in the first place. That goes to my point that all our experiences occur in the unity of the self that is the body. Sensations happen in your body, through its senses in connection with the whole CNS, that includes the brain.
People without a limb had to have a real limb at some time in their lives for it to have been imprinted in their brain.

Please refer to the post I made above.

Pattern-chaser wrote: ↑Today, 7:23 am

Sculptor1 wrote: ↑Yesterday, 11:06 am I am talking about "feeling"; sensation, perception, and pain. It's a neural phenomenon. Ordinary nerves carry electrical impulses, the neural matter interprets, and this interpretation is the "feeling".

I wouldn't've expected "feeling" to refer to sensation and perception. Isn't the word more normally used to refer to emotions, not perception? Sorry for my confusion.

I see no real reason to draw a specific distinction here since all I have described are mental acts, which are neural.

Belinda wrote: ↑Today, 9:11 am

Sculptor1 wrote: ↑Yesterday, 11:06 am

Pattern-chaser wrote: ↑Yesterday, 8:56 am

Sculptor1 wrote: ↑October 12th, 2024, 10:37 am All sensations ,pain, perceptions of all kinds happen in neural tissue. That is principally the brain but also includes the exceptions I already laid out that there is small amounts of the same tissue in the but and heart.

Processing of (for example) optical sensation begins in the optic nerve, before the impulses (?) reach the brain. Yes, brains and nerves are made of the same sorts of cells; neurons, and the like, are not confined to the brain. They are all over our bodies. The distribution of 'function' is such that it makes made-up terms like brainmind or bodymind more useful than just brain, mind and body.

We love to separate aspects of ourselves and our bodyminds, but the truth seems to be that most 'function' is distributed, not concentrated. Is this what you're getting at?

Erratum above should have said "gut" not "but".
Aside from brain gut and heart I disagree with your POV.
I am taking about "feeling"; sensation, perception, and pain. It's neural phenomenon. Ordinary nerves carry electrical impulses, the neural matter interprets and this interpretation is the "feeling".

"neural matter" acts electro-chemically .The grey matter is where concepts and percepts form feelings. Feelings are subjective and can't be measured like electro-chemical activity can be measured.
I always think the reflex arc is a useful means for getting the general idea of neural activity

No, The reflex arc is more like the exception. Take the knees jerk for example.
When the knee is struck the mechanical signal stimulate an electical impusle that reaches to the spinla column where it immediately invoke the motor neurone response to move the leg. Another eampl is the graps rresponse which a baby has, which we lose whilst apes keep. There is also a leg lift present in babies.

In the case of the reflex the brain gets the signal after the motor response has ocurred.
WHilst it is true that they show the electro-chemical response as you say, the mental event assocaited with it comes later.
Nonetheless, whilst this shows movement without stimulus, it shows that whilst the signal does not reach the brain it is not a mental response, which rather makes my point for me.