Is there any real difference between reality and a dream?

[Holocene]

Is there any real difference between "reality" and a dream?

You're reading this right now, and it might seem very real to you. You might truly believe that you really are reading this. Why do you believe that though? The answer must, at least in part, lie with the fact that you are unconsciously basing that assumption on the fact that various electrical process in your brain are telling you that this brief moment in your daily life is "real".

But a "dream" is again, nothing more than electrical processes in the brain. Usually, we awaken from a dream, and might dismiss it as something that never happened in "reality".

But if you believe that your decision to click on this thread just a minute ago was "reality", do you have anything other than electrical processes in your brain to base that assumption upon?

It seems to me, that if every recollection of our lives is but the result of electrical processes in the brain, then there ought to be no real difference, nor no bias in terms of "importance", between so-called "reality" and a "dream".

 

[P4PPY]

A maximum of 2 senses can be active at a time during a dream. In reality you can use all of your senses at once. :)
Hey... what?... it sounds really really good!

 

[JoeDawg]

You're reading this right now, and it might seem very real to you.

Yes it does. And while dreams can seem real to me, context is everything.

I know I fall asleep at night and within the bounds of that experience, I know I have 'experiences'.

Those experiences however seem of a different quality. They are inconsistent and disjointed.

I'm one of those people who doesn't remember much of my dreams, so it may be easier for me. Some people have very vivid dreams and remember them, some can even control their dreams and dream lucidly.

Most I think would agree that there is more continuity to 'waking life'. I wake up mostly where I left off. Unless I've had too much to drink, of course.

But even that last one is in context. I've discovered over my life that certain things cause inconsistency in perception. And I've compared that to the experiences that others tell me about.

Its not perfect, but we have a relatively solid foundation to distinguish dreams and waking life... at least in terms of the quality of the experience.

 

[DaveC426913]

It took me a long time to come across it but now that I've found it, it's never failed.

There is one incontrivertible difference that sets dreams apart from reality - a subtle "simulation glitch" that let's me test which state I am currently in.


If, after peeing, I don't feel the urge to pee any longer, I'm awake.
If, after peeing, I perplexingly still feel the urge to pee, I'm dreaming.

I sh*ite you not.

 

[Math Is Hard]

A maximum of 2 senses can be active at a time during a dream...

Where did you get this information? Are you joking?

 

[octelcogopod]

I agree with everything Joe said, but also, what's shared between a dream and reality is that we with both see imagery, have emotions, it's called an experience.
These two types of experiences come from the same thing, the brain.
We can separate a dream from reality because of what Joe said, but also within the context of reality, a dream is a phenomena we know happens when we sleep.
While yeah, you can say all of reality is a dream, from a kind of solipsists point of view, but a sleep dream is nothing more than a phenomena within the brain, within reality(which may be defines as a dream in some cases.)

There's no reason to say reality isn't 'real' though. What people experience in their lives is as real as it's going to get, at least from our perspective the way we are made.
It's all we got really, so why not believe it?

 

[P4PPY]

Where did you get this information? Are you joking?

Yes... I was joking

 

[Moridin]

Physicist Victor Stenger argues that reality is point-of-view invariant, whereas this might not apply to dreams.

 

[Violator]

The pee test can be dangerous. More then once, when young, I found after peeing in a dream I no longer needed to pee.


I think an interesting variation on the question would be to theorize the presence of a powerful hallucinogen such as DMT rather than a dream state. While under the influence of such a drug, the break with reality can become total. The hallucinogenic state can have self-consistent history and rules. It can also include time effects making it seem to go on indefinitely, and to have been going on indefinitely. Perhaps, we are all tripping right now.

 

[g33kski11z]

I've noticed that I do not have shadows in my dreams...
..not sure what that means..

 

[Noone]

You're reading this right now, and it might seem very real to you. You might truly believe that you really are reading this. Why do you believe that though? The answer must, at least in part, lie with the fact that you are unconsciously basing that assumption on the fact that various electrical process in your brain are telling you that this brief moment in your daily life is "real".

But a "dream" is again, nothing more than electrical processes in the brain. Usually, we awaken from a dream, and might dismiss it as something that never happened in "reality".

But if you believe that your decision to click on this thread just a minute ago was "reality", do you have anything other than electrical processes in your brain to base that assumption upon?

