In Mind and Brain: The First Night we are introduced to three different people; Mary who represents the materialists, Dave who represents the dualists, and Steve who speaks for the all the skeptics. All three bring about very interesting arguments which made it very hard for me personally to pick a side. For example, throughout the first few pages I agreed with Mary because of the statement, “I have a difficult time understanding why a supposedly all-knowing, all-powerful, and all-good Being would allow so much misery and evil to exist in the world.” When I think about the existence of God this basically sums up my opinion. I want to believe in God, but when I see and hear about the terrible things that have happened in this world I find it very hard to believe in this Being who supposedly looks out for all of us. I don’t believe that the terrible things in this world have to happen, and there is no justification for these events. Although I agree strongly with Mary’s opinion on this subject, I do not support her materialistic views. I may not fully believe in God, but I do believe in some kind of after-life and I do agree with Dave in that the brain is separate from the mind and that souls exist. I find it very hard not to believe in some sort of after-life and I find it hard not to believe that souls continue to exist even after someone’s death. Materialists stick to what they can prove, which is understandable; but in doing this they leave no room for the possibility that others’ beliefs may be true, that there is a soul, and that people can ‘exist’ even after their death in this world. All three people made good arguments and presented very strong points to support their beliefs, but I still find it impossible to completely side with Mary in that the brain and mind are two separate things. I believe the brain and mind do go together and one cannot function without the other, but they are not one and the same.
Important Blog/Course Info
Categories
-
Recent Posts
- Is being a Saint really a good thing?
- On The Immorality Of Abortion
- Research Post
- The Problem of (Necessary) Evil
- The Problem of Evil: A Solution from Patricia Williams – Research Post
- Leibniz “Worse Alternatives Solution” to Explain Evil
- Determinism vs. Free Will- Research Post
- Inverted Spectrum- Research Post
- Imagining pain
- Determinism vs. Libertarianism
-
Recent Comments
- Andrew Cullison on Imagining pain
- Andrew Cullison on Inverted Spectrum- Research Post
- Andrew Cullison on The Problem of Evil: A Solution from Patricia Williams – Research Post
- Andrew Cullison on On The Immorality Of Abortion
- KatieBug on On The Immorality Of Abortion
- Andrew Cullison on Is being a Saint really a good thing?
- kiel1944 on The Problem of (Necessary) Evil
- Brendon on Is it possible for anything to really exist in the “knowing”?
- Brendon on The ontological argument
- lmtj.21 on All Knowing God and Free Will
Useful Research Tools
Useful Software and Web Apps
Philosophy Journals
- Analysis
- American Philosophical Quarterly
- Australasian Journal of Philosophy
- Canadian Journal of Philosophy
- Ethics
- Journal of Ethics & Social Philosophy
- The Journal of Philosophy
- Mind
- Noûs
- Pacific Philosophical Quarterly
- Philo
- Philosophers' Imprint
- Philosophical Issues Philosophical Perspectives
- The Philosophical Quarterly
- The Philosophical Review
- Philosophical Studies
- Philosophy and Phenomenological Research
- Philosophy and Public Affairs
- Ratio
- Synthese
Philosophy Blogroll
Archives
Why Study Philosophy?
- THINK! (One Page Handout...Pass it On!)
- Why Major in Philosophy(more info)
Check Your Grade
What is my password?
7 Comments
After reading “First Night” many ideas filled my head. Many of the beliefs Mary described confused me. Mary stated that their could be no god because of all the awful things that occur throughout the world, but i believe certain situations happen because god wants us to learn from our mistakes and he puts people in certain problems to test them and make certain decisions. One thing i didn’t understand was Dave’s belief. Dave believed there was an after life for all humans however, animals could not go to heaven because they had no souls. I don’t understand why animals would not have and afterlife while humans do seeing that humans were derived from animals. Do animals not have souls, and do you need a soul to go into heaven? After reading “First Night” it left me with many unsolved questions.
