structure for 'Nature of Minds'    |     alphabetical list of themes    |     unexpand these ideas

15. Nature of Minds / A. Nature of Mind / 1. Mind / d. Location of mind

[decided where the mind is located]

9 ideas
Alcmaeon was the first to say the brain is central to thinking [Alcmaeon, by Staden, von]
     Full Idea: Alcmaeon apparently was the first Greek to assign central cognitive and biological functions to the brain.
     From: report of Alcmaeon (fragments/reports [c.490 BCE]) by Heinrich von Staden - Alcmaeon
     A reaction: The name of Alcmaeon should be remembered with honour. This was 200 years before Aristotle, who still hadn't worked it out. I presume Alcmaeon inferred the truth from head injuries, which is overwhelming evidence, if you notice it.
The mind is in the middle of the breast, because there we experience fear and joy [Lucretius]
     Full Idea: The guiding principle of the whole body is the mind or intellect, which is firmly lodged in the mid-region of the breast. Here is felt fear and alarm, and the caressing pulse of joy. Here, then is the seat of the intellect and mind.
     From: Lucretius (On the Nature of the Universe [c.60 BCE], III.140)
     A reaction: Even by this date thinking people were not clear that the mind is in the brain. They paid insufficient attention to head injuries. The emotions are felt to have a location, but intellect and principles are not.
The mind is a part of a man, just like a hand or an eye [Lucretius]
     Full Idea: First, I maintain that the mind, which we often call the intellect, the seat of guidance and control of life, is part of a man, no less than hand or foot or eyes are parts of a whole living creature.
     From: Lucretius (On the Nature of the Universe [c.60 BCE], III.95)
     A reaction: Presumably Lucretius asserts this because some people were denying it. Sounds like common sense to me. The only reason I can see for anyone denying what he says is if they are desperate to survive death.
Galen showed by experiment that the brain controls the body [Galen, by Hankinson]
     Full Idea: Galen established by experiments in neural anatomy that the brain really is, contra the Stoics and Aristotelians, the body's control centre.
     From: report of Galen (On Hippocrates and Plato [c.170]) by R.J. Hankinson - Galen (damaged)
     A reaction: And about time too. This is one of the most significant events in the development of human understanding. No one has been able to go back to the old view, even Descartes, no matter how much they may long to do so.
The soul is everywhere and nowhere in the body, and must be its cause [Porphyry]
     Full Idea: The soul is neither a body, nor in the body, but is only the cause of the body, because she is simultaneously everywhere and nowhere in the body.
     From: Porphyry (Launching Points to the Realm of the Mind [c.280], 6Enn5 43)
     A reaction: This is the rather bewildering phenomenology of consciousness which persuaded Descartes of dualism.
The soul is in the brain, as shown by head injuries [Montaigne]
     Full Idea: The seat of the powers of the soul is in the brain, as is clearly shown by the fact that wounds and accidents affecting the head immediately harm the faculties of the soul.
     From: Michel de Montaigne (Apology for Raymond Sebond [1580], p.0614)
     A reaction: At last someone has finally got the facts clear. It seems surprising that the Greeks never clearly grasped this piece of irrefutable evidence - even those Greeks who speculated that the brain was the key. Here we have a fixed fact of philosophy of mind.
A meeting of man and animal can be deterritorialization (like a wasp with an orchid) [Deleuze]
     Full Idea: The wasp becomes part of the orchid's reproductive apparatus at the same time as the orchid becomes the sexual organ of the wasp. …There are becomings where a man and an animal only meet on the trajectory of a common but asymmetrical deterritorialization.
     From: Gilles Deleuze (A Conversation: what is it? What is it for? [1977], I)
     A reaction: [second bit compressed] The point here is to illustrate 'deterritorialization', a term which Deleuze got from Guattari. It seems to be where the margins of your being become unclear. Recall the externalist, anti-individualist view of mind.
Representations are in the head, but their content is not, as stories don't exist in their books [Dretske]
     Full Idea: Representations are in the head, but their content is not; in this sense, the mind isn't in the head any more than stories (i.e. story contents) are in books.
     From: Fred Dretske (Naturalizing the Mind [1997], §1.6)
     A reaction: This is the final consequence of Putnam's idea that meanings ain't in the head. Intentionality is an extraordinary bridge between the brain and the external world. The ontology of stories, and musical compositions, is one philosophy's deepest problems.
Externalists say minds depend on environment for their very existence and identity [Lowe]
     Full Idea: Externalism maintains that our minds 'reach out' into our physical environment, at least in the sense that our states of mind can depend for their very existence and identity upon what things that environment contains.
     From: E.J. Lowe (Introduction to the Philosophy of Mind [2000], Ch. 6)
     A reaction: A nice statement of the externalist view. Does this mean that a brain in a vat would not have a mind? Does a photograph 'reach out' to its subject-matter?