It seems to me, that if every recollection of our lives is but the result of electrical processes in the brain, then there ought to be no real difference, nor no bias in terms of "importance", between so-called "reality" and a "dream".

To answer your question within your title...

Control is what the difrince is... and due to the fact, in your reality everyone els is there in there reality as well, but in a dream you alone would be in your own created reality in your head.

thats the answer to your question in your title :/ and its true and correct

And anyways... are brain is are mind and are mind is are brain... so are brain is us, and are mind is us... the only difrence would be the mind speak's english...

 

[Noone]

It is real beacuse i say it's real, so therefore i make it real -.-

why when i say it's real it make's it real?

 

[russ_watters]

The answer must, at least in part, lie with the fact that you are unconsciously basing that assumption on the fact that various electrical process in your brain are telling you that this brief moment in your daily life is "real".

But a "dream" is again, nothing more than electrical processes in the brain. Usually, we awaken from a dream, and might dismiss it as something that never happened in "reality".

The difference should be pretty obvious: when you are awake, those electrical impulses are generated/formed by your external senses. In a dream, the "reality" is generated internally.

It just sounds to me like you need to watch the Matrix again - you don't quite have it down.

 

[Noone]

The difference should be pretty obvious: when you are awake, those electrical impulses are generated/formed by your external senses. In a dream, the "reality" is generated internally.

It just sounds to me like you need to watch the Matrix again - you don't quite have it down.

LOL yea that movie dose portray it in a way just about everyone can understand...

But nature tell's the story much better :/

 

[Lord Ping]

Descartes did this first.

The answer is, erm, yes. Of course there is a difference between reality and dreams. Think about it.

But producing an argument to the conclusion that we can know we're not dreaming sounds kind of tricky, and therein lies the attractiveness of Descartes's argument.

 

[Violator]

Locke's response to Descartes ran something to the effect of "How about I push you in a fire and we see how you respond." His point being of course, you would try to put out the fire and live whether in a dream or not.

 

[secular]

Reality is an 'extended' dream and Death is when you wake up. Think of this - Can we at this moment tell with 100% confidence ' I am not dreaming'. May be we will wake up this moment from this dream.

I know it is not as simple as it sounds, but its a very interesting paradigm. What happens when we die - this world no more exists for us, it is only a memory, maybe 'just like a dream'.

My conclusion: A dream is reality when you are in it. Reality is a dream (memory) when you are out of it.

 

[DaveC426913]

My conclusion: A dream is reality when you are in it. Reality is a dream (memory) when you are out of it.

This is looking at the problem only symptomatically, ignoring the origin of these states: the conscious and unconscious mind.

A dream is what your unconscious mind does to entertain itself when your conscious mind is dormant. Waking state is what happens when your conscious mind returns to its active state and reasserts its dominance.

 

[WaveJumper]

This is looking at the problem only symptomatically, ignoring the origin of these states: the conscious and unconscious mind.

A dream is what your unconscious mind does to entertain itself when your conscious mind is dormant. Waking state is what happens when your conscious mind returns to its active state and reasserts its dominance.

I got the impression he was stating that the conscious mind/brain is (also) a projection(constituent part of the dream), the opposite of the mind being responsible for all objective sensory sensations. What the thing that 'projects' those sensations(reality) onto the mind is supposed to be like, is not something i can fathom, though. Maybe he can clarify his beliefs about us being in a more fundamental state somewhere else, and only temporarily here(dream state) in this physical universe. I wonder when we "wake up" as he claims after death, how are we supposed to know that we aren't again in a dream-reality?

Reality is an 'extended' dream and Death is when you wake up.

Would a total freedom and no laws of physics and bounderies mean that you have woken up?

If yes, i don't want to wake up(yet).

 

[Borg]

Locke's response to Descartes ran something to the effect of "How about I push you in a fire and we see how you respond." His point being of course, you would try to put out the fire and live whether in a dream or not.

I have hit the ground from a great height while dreaming and picked myself right up. I wouldn't do that in real life. Dreams for me are not real.

 

[secular]

This is looking at the problem only symptomatically, ignoring the origin of these states: the conscious and unconscious mind.

A dream is what your unconscious mind does to entertain itself when your conscious mind is dormant. Waking state is what happens when your conscious mind returns to its active state and reasserts its dominance.

