In article <363F9B7C.64E965EB at clickshop.com>, Seth Russell <sethruss at clickshop.com> wrote:
>Ray Scanlon wrote:
>>> It is for this reason that I argue that people should use the word "soul"
>> instead of "mind" when referring to that which is aware. Let the brain think
>> and let neuroscientists examine the brain. Let the soul (mind, self,
>> intellect) be aware of the constellations of active neurons in the working
>> brain. Let the soul be aware of them as "thoughts".
>>I have not been following this train and apologize if this has already been
>covered. But to me there is a grand distinction between "mind" and "soul".
> Now
>as these are natural language words they will be pointing to many different
>things in many different minds, but in my mind (and I hazard a guess in most
>people's minds) the word "soul" carries with it a lot of religious connotations
>that are not present in the "mind" word. Your paragraph above does not contain
>any religious connections, so if you don't want those connotations, why not
> just
>use the word "mind" and not confuse people with this other more controversial
>baggage?
Because he already realises that there is something
BEYOND the mind.
And you are still trying to fit everything into the same
old can of worms.
He may be groping for something, and you hold him back.