“…but i believe certain situations happen because god wants us to learn from our mistakes and he puts people in certain problems to test them and make certain decisions.” I always wanted to believe this, but there are just some situations and events that have occurred throughout the world that make that impossible to believe. For example, what exactly is God trying to test when women get raped? Or good people get murdered? There is absolutely no good outcome from these situations, and I don’t see anyone learning from any lessons there. That is the reason I was conflicted throughout the argument. I want to believe in souls because I want to believe in an afterlife, but I’m not sure if I believe in God or not, which makes me agree with Mary in some way. But then again, I can’t really side with Mary because I believe in an after-life, so I thought maybe I’ll agree more with Dave. But I couldn’t because if there are souls I believe all animals as well as humans have them because of what we talked about in class on Monday and what smit9534 just mentioned. We derived from animals, so at point were we ‘good enough’ to obtain a soul? This also goes against the belief of reincarnation, it has been said that if you are reincarnated you can come back as anything based on karma, including animals. So, if you do have a soul now as a human, do you ‘lose’ it when you enter into your next life as some kind of animal? I believe Dave needed his argument to be more concrete if he wanted anyone to side with him. I am in no way a materialist, and I found myself siding with Mary and disagreeing with Dave more then once throughout this argument.
at first when i read the article i was confused on what was going on, but after reading through different peoples posts and comments i started to get the idea of it.i agree with alot of what cassisdycala has to say in her different points of the reading. One of the first points that cassisdycala says is that Mary believes in no God because he allows evil and misery. But i do believe in God and i believe in an after life. I do believe that God allows evil into the world so that we make mistakes and that we can learn from them. And then on the other side of the argument is Dave’s point of view where he talks about the mind and brain and the soul. I believe that the mind and the brain are connected in some way and that they can not function with out each other. I believe that we all have souls and that even after we die our souls exist and that yes even animals have souls and that our souls go into the after life with us and that is how we still exist in the world. One last point is that i felt that in the end that both Dave and Mary are so tied down on their own beliefs that they do not think of other peoples beliefs or even try to relate it to other peoples ideas. But in the end both beliefs have good points that they are trying to get across.
I agree with malexander11, after reading other peoples blogs helped me get a better feel with what the reading was about. I mainly agree with smit9534, how god wants us to learn. If we are made from animals and we have souls, then that must mean animals have souls. I also believe that after we die our souls exist in afterlife. I think that the mind and brain are two different things. The brain is a physical thing where the mind is inside of the brain. The mind is part of the human soul and makes all the decisions. The mind can not be seen from someone else, where the brain can be.
After reading the comments on and analysis post about the First Night it definitely gave me a better understanding about the reading. However I still am left confused as to who to side with, combinations of different views I guess? I most definitely agree with the idea that we are put in some awful and often times tragic situations to learn and grow as an individual. We also learn from hearing these stories of other peoples tragedies. I also agree with beaners2490 that the brain and mind are two different things, where the mind it part of the soul. The brain is the material concrete thing you see whereas the mind is a feeling it has no matter and you must search deeper then a substance to figure it out.
The posts about The First Night have also helped me understand more about what the reading was about. Like a few of the others that have posted, I too am undecided as to where I stand. I agree with Dave in some aspects but I also agree with Mary. I think it’s questionable whether or not god does exist. If there was such a great force on our side then why do bad things happen? Like cassidycala I do believe that there is no need for bad in the world.
Dave brings up the fact that animals don’t have souls, and I believe in evolution. I agree with the idea that humans once evolved from animals. I also think that it would be fair, in my opinion, to say that we are very close in relation to animals.
I like what Mary said about numbers being like God, she made numbers out to be their own omnipresent beings, which if you look at the numbers on the clock they appear to be constant in the same sense as God is supposed to be constant. They have no beginning and they have no end, they are all knowing and all being. Numbers are in everything, and can’t be ignored. Though what she said as to numbers taking the place of a God is completely ridiculous. The only way this argument made sense was looking at it from a mind/ body point of view. Numbers could possibly be etched on the mind and not on the body. So numbers are God in a materialist sense.