> Let me add another state of our mind (in addition to unconscious- dreaming/ conscious-waking) - the sleep state. In this state we do not experience anything, but we are somewhere. Well, there can be another state of consciousness that is different from all these 3. While dreaming we are not aware of reality, so I cannot say what this fourth state is while in this reality-dream. This brings me to another question - what is space? ( is it an absolute reality OR just a sensory perception).

I got the impression he was stating that the conscious mind/brain is (also) a projection(constituent part of the dream), the opposite of the mind being responsible for all objective sensory sensations. What the thing that 'projects' those sensations(reality) onto the mind is supposed to be like, is not something i can fathom, though.

>You did understand what I was trying to convey. So, coming to the concept of space, what space are we in when we are dreaming? are we physically (as per the laws of physics) present in the conscious world (I am talking about individual awareness and not of the body as others can see it)?

Maybe he can clarify his beliefs about us being in a more fundamental state somewhere else, and only temporarily here(dream state) in this physical universe.

> 'somewhere else' need not be some space in the physical sense. Are we in a different physical location when we are dreaming as against when we are awake? Same way we need not be in a different physical location after death, we may become aware of the the illusion of 'what we call reality now' as being something like a dream.

I wonder when we "wake up" as he claims after death, how are we supposed to know that we aren't again in a dream-reality?

> I do not know about that for sure.


Would a total freedom and no laws of physics and bounderies mean that you have woken up?

If yes, i don't want to wake up(yet).

While dreaming, have you ever been aware that you are in a dream? It is a very funny feeling. I did experience it a couple of times , but it did not stay for long. I must say I did feel great freedom during that phase, and wanted to enjoy the dream with abandon. Sadly, they did not last for long. Would like to know if anyone has had a similar experience in dreams.

 

[M Grandin]

While dreaming, have you ever been aware that you are in a dream? It is a very funny feeling. I did experience it a couple of times , but it did not stay for long. I must say I did feel great freedom during that phase, and wanted to enjoy the dream with abandon. Sadly, they did not last for long. Would like to know if anyone has had a similar experience in dreams.

Interesting topic !

Sometimes I have also been aware of dreaming, although still been careful because I could not be 100% sure of dream.

In some dreams I have also made experiments, calculus and even "innovations", aiming to analyze it later after awakening - are the physics laws and logics the same in dream world as in "real" world? Such research in dream is not always easy accomplish. (My impression is that logics is consistent in dream world, but not always exactly the same as in "real" world).

Some times I have also dreamt in dream in dream... up to threee or four stages - and
waked up in stages not sure when finally in "real" world. Bedlamp not working is sign of still in dream world.

 

[Buckethead]

> While dreaming, have you ever been aware that you are in a dream? It is a very funny feeling. I did experience it a couple of times , but it did not stay for long. I must say I did feel great freedom during that phase, and wanted to enjoy the dream with abandon. Sadly, they did not last for long. Would like to know if anyone has had a similar experience in dreams.

I certainly have, many times. It is 100% coincident with becoming fully conscious and not just subconscious. As soon as I realize I'm dreaming, it's like a veil over my whole brain is lifted and I become fully aware, have all my will, can think logically and thoughtfully and be fully questioning how "this" can be so real, just like waking life. It's very odd indeed because if it happens to you once, you will never think of waking reality the same way.

I had a fully conscious experience once where I did not know I was dreaming, and that to me was the most extreme of all mind bending experiences. I had a different job then in waking life, I had a family, a dog, and all memories of this new person that I had become. Had I not awaken, I never would have known that I had any other life than that one. Talk about a religious experience, holy moly. No drugs used.

 

[Quincy]

Your brain perceives dreams the same way it perceives reality, so there's no difference between reality and dreams to your brain, but there is obviously a difference between reality and dreams to your body. So the answer to the question "Is there any real difference between "reality" and a dream?" is that to the brain, no, to the body, yes.

 

[DaveC426913]

Your brain perceives dreams the same way it perceives reality, so there's no difference between reality and dreams to your brain,

This is not true. I don't know why you say this.

Your brain perceives reality through our senses. It does not perceive dreams through our senses, rather it manufactures dreams from within, partly pulled from memories, but much of it constructed by our mind on-the-fly.

 

[Sorry!]

The only difference is that psychological sciences are making great strides towards understanding dreams. In my dream world there are no strides being made towards understanding the 'real' world.

