Benjamin asked:

I am writing a philosophical paper and need a little advice about a theory. I have concocted a theory
on the mind and have come up with a basic problem in it. I must first ask where does the mind end
and the brain begin? What functions do the brain control and what are productions of the mind?

============

It seems that you have opted for a dualist philosophy, hence you are at once burdened by the age-old
problem of the interface between mind and body (brain). Over the years dualists have proposed
different solutions to the problem. The following are three of the best supported concepts :-

Interactionism.

Two-way causal interaction between the physical and the mental: physical events cause mental
events, and vice versa.

Parallelism.

Mental and physical events run in concurrent series, but events of either kind are not caused by
events of the other.

Epiphenomenalism.

Mental events are a kind of by-product of a physical system, the human body, which from a
causal-scientific point of view is self-sufficient. Human beings can be regarded as machines which
would function in just the same way without the puzzling 'extra something' that we call 'mind' or
'consciousness'; but this is not to deny that the latter exists. The example often given is the sound of
a steam train whistle, the whistle emanates from a physical act in the engine; the sound of the whistle
becomes a separate entity from the engine, but could not be there without the presence of the
engine.

One way of considering mind and body as two separate entities is by way of the common concept
that 'we' own our bodies. We frequently refer to 'my body', 'my brain', 'my leg', etc.. We talk about
'using' our bodies, about 'moving' a leg, an arm, a finger, etc.. Thus something called 'I' seems to
dominate proceedings.

You ask where the mind ends and the brain begins, and what are separate tasks of brain and mind,
both questions are derived from a priorijudgements based on a presumption of dualism. If we accept
the presumption that there are two entities referred to as mind and body, then there is a way in which
one can be viewed as separate from the other, however, we are still left with the problem of the
interface between the two, and how it is possible for one to act upon the other, having in mind that
one is considered to be 'matter stuff' controlled by the laws of physics, and the other some form of
'non-matter stuff', immune from the laws of physics, and which has its seat in some quantum world
explained only in terms of metaphysics. Unless we accept the notion of 'parallelism', where it is
understood that God (Nature) has wound-up two clocks and set them off to run side by side and
perfectly synchronised, but neither interferes with the other. Any change in one corresponds with a
change in the other.

The term 'mind' encapsulates a whole series of concepts — attention, concentration, awareness,
consciousness, intentions, choice and will. It is extremely difficult, in my view, to succumb to the
pressures of science to promote the brain as the one and only possible source for the generation of
such complex concepts. My belief has always been that the brain is a tool of the mind, rather than the
other way around, as proposed by materialists. I recognise the ability of the brain to carry out
unconscious actions, reflex responses and indeed all actions involving control of the body, although it
would be unwise in view of current research to consider the brain as little more than a complex of dry
electrical circuits. The brain is very 'wet' as interactions between neurones and hormones constitutes
the control system of the physical body.

It would be foolish to deny any relationship between mind and brain, but it really is taxing credulity to
the nth degree to claim that a bundle of neurones has 'intentions', 'willpower', capabilities of making
choices, making decisions, etc. Once we have worked out how a thought can move a limb we shall
have discovered what happens at the interface between mind and body (brain). Something seems to
make the decision and the brain carries out the physical operations to achieve the intention. The
mind, whatever it is, is the boss. Most people are too easily persuaded by science to accept the
materialist view. Science is really materialist philosophy.

John Brandon