The conscious mind only exists physically

I'll address this debate by refuting con's statements as well providing my own evidence and logic. "There are three basic laws of logic. The first one states that a thing is what it is, and is not something else. " This statement, besides being scientifically wrong, is also baseless. My counter evidence is derived from a property of nature called the wave particle duality, from Quantum mechanics. The wave particle duality says that a small enough object is both a wave and a particle simultaneously, and can switch between the two. By con's logic, a electron is a wave, or an electron is a particle. This is false. An electron is a wave and an electron is a particle at the same time, or it is a wave, or it is a particle, or it is unknown. A thing is what it is as well as possibly something else at the same time, and can also be what it is and what it is not separately, or it can be unknown as to what it is. That is more accurate. . http://en.wikipedia.org... "For him to do this, he must show that consciousness and physical world share all the same properties. " Con attempts to force me to provide evidence for the physicality of consciousness. I argue that con, in fact, needs to prove that there is some "spooky action", which is not explained by any chemical, or molecular processes that occur in the brain. Con supports the notion of magical thinking"that the mind and consciousness somehow exists separately from the brain and defy the laws of physics. However, I will of course supply evidence supporting my assertions that the mind is entirely explainable physically. Because we live in a world that can be accurately modeled by the laws of physics, thus it is logical to assume that everything in the brain can be modeled based on information( I. E. the quantum state of the brain), which contains the locations and momentum of all fundamental particles in the brain. In other words, since nature has often been proven to follow fundamental laws, such as conservation of energy, then logically, the human mind should also follows these laws on a base level since it exists in the brain, which is in the universe. If any information is removed from the brain, such as in a lobotomy, then consciousness changes proportionally. This is particularly evident in individuals such as Phinneas Gage. There is a proportional link between consciousness and the modification of brain matter, which implies the physicality of the mind. . http://en.wikipedia.org... "The brain and all its actions are understood from an "it" perspective. I touched the brain, the brain reacted, the brain was crushed. " Human semantics do not prove that the brain and mind are separate. I am my brain is more accurate. "if the mind were only a physical substance, then it would have to obey physical laws. If the mind obeys physical laws, then the actions caused by the mind cannot be free, and hence cannot be the result of free will" Neurons in the brain function identically to physical laws of nature, and can be modeled on a computer program, which I will provide evidence for in an argument below. The brain is made of neurons and the mind is in the brain. Con makes a claim that the mind cannot have free will when it made entirely of physical substances, but provides no evidence supporting this. ". If the mind obeys physical laws, then the actions caused by the mind cannot be free, and hence cannot be the result of free will. " Con believes purely in the classical laws of physics"that every cause has a predetermined outcome that is exactly predictable. This is another faulty assumption"the quantum universe depends solely on probability and chance, and thus so does the brain since the brain is made of quantum particles. Probability and chance allow the human mind/brain to make new decisions (free will). However, free will may or may not be an illusion due to complex, incomplete science. " So while I could refute materialism by pointing out that the mind is not perceptible by any of the senses" Wrong, there is a device called an MRI machine, which makes active areas of the mind available to our sense of sight. It is also faulty logic to assume that because you can't perceive something, it somehow means that refutes something. I can't perceive an electron, but electrons are not refuted. In fact, brain scans determine what decisions you will make 7 seconds before you make them. Thus, it is fairly obvious to conclude that decisions made by the mind are a result of the physical brain. . http://exploringthemind.com... "It is probably true that the mind interacts with the physical world" it is absolutely true that the mind interacts with the physical world. My mind controls my hand; the only way my mind can move my hand is if it sends an electrical impulse. Electrons are physical. " But we have no problem accepting that immaterial things like synergy could interact with material things like chemicals" Synergy, in this case, is a complex chemical cascade in the brain, determined by genetics as well as the neurophysiology, which alters the state of information in the brain, similar to how a computer manipulates information through a complex cascade of transistors turning on and off. By con's logic, a computer program also doesn't exist physically because it uses synergy, which is obviously a fallacious statement. Synergy does not imply non physicality. Everything in a computer can be explained by physical processes, and analogously, so can the human brain. Con needs to provide evidence to the contrary. "The mind could only interact with the physical world if it were physical. " Yes, thank you for supporting my claims, since I have proven that synergy is physical in the brain. This actually leads into my strongest argument--that the human mind is entirely physical because it can be simulated on a physical system such as a computer. The recently announced blue brain project will simulate individual neurons on a super computer in order to emulate a human mind. This has already shown it's proof of concept by simulating the neocortical column. Thus, since computers are entirely physical, and since a human mind can exist on a computer, we can infer from transitive logic that the human mind is also entirely physical. . http://bluebrain.epfl.ch... In conclusion, con argues from faulty, evidence deprived philosophical logic.