I think this theory is misunderstanding what dreams actually are.

++For those interested dreams are more than likely our brains way of 'defragging' and getting rid of useless information. Dreams can be as short as a few seconds to as long as 45 minutes (quite rare lengthy ones). The average is only a few minutes. Humans have around 8 dreams a night.

 

[Quincy]

This is not true. I don't know why you say this.

Your brain perceives reality through our senses. It does not perceive dreams through our senses, rather it manufactures dreams from within, partly pulled from memories, but much of it constructed by our mind on-the-fly.

Their was a study (I don't remember when or where, unfortunately) which showed that the brain doesn't know the difference between when the body is actually experiencing something or is imagining that experience. Maybe "perceives" is the wrong word to use...

 

[Rayman9102]

Heres a question that can probably answer this.. Do you guys think a blind man can dream?

 

[Sorry!]

Their was a study (I don't remember when or where, unfortunately) which showed that the brain doesn't know the difference between when the body is actually experiencing something or is imagining that experience. Maybe "perceives" is the wrong word to use...

This is different from dreaming. The brain knows it's dreaming YOUR not conscious of it though.

The experiment your speaking of has to do with how the brain interprets perceptions. AKA While you're concious.

 

[WaveJumper]

The brain knows it's dreaming YOU ARE not conscious of it though.

I thought the brain was me. Are you implying I am not my brain?

 

[magpies]

I say they are both a dream state and in only one you really know this fact. Like you start having a dream then you move onto a second dream and become unsure of the fact that its just a dream because of your first dream. So basicaly life is just one recursive nightmare you learn to live with.

 

[russ_watters]

Heres a question that can probably answer this.. Do you guys think a blind man can dream?

I don't think you realize just how irrelevant the question is. Blind people dream - dreams are not exclusively sight driven. You only think they are because as a person who sees, your eyesight is your dominant sense. People who don't see and never have have auditory dreams:

Answer from somebody who has been blind since she was fairly young:

" Yes, blind people do dream. What they see in their dreams depends on how much they could ever see. If someone has been totally blind since birth, they only have auditory dreams. If someone such as I, has had a measure of sight, then that person dreams with that measure of sight. I still dream as though I can see, colors included. For people I've met since, their faces are just blurs or how I imagine they look. To me, someone like my mother looks forever 30. "

http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/11187

 

[magpies]

They could possibly probably feel things in the dreams also... I know I have felt touching things before in dreams. I have also smelt something a flower I believe and heard voices of people talking in my dreams is fairly common.

 

[Rayman9102]

I don't think you realize just how irrelevant the question is. Blind people dream - dreams are not exclusively sight driven. You only think they are because as a person who sees, your eyesight is your dominant sense. People who don't see and never have have auditory dreams: http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/11187

But isn't that a blind person that can partially see? A complete blind person can't see. But if they see blures then they must be able to see some what of life, and then they are not completely blind. But what about a complete blind human? He can feel but can't imagine right? In order for us to imagine we must first see. And in order to dream, we must see to get an 'idea' or a 'picture'. Now colors... If a blind person can see colors then we do know that the colors we see as humans that are not blind are the actual colors of the universe, and not due to our Sun, or evolution correct? Put yourself into a pitch black room, feel around for objects you never 'seen' before, though this may not work well because you 'can' see objects so your going to try to make an assumtion of what they will look like regardless. But as for a 'complete' blind person they have not seen the world around them so how can they imagine? Though they can smell.. I just don't see how this adds up, they can imagine but in order to imagine you must see...

 

[DaveC426913]

But what about a complete blind human? He can feel but can't imagine right? In order for us to imagine we must first see.

Wrong.

And in order to dream, we must see to get an 'idea' or a 'picture'.

Wrong.

But as for a 'complete' blind person they have not seen the world around them so how can they imagine? Though they can smell.. I just don't see how this adds up, they can imagine but in order to imagine you must see...

Wrong.

Raymond, you (and the rest of us) have a physical disability. You are unable to imagine or to dream without using your visual cortex. You are highly dependent on this one sense; it dominates the rest.

Blind people do not have this disability. They are perfectly capable of imagining sounds, smells, tastes and touches without visual imagery. And they are perfectly capable of having dreams filled with sounds, smells, tastes and touches.

Sight is just one of the senses.

 

[Rayman9102]

Wrong.

