An Unembodied Mind is Very Complex

Arguably we are talking about the complexity of a being including the necessary brain (unembodied in this case) necessary for all minds and information storage or processing power we are aware of. However, this round I will focus on the mind itself based on standard definitions. Remember the human mind is the only known example and is incredibly complex. This is what Con has chosen to represent a being he asserts is simple. Complex thoughts & actions are central to the debate Since Con’s non-standard concepts of mind were not offered in round one standard dictionary definitions of mind apply: 1. The human consciousness that originates in the brain and is manifested especially in thought, perception, emotion, will, memory, and imagination [9]. 2. The collective conscious and unconscious processes in a sentient organism that direct and influence mental and physical behavior. Con misunderstands what is meant by mind Every complex thought or process Con attributes to the creator are exactly what we are referring to when we say a mind. Any thought, any organization, processing, memory, decision to act or creative impulse and talent are exactly what a mind is. The imagination used to create this universe would have been at least as complex as the universe. “The mind is typically defined as the organized totality or system of all mental processes or psychic activities of an individual [10].” Thought is an intricate part of the mind and there are thousands of them The National Science foundation estimates that the numbers of conscious thoughts we have in a day are in the range of 12,000-50,000, deep thinkers averaging more. A creator of the universe would dwarf this figure. After all, minds can only create something first imagined to exist. This is far less than the mental activity in our simple minds because 95% of our activity we are not even aware of [11]. Simple tasks like driving a car use 30 specific skills each orchestrated by elaborate mental processes we are often not aware of. Compare this to more multifaceted tasks like creating a great work of art…. like a universe. Creative problem solving continues in the subconscious often referred to as the Eureka Effect. The collective consciousness of mankind cannot even understand the universe With the collective knowledge of the 100 billion people that have existed on earth in the last 10,000 years [13] we are only just discovering some of the basics about how the universe works. Remember just how complex the available memory storage and processing power are available to a single mind to generate thoughts, memory and imagination. There are now 25,400 scientific journals and they published 1.5 million papers in 2009 [14]. Wikipedia scratches the surface of many topics and in a single month the website grew by more than 30 million words and the site contains around 1.4 billion words [15]. The amount of information available to us is staggering. All of our collective shared thoughts, imagination, memory and creative talent and we still cannot create one single atom of hydrogen much less an entire universe. Remember all these characteristics are what are referred to when we use the word ‘mind.’ The complexity of the brain illustrates the complexity of minds The intricate hardware needed to support the only mind we are aware of verifies to the vast complexity of human consciousness. Con can assert that a mind is simple: that thoughts, emotions, will, memory and imagination are simple, as absurd as that is. Why then does our small memory, intelligence and creativity (compared to a God mind) require more storage than all computers on earth and microprocessors in the range of 15,000 times the number of stars in the Milky Way galaxy? The processing power alone indicates our immense creative problem solving ability. “by Pro’s own admission we are debating the hypothetical possibility of whether or not an unembodied mind (any unembodied mind), would itself be complex” I disagree with Con here. This is not about any mind such as a disembodied gerbil. The context of my comment and debate is the complexity of a mind that created the universe. “Thus thoughts and actions are emergent from the mind, not the other way around; they are two distinct things.” The mind is an emergent property of the brain and refers to consciousness this includes thoughts and decisions to act. The complexity of the actions are relevant because complex thoughts are needed for intricate actions and we are discussing a being that is able to create a universe. I. The complexity of the brain illustrates the complexity of the mind and it’s features such as thinking, predicting and planning. “For if embodied minds are as complex as Pro says, and they are complex primarily because they are embodied” No, the mind, or consciousness, is complex in and of itself. The complexity of the brain is relevant in that it demonstrates the enormous number of complex thoughts and processes that combine to form a conscious mind. The brain is complex because, as I have demonstrated, this is necessary for the vast number of complex thoughts to take place. Notice Con here has conceded that an elaborate form of memory storage would be necessary for a creator mind. Memory is, by definition, a part of a mind. It is the complex process of collecting, storing and retrieving information for a given task. There is no immaterial self-using the brain. All actions of a mind are a direct result of physical actions in the brain. The only mind we are aware of requires a complex mechanism to be produced and we have every reason to believe that a disembodied mind would have some form of a disembodied brain. II. It is extremely large amount of processing power that reveals how complex conscious minds really are “Pro attempts to argue that “the more complex the information available the more complex the mind.” But he equivocates mind with brain again” I agree and it would be more correct to say that ‘the more complex the information processed the more complex the mind.’ This keeps it clear that by mind we are referring the vast number of running processes that make up a mind. “Now what reason does Pro give for thinking that a “disembodied mind would need some kind of switch or hardwired change to store each individual piece of information.”?” Con misrepresents me here. My first example of why a mind would need memory storage is that the only minds we are aware of need a brain. All memory storage requires some kind of a mechanism to store each piece of information. The more information the more complex the storage. “There is nothing incompatible with the notion of a unembodied substance capable of intention” Complex intention (will) to create is by definition part of a mind. III. Here Con is trying to define God as simple because he doesn’t exist in our reality That a God mind would not be composed of matter and energy just means that he is composed of something we have no reason to believe exists. It does nothing to demonstrate simplicity. Con references a mind to describe another being. All creative minds we are aware of are incredibly complex. All creative intentional causes we are aware of, and your analogy for this being, i.e. minds are very complex. IV. Here Con makes unjustified assumptions about a mind that are nothing like the minds we are aware of Hypothetical refers to a hypothesis that we intend to supply evidence to support and does not give permission to define things into existence. Con has given no reason why he suggests that a creator mind would be exist outside of time, not have a creator or be efficient. The only examples we have are none of these things. He has also suggested near omnipotence while suggesting a simple entity. “Such a being by definition is simple since it fills no space!” That this mind does not fill physical space we are aware of only suggests that it exists in some other zone of reality, not simplicity. I would expect something similar to matter and energy since all minds we are aware of are made of matter and energy. “wholly apart from any thought processes or behavior it may or may not have.” Thought processes refer to a mind, behavior indicates what type of thought processes are possible. “An unembodied mind which is causal isn’t composed of matter, space or energy and so it would be a very simply entity.” How have you demonstrated this? You are only stating what the mind is not. This says nothing about simplicity. “An unembodied mind by contrast is a substance that is aware but not composed of what it's aware of, it thinks but isn't the sum total of its thoughts, experiences but isn't its past collection of experiences, reasons but isn't the product of its reasoning, understands but isn't what it has understood.” Thinking, experiencing, reasoning and understanding are what we are referring to by mind. This concept you have provided is completely baffling and you cannot explain a creator mind by what it is not. This does not establish anything about what it would be. “Thus I declare victory.” Interesting way to close the second round. - Con attributes complex characteristics of a mind and uses a mind as an analogy for a creator God. He then argues that these characteristics are not a mind when by definition they are. We are talking about the complexity of a being that would require something like a very complicated, disembodied brain to function. [9] http://www.thefreedictionary.com... [10] http://facts.randomhistory.com... [11] http://health.usnews.com... [12] http://www.processcoaching.com... [13] http://theratchet.ca... [14] http://www.bmj.com... [15] http://en.wikipedia.org...