Phineas Gage revisited

I just came across some new information on Phineas Gage. It looks like according to neuroscientist, Dean Burnett most of the extreme claims of Phineas Gage personality changes were made after his death. So their was no way for Phineas Gage to refute them. There is no doubt of course that his personality was affected. It the degree of which it was that is in question. So your saying so what?. There are thousands of other cases of personality change. Well the cases are also probably not as dramatic as many neuroscientist's let on they are, especially knowing the fact that these other cases are similar to the Phineas Gage case. Neuroscientist Dean Burnett is no dualist neither is he a materialist as far as I know. His book however was reviewed by csicop which is a skeptical organization and they gave his book praise. Even if he is a materialist that doesn't mean he cannot be honest. He is brave enough to admit that's what materialist's often claim that personality couldn't survive death because of dramatic personality change, well when a neuroscientist comes out and admits that their is indeed personality change but not the degree that materialist's pertain it to be. Many of these materialist's are neuroscientist's themselves but when he admits that other neuroscientist's can overstate cases, it's important to get this out there. I should also point out, there are also neuroscientist's, who are dualist's as well along with belonging to other views too. It should be noted however that a dramatic effect on his personality did happen but not to the extreme level that many materialist's who were trying to fit the data in with the view that personality itself is caused by the frontal lobe. The point is yes there is a strong correlation with the frontal lobe of the brain and personality and other brain structures have strong correlations with other mental functions. But that doesn't not equal the type of casuality that materialist's pertain that mind is what the brain does. This case is considered to be a dramatic example of mind-brain dependency. However, as I have clearly shown here it is not.


https://books.google.ca/books?id=-Nr_CwAAQBAJ&pg=PT134&lpg=PT134&dq=The+Idiot+Brain:+A+Neuroscientist+Explains+What+Your+Head+Is+Really+Up+To+phineas+gage&source=bl&ots=BQ_B3s8F-L&sig=Ru5uz2g56qCoAGiqFUjPSINAqlw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjzw73anZbNAhVIw4MKHfwVBdYQ6AEILzAD#v=onepage&q=The%20Idiot%20Brain%3A%20A%20Neuroscientist%20Explains%20What%20Your%20Head%20Is%20Really%20Up%20To%20phineas%20gage&f=false


The Strange case of Phineas Gage

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/27225153_The_Strange_Case_of_Phineas_Gage

Recent finding appears to deliver powerful evidence that mind is probably produced by the brain?

There is a recent finding that has been published that appears to suggest that mind is produced by the brain. I will link to the article at the bottle of this post. However, I think there is another explanation that is just as credible than assuming that the brain has a on and off switch for consciousness. That is that when you stimulate the brain and in this case it was the claustrum, that the brain blocks out consciousness, memories until the blocker's electrical stimuli is turned off then consciousness returns. In this view the on and off switch is just a metaphor. This finding then appears to be consistent with the view that the brain is a blocker/reducing value/receiver/filter of consciousness rather than the producer of consciousness.

Read more here:

http://news.discovery.com/tech/biotechnology/elusive-on-off-switch-found-for-human-consciousness-140707.htm

The Unity of Consciousness and the Split-Brain Syndrome

An excellent paper on why split-brain cases don't show to separate streams of consciousness. http://www.philosophy.ox.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/2757/split-brain_web.pdf. I talked about split brain patient cases before presenting reasons why it doesn't show two separate streams of consciousness well there is more reasons as well.

Split–brain cases do not show the results we would expect if two fully independent, separate streams of consciousness were being generated by callosotomy; subjects can for instance continue to operate both halves of their bodies in unity and perform sometimes highly complex tasks. The evidence, therefore is more compatible with phenomenal unity without joint access (thus, the side of the brain responsible for speech cannot access the contents of that which is seen by the right side of the brain, even though both are contained within a single stream of subjective consciousness). This conclusion is also more parsimonious; and since the two–separate–streams hypothesis is (unlike dualism) an empirical one (instead of metaphysical), considerations of parsimony apply. Therefore, split–brain cases pose no serious difficulty to phenomenal unity, and thus in turn pose no serious difficulty towards dualism.

