Morny wrote:PaulSacramento wrote:It is clear that the human brain shows properties that go beyond it's[sic] physical capacities ( which are basically the same as all other animals).
Does the "which" clause modify "physical capacities"? If so, what do you mean by "physical capacities"? (for clarity, give examples)
And what do you mean by "properties"? (for clarity, give examples)
I doubt that PaulS could do it justice in a thread where the desire is to argue to protect a Physicalist mindset.
Thomas Nagel (Atheist) caused a ruckus in recent years, with his Mind and the Cosmos.
I think Nagel is deluding himself into thinking some "laws" can be found for the immaterial akin the the physical, but nonetheless enjoyed his thoughts.
And he summaries within the past century of thoughts by respected thinkers and where it's all lead.
It'll likely become a required read for many on mind-body.
Now, I'm not telling you what to believe.
But if you're really interested in such questions you're asking PaulS, rather than looking for an opening to stab, then take a stroll around the Internet just reading
about the controversy surrounding Nagel.
Doing this will: 1) It'll be more interesting seeing the venom fly while 2) giving you a bit more understanding in the issues.
Perhaps it'll whet your appetite to investigate such matters further out of interest rather than a feeling of being affronted.