Wrong.


Wrong.

Raymond, you (and the rest of us) have a physical disability. You are unable to imagine or to dream without using your visual cortex. You are highly dependent on this one sense; it dominates the rest.

Blind people do not have this disability. They are perfectly capable of imagining sounds, smells, tastes and touches without visual imagery. And they are perfectly capable of having dreams filled with sounds, smells, tastes and touches.

Sight is just one of the senses.

I understand where you are coming from but my point here is to visualize a dream.. I am sure they dream of sounds but sounds without pictures. Or is this another 'wrong' statement?

 

[DaveC426913]

I understand where you are coming from but my point here is to visualize a dream.

You point was actually:

Do you guys think a blind man can dream?

The answer is, in a word, yes.

 

[Rayman9102]

You point was actually:

The answer is, in a word, yes.

Well my fault for not being so specific i know what i was saying thinkg you guys will see where i am coming from. My appologies.

 

[DaveC426913]

Well my fault for not being so specific i know what i was saying thinkg you guys will see where i am coming from. My appologies.

Which is why it was particularly odd that you came back with the same thing even after Russ corrected you. My post was actually correcting you for the second time.

Maybe you missed Russ' post?

 

[Rayman9102]

Which is why it was particularly odd that you came back with the same thing even after Russ corrected you. My post was actually correcting you for the second time.

Maybe you missed Russ' post?

Lol no, it was just foolish of me that i got his words mixed up completely. I didnt read it through clearly and just read it the first time, until you said what you said i went back and reread them all and was like oooo.. lol "Auditory dreams" lol didnt even remember reading that!

 

[M Grandin]

If the dream is just a processing sleeping brain in real world, isn't it astonishing how it can execute/animate exactly and rapidly real world events/acts - in contrast to rather fuzzy
low precision thinking process as awake? Not to mention the precise vast memory required
to execute an abstract dream. In dream I may look at a book and every word on every page
in that book remains the same, if I return to that book in dream - while awake I can only remember a few words a short time.

Why don't you have access to that brain capacity at awaken state, i.e in "real" world?
It may indicate dream world is comparable to real world in some extent.

 

[Sorry!]

I thought the brain was me. Are you implying I am not my brain?

No you are not your brain.
What ever gave you that idea?

You are a byproduct of your brain of course. Just to show you what this means can you for me control your hypothalamus? Can you turn off your vision while keeping your eyes open? Can you slow down or speed up your heart rate?

These things are all controlled by various portions of your brain most autonomic neural processes are controlled by your hypothalamus which is part of your brain. The slowing down of the heart rate is possible through meditation some people claim but I'm not talking about slowing it down through some sort of relaxing method. I'm speaking about just sitting there normally in a conversation and tell your heart to slow down and it listens.

You are not your brain what you are is your conciousness. While you dream you are not concious. The moment you become conscious you are in what is now called a lucid dream, which is different.

 

[WaveJumper]

No you are not your brain.
What ever gave you that idea?

Biology/medicine textbooks.(though it's not a fact, it is assumed that it is so)

can you for me control your hypothalamus? Can you turn off your vision while keeping your eyes open? Can you slow down or speed up your heart rate?

Some people can. It has been officially documented. Though it is still not an answer what is the "you" and what it is that forces controls on the heartbeat.

You are not your brain what you are is your conciousness. While you dream you are not concious. The moment you become conscious you are in what is now called a lucid dream, which is different.

I am not sure i understand you, if you were to take a definite position on the brain/mind duality and say it outright the first time - would it be that consciousness is not(entirely) reducible to physical processes of the brain? I am not disagreeing with your statement and merely asking for clarification.
The problem with these statements is when people start to deeply believe they have found the answer to these hard to resolve ongoing debates on the brain/mind duality. I tend to favour your position much more than consciousness being reducible to physical processes but given the conflicting evidence, it's hard to be too certain.

 

[frankinstein]

Actually this notion is more perplexing when one considers the dream experiences of animals. Does a dog know the difference between a dream and reality? If not, is that why dogs love to sleep or if they can tell the difference does it explain why they rather not sleep in lieu of the choice to take a walk or play?

 

[Freeman Dyson]

This is not true. I don't know why you say this.

Your brain perceives reality through our senses. It does not perceive dreams through our senses, rather it manufactures dreams from within, partly pulled from memories, but much of it constructed by our mind on-the-fly.

