>>> Jkr438@aol.com 06/02/02 23:27 PM >>>
[Veridicus] The reasoning goes such, because the symptoms of mental
illness
can be alleviated by changing brain chemistry, mental illnesses must
really
be disorders of brain chemistry and therefore mind (and soul) must
really be
brain. This line of "neurophilosophical" reasoning is taken so much for
granted nowadays that it can be quite startling to realize how little
sense
it actually makes. We could with equal logic argue that if a tree
disease
can be cured by changing the chemistry of the soil, then tree diseases
must
really be soil disorders and therefore trees must really be soil!
You are trying to argue against a very basic application of Occam's
razor.
The problem lies in having useful theories of "mind" on which to base
mental
illness. We have useful enough theories about trees and their diseases
that
it makes sense to interject a tree between the soil and the disease.
Whether
we have as useful theories about mind(s) and what relationship if any
they
would have in mental illness, remains uncertain at best if not doubtful.
Lacking that, it makes much more sense to draw connections between known
entities, rather than adding more entities. If not, then why not add
"souls", "conscience", "spirit", "awareness", "virtue", "personalities",
etc., or the lack thereof to the equation? Wait a minute, obviously you
DO
exactly this . . .
[Veridicus] Mental illness cannot be just a chemical imbalance in the
brain.
Rather, it is a disharmony of body, brain, mind, and spirit within the
whole
person: an inner conflict of the soul.
You have succeeded in only complicating the situation unnecessarily by
adding
even more superfluous entities.
-Jake
It seems, rather, that the situation has been oversimplified.
Complicating the situation is necessary to fully understand it, if the
situation is more complicated then we are perceiving. Perhaps these
entities are superfluous, and I acknowledge the application of Occam's
razor in this instance. Yet, if it is obvious that our currently
accepted reasoning has no factual basis and is inherently flawed then it
must be conceded that there is a great deal missing from the current
hypothesis. Therefore, to administer potent chemicals to individuals
altering their brain chemistry on the pretense that we have sufficient
understanding of the mind is an extremely dangerous practice with, as of
yet, completely unknown consequences.
-Veridicus (James)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sun Sep 22 2002 - 05:06:14 MDT