Having revisited the Planet of the Robots yesterday morning,
in the afternoon I chanced across Wilder Penfield’s The Mystery of the Mind (Princeton University Press, 1975). The
book’s subtitle is “A Critical Study of Consciousness and the Human Brain.”
Penfield is perhaps best known for stimulating neural cells
of awake subjects and, doing so, eliciting super-sharp memories the subjects
spontaneously produced. Examining such reactions—in which the subject was
simultaneously aware both of the memory and his or her current presence in the
operating room—as well as doing other experiments where pictures were shown to
the subjects to be named—while Penfield occasionally inhibited the subjects’ abilities
to produce words—Penfield gradually reached the conviction that the mind was
independent of the brain and, indeed, made use of a source of energy of all its
own. He could not determine if that energy came from some external source or
was produced by the brain for the mind. But that a separate energy
was definitely involved became quite clear to him (link on this site). He was confident that,
someday, we would discover what that energy was.
Penfield died a year after his last book was published. A
brief look suggests that science has indeed continued to concern itself with the
brain-mind subject since Penfield’s death. The general tendency of that
research, however, has been to deny Penfield’s notion of a possible brain-mind
dualism, first by linking the “energy” to quantum phenomena and, second, tentatively
identifying new brain structures which could explain the mind’s seeming “independence”—thus
denying that independence.
For a while there one scientists had timidly touched the
border between the physical and something else. But the overwhelming bias of
science has been and continues to be in the other direction: back to the
comforts of materialist monism. I use the word “timidly” because, in that book,
Penfield, while stating his own convictions, does so with an obvious awareness
that he is, most definitely, stepping off the reservation.
A recent post on The
Zennist says that “Usefulness and truth are different” (link).
The useful aspects of Penfield’s work were aimed at the understanding and treating
epilepsy by surgery—to which he made significant contributions. The utility of
knowing that mind and brain are different would appear to be quite slight.
Moreover, it does not really require a scientific proof; good philosophy
suffices. One sort of hopes that the special “energy” the mind uses will not be discovered. If it is, it might
well be abused…
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.