36. Mind is a whirlpool
In 1977, a compatriot of mine, named Ilya Prigogine, received the Nobel prize for his theories about ‘dissipative structures’. Aren’t we all proud of him!
◊◊◊
The core of ‘dissipative structures’ is easily explained with an example. Mainly, when one puts enough ‘energy’ into a system, then in certain circumstances a new structure may arise with characteristics that are fully its own. That is: the new structure is not the prior structure anymore. For example: a stream of water that flows hard enough, may engender a whirlpool. This whirlpool is not the stream anymore. It’s something different, something that exists on its own, with very other characteristics than those of the stream.
◊◊◊
Mind is frequently looked upon as something that is the result of the working of the brain. First there is the brain, the working brain, and this ‘working’ gives rise to what we call ‘mind’. Or: ‘mind’ is the working of the brain, something like a computer program that is at run time nothing more than the working of the computer.
◊◊◊
But mind is extremely complex and is continuously working in all its complexity. This is: there is much ‘energy’ in it. In Prigogine-speak, one can see what directly comes from the brain, the result of its working, as the stream. Then mind itself is to me not like the stream, but more like the whirlpool: something with its own characteristics, something that exists on its own.
◊◊◊
So mind is a whirlpool… but that’s not the end.
◊◊◊
Mind also influences the brain. One thought brings about another thought. But a thought cannot be thought without, at microlevel, a change in the brain. Therefore every single thought that is brought about by another thought, brings with it a change of the brain. Mind, at the mind-level existing on its own, changes the brain.
◊◊◊
So brain makes mind… mind makes brain… but that’s not the end.
◊◊◊
It’s not like one makes the other first, and only then the other makes the one. It’s a continuous happening, in which the distinction of what exactly is happening, depends on how you prefer to look at it. Since the smallest change in the one is a change in the other, one may as well say that one and the other are the same thing.
◊◊◊
Brain is mind.
◊◊◊
But as you might have guessed… this too may well not be the end of things. It is however the end of this sticky thought.
◊◊◊
Related Posts
Let the Real Consciousness Come Forward
Besides many definitions of consciousness, there is a distinction between consciousness as something very worldly versus something magical. What will it be? Consciousness as a functionality Humans have received consciousness from Mother Nature because the pre-conscious era evolved toward a state in which consciousness was gradually becoming an asset for survival. In this sense, consciousness Read the full article…
The Non-Conscious is No Automaton
This insight is central to anything human-related. Two ways to ignore the non-conscious in human mental life These are by ignoring there is anything at all functionally, seeing it as something inactive by itself. In the latter option, the non-conscious is something like a meaningless automaton, an entity of levers, buttons to be pushed, and Read the full article…
Inner Dissociation – Ego – Total Self
Inner dissociation is a wrongly perceived divide between – more or less – conceptual and subconceptual mental processing. Metaphorically, the dissociation lies between the ego and the total self. Reality is always more complex. Functionally In-depth, of course, the ego is part of the total self. Moreover, any conscious ego-element is engendered in deeper subconceptual Read the full article…