... Read more:
"Abstraction" and "immateriality of the soul" are obvious principles for experts. In a way that denying it requires proving it. Because how can the material properties and characteristics of brain cells discuss the origin and type of their existence and give a reason to prove or disprove it? In other words, those who do not believe in the celibacy of the human soul are asked, "Is this a feature of your brain cells that argues for the negation of celibacy?"Do these arguments and denials, mechanical properties, arise from brain cells algebraically according to the law of determinism? Therefore, the arguments given to prove the existence or abstraction of the soul are to punish and awaken the unconscious conscience. Because of the obvious dissimilarity of sensual states with other material characteristics, the deniers of celibacy have to resort to justifications that are not accepted by human intellect.
Proponents of the materiality of the soul who research the soul and the spirit The ultimate interpretation they offer of the soul is a material interpretation of it. In the opinion of these people, the existence of the abstraction of the soul is not provable. In fact, this group believes that in the human realm, there is nothing but the body and material organs! The best interpretation of the soul is that the soul is a feature of one of the parts and organs of the body, the brain. Of course, those who consider the abstraction of the soul unacceptable in explaining and interpreting the truth of the soul, offered different views, and here we refer to only one of those theories, the theory of "this" which is related to the question:
The theory of "similarity" is a theory in the philosophy of mind according to which the states and processes of the mind are the same as the states and processes of the brain. According to the theory of identity, for example, when you see something or experience pain, it is not that these states are something beyond the activities of the brain and are only associated with those activities, but that these mental states are exactly the same states of the brain. .
According to this theory, any kind of mental state is identical with a kind of physical state, or more precisely, brain state. For example, pain is always the same as shooting a nerve. Of course, the concept of state of mind is different from the concept of state of mind, but the two are one thing outside. This theory is also referred to as "physicalism".
Many Western thinkers (such as Thomas Hobbes, Pierre Gassandi, GGCsmart, and John Searle) consider the theory of identity to be the best interpretation of the soul. The theory of similarity faces many problems and challenges and can be debated and criticized from different angles. Because this theory claims that sensual states are the same as physical properties! That is, the feeling of pain is the same as a nervous breakdown. Consciousness is the change of cells and neurons. But, as we have mentioned in the discussion of the reason for the abstraction of the soul, science is one of the basic properties of the soul which bears no resemblance to the material properties and cannot be considered as material properties.
The claim that the sensation of pain is, for example, the same as a nervous breakdown is a claim that has not yet been explained by any acceptable scientific statement. According to functionalists; Why should it be assumed that every organism must be made of the same chemicals that we are made to have a state that can be accurately identified as a state of pain? One of the problems of the theory of inequality is the confusion of scientific and philosophical issues. To explain that; When mental states such as consciousness or pain occur, there is no doubt that changes occur in the body's physique. Two questions arise here; First, what is the nature and form of consciousness and pain?
The second question is what is the function of the brain and what processes take place in the brain during perception? Neurologists do not answer the question, what is the nature of consciousness and pain? Rather, their job is to explain how the brain works and to describe the processes that take place during perception. Similarly in the field of biophysics, the question "What is life?" Is.
Non-experts do not understand the difference between these two questions and by confusing these two questions, they make a philosophical mistake and think that empirical science has found the answer to the first question. In the words of John Hick: We all - despite all our differences - take it for granted that for every change that occurs in consciousness, there is a corresponding change in a part of the brain. But the danger that has permeated most writings is that we consider "solidarity" to be "identical." Although there is ample evidence for mind-brain correlation,
As long as we imagine the accumulation or breadth of this evidence to prove this identity of mind and brain, we have made a blunder. As Steven Rose says, it is clear that; "The existence of solidarity is not the reason for the existence of a cause."
...