Not at all. It has been proven that outside stimuli affect dreams. Like sleeping on your arm in a painful way might invoke a dream of a bear chewing on your arm. Heat applied to the body while dreaming invokes fire or something similar. Breathing obstruction can invoke suffocating or drowning dreams. etc.. etc... this was known well before Freud's time even. dreams are symptoms of real things and actually pretty damn smart. they have a logic to them.

 

[Freeman Dyson]

Here is a neuroscientist who was the first person to prove lucid dreaming weighing in on this:

Let’s suppose I’m having a lucid dream. The first thing I think is, "Oh this is a dream, here I am." Now the "I" here is who I think Stephen is. Now what’s happening in fact is that Stephen is asleep in bed somewhere, not in this world at all, and he’s having a dream that he’s in this room talking to you. With a little bit of lucidity I’d say, "this is a dream, and you’re all in my dream." A little more lucidity and I’d know you’re a dream figure and this is a dream-table, and this must be a dream-shirt and a dream-watch and what’s this? It’s got to be a dream-hand and well, so what’s this? It’s a dream-Stephen! So a moment ago I thought this is who I am and now I know that it’s just a mental model of who I am. So reasoning along those lines, I thought, I’d like to have a sense of what my deepest identity is, what’s my highest potential, which level is the realest in a sense? With that in mind at the beginning of a lucid dream, I was driving in my sports car down through the green, Spring countryside. I see an attractive hitchhiker at the side of the road, thought of picking her up but said, "No, I’ve already had that dream, I want this to be a representation of my highest potential. So the moment I had that thought and decided to forgo the immediate pleasure, the car started to fly into the air and the car disappeared and my body, also. There were symbols of traditional religions in the clouds, the Star of David and the cross and the steeple and near-eastern symbols. As I passed through that realm, higher beyond the clouds, I entered into a vast emptiness of space that was infinite and it was filled with potential and love. And the feeling I had was-- this is home! This is where I’m from and I’d forgotten that it was here. I was overwhelmed with joy about the fact that this source of being was immediately present, that it was always here, and I had not been seeing it because of what was in my way. So I started singing for joy with a voice that spanned three or four octaves and resonated with the cosmos with words like, "I Praise Thee, O Lord!" There wasn’t any I, there was no thee, no Lord, no duality somehow but sort of, ‘Praise Be’ was the feeling of it. My belief is that the experience I had of this void, that’s what you get if you take away the brain. When I thought about the meaning of that, I recognized that the deepest identity I had there was the source of being, the all and nothing that was here right now, that was what I was too, in addition to being Stephen. So the analogy that I use for understanding this is that we have these separate snowflake identities. Every snowflake is different in the same sense that each one of us is, in fact, distinct. So here is death, and here’s the snowflake and we’re falling into the infinite ocean. So what do we fear? We fear that we’re going to lose our identity, we’ll be melted, dissolved in that ocean and we’ll be gone; but what may happen is that the snowflake hits the ocean and feels an infinite expansion of identity and realizes, what I was in essence, was water! So we’re each one of these little frozen droplets and we feel only our individuality, but not our substance, but our essential substance is common to everything in that sense, so now God is the ocean. So we’re each a little droplet of that ocean, identifying only with the form of the droplet and not with the majesty and the unity.

 

[DaveC426913]

Not at all. It has been proven that outside stimuli affect dreams. Like sleeping on your arm in a painful way might invoke a dream of a bear chewing on your arm. Heat applied to the body while dreaming invokes fire or something similar. Breathing obstruction can invoke suffocating or drowning dreams. etc.. etc... this was known well before Freud's time even. dreams are symptoms of real things and actually pretty damn smart. they have a logic to them.

What I said does not exclude stimuli intruding on one's dreams via one's senses. What I said simply refutes Quincy's claim that "Your brain perceives dreams the same way it perceives reality, so there's no difference between reality and dreams to your brain..."

 

[Sorry!]

I am not sure i understand you, if you were to take a definite position on the brain/mind duality and say it outright the first time - would it be that consciousness is not(entirely) reducible to physical processes of the brain? I am not disagreeing with your statement and merely asking for clarification.
The problem with these statements is when people start to deeply believe they have found the answer to these hard to resolve ongoing debates on the brain/mind duality. I tend to favour your position much more than consciousness being reducible to physical processes but given the conflicting evidence, it's hard to be too certain.

My position is not dualist I don't think. For my position to be dualist I think I must believe that there is something 'more' to the 'ME' that I think about. I don't though I just think it's an abstract thought about self-conciousness... without my brain I do not exist. True, but that doesn't mean that I (the abstract thought of myself) controls every aspect of my brain or knows what is occurring every instant in my brain either.

It would be a flaw in your logic to think that because I exist because of my brain that I am my brain. Red exists because of my brain is it my brain too?

As well if you can link to me some references that show a person controlling their hypothalamus or any vital organs etc. without the use of any special thought processes then go ahead and show me. What I'm talking about here isn't just controlling your emotions/feelings in an attempt to inadvertantly control these parts of your body. I'm actually talking about physically(well mentally controlling how they physically act) controlling them. (it's not possible)

EDIT: I just noticed that you said medical/biology textbooks mention specifically that YOU are your BRAIN. Can you reference any specific text off the top of your head I'm interested in going to read it.

 

[WaveJumper]

My position is not dualist I don't think. For my position to be dualist I think I must believe that there is something 'more' to the 'ME' that I think about. I don't though I just think it's an abstract thought about self-conciousness... without my brain I do not exist. True, but that doesn't mean that I (the abstract thought of myself) controls every aspect of my brain or knows what is occurring every instant in my brain either.

It would be a flaw in your logic to think that because I exist because of my brain that I am my brain. Red exists because of my brain is it my brain too?

As well if you can link to me some references that show a person controlling their hypothalamus or any vital organs etc. without the use of any special thought processes then go ahead and show me. What I'm talking about here isn't just controlling your emotions/feelings in an attempt to inadvertantly control these parts of your body. I'm actually talking about physically(well mentally controlling how they physically act) controlling them. (it's not possible)

EDIT: I just noticed that you said medical/biology textbooks mention specifically that YOU are your BRAIN. Can you reference any specific text off the top of your head I'm interested in going to read it.

"The brain controls the other organ systems of the body. Brains exert control either by activating muscles, or by causing secretion of chemicals such as hormones."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brain


As far as medicine and science is concerned, the mind does not exist and consciousness is a state of the brain.. This is hardly news to anyone.
If you are asserting that you are not your brain but the product of your brain, then i agree.

It appears that the resultant emergent phenomenon - "Mind" can in some cases control the brain.

Here are some interesting reputable reports, where mind appears to control the brain & body:

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v295/n5846/abs/295234a0.html

http://www.hno.harvard.edu/gazette/2002/04.18/09-tummo.html[/URL]

[MEDIA=youtube]madoDvtKEes[/MEDIA]


What controls the brain(or if it controls itself!?) is a huge topic. If you feel like it, you can open a new thread on it.

 

[Freeman Dyson]

I was just thinking about the iceman. I saw that episode.

This whole mind thing made this thread more interesting imo. Why stop at the brain? Why can't mind control more matter? Who says the entire universe isn't controlled by mind? Is there a mental/mind apparatus to the universe to complement the physical apparatus of the universe in the same fashion as our bodies?

Freeman Dyson has some interesting thoughts on mind:

"It appears to me that the tendency of mind to infiltrate and control matter is a law of nature. Individual minds die and individual planets may be destroyed. But, as Thomas Wright said, "The catastrophe of a world, such as ours, or even the total dissolution of a system of worlds, may possibly be no more to the great Author of Nature, than the most common accident of life with us."

The infiltration of mind into the universe will not be permanently halted by any catastrophe or by any barrier that I can imagine. If our species does not choose to lead the way, others will do so, or may have already done so. If our species is extinguished, others will be wiser or luckier. Mind is patient. Mind has waited for 3 billion years on this planet before composing its first string quartet. It may have to wait for another 3 billion years before it spreads all over the galaxy. I do not expect that it will have to wait so long. But if necessary, it will wait. The universe is like a fertile soil spread out all around us, ready for the seeds of mind to sprout and grow. Ultimately, late or soon, mind will come into its heritage.

What will mind choose to do when it informs and controls the universe? That is a question which we cannot hope to answer. When mind has expanded its physical reach and its biological organization by many powers of ten beyond the human scale, we can no more expect to understand its thoughts and dreams than a Monarch butterfly can understand ours."