See also several other papers from Tim Bayne, including an important one with David Chalmers titled ‘What is the Unity of Consciousness?’ as well as from Torin Alter.

Incidentally, subjects born without a corpus callosum altogether, as well as those with agenesis of the corpus callosum, do not experience even the relatively mild symptoms which callosotomy patients do.

What we have here is one subject with a fragmented brain, not the sudden appearance of two ‘persons’ in one skull as some argue. Peter Ellis’ paper, ‘The Decider System Model: A Defense of the Cartesian Theatre’ is also of important relevance both to those interested in criticism of Dennett’s theories as well as the import of callosotomy experiments to philosophy of mind.

Naturalism the Dominant View of Mainstream Science

One of the reasons is the major successes it has, however when it fails which it has it's hard to give it up. The evidence against naturalism in general is overwhelming their is no way the evidence for survival can be accommodated in a naturalist worldview. Science can be used to favor a particular worldview over another if the evidence is uncovered. The evidence for survival fits well in a substance dualist worldview but doesn't fit in a naturalist worldview. That is one of the major reasons why I cannot take naturalism as the answer to why were here, who we are etc. Another reason is the evidence for psi phenomena that have been replicated over and over with positive results. This evidence also doesn't fit a naturalist worldview but does fit substance dualist and can also fit the view that all of reality is created by consciousness itself.


One thing can seems very straight forward naturalism isn't the answer however nothing can be ruled out completely. If all of the evidence for survival is just scientists chasing over something that really doesn't exist and psi doesn't exist either like naturalists assert. Well then they have won this debate hands down. One way to know for certain who's right and who's wrong is those last minutes of our lives when our bodies shutdown. Then we will all know the answer with 100 percent certainity.


Here's a quick poll for all of you here.

Dualism Is Long Long Dead Assert The Materialists

I have read this from a lot of materialists saying this very thing. Without actually weighing the evidence against materialists in the first place. As i have mentioned many many times on this blog the massive amounts of evidence, that do not fit into an materialist worldview. The claim that mind is an aspect of the brain for example is reverted by many lines of evidence one of them is the fact that near death experiences are occurring when someone is having a flat EEG. How do we know this?.


This is because the patterns strongly show that these experiences are happening for a long period of time. Now their is minimal activity going on but would it support consciousness when your flat lined no it wouldn't. So clearly, flat EEG ndes refute the view that mind is an aspect of brain activity along with other materialist theories of mind and brain.


Here is a good example of a materialist claiming there fmri's reading people's thoughts provides more nails in the coffin of dualism.



However, their obvious is a way to interpret this rationally in a dualist view. Simply by saying that no dualist denies that the brain and it's subconscious parts play a big role in controlling our decisions. This doesn't mean we have no free will at all, but that we have limited free will. Materialist's would say we need full blown free will to the extent that we have control over everything that happens to us. Which isn't true we obviously, don't and that isn't what is require to postulate the possibility of a soul surviving the demise of the physical body.


Also if you notice in the video where the scientist says i wouldn't call it hostaging because it implies a dualism between your conscious mind and your brain activity. So as you see this scientist is ignoring the possible alternative open minded scientist?. But no surprise either simply following the current worldview doesn't want to go against the grail.

Is Dualism Testable?

Of course dualism is testable and also falsifiable. The evidence that supports dualism in the form of substance dualism is very very strong, it's hard to see how educated professionals can go on denying the obvious facts. This is what this blog is all about letting the general public along with scientists know that their is overwhelming data for survival of bodily death and psi phenomena.

Keith Augustine's theory that near death experiences that just hallucinations brought on by a dying brain. It has many problems for example how does he theory account for people who blind in life can see when experiencing an out of body experience?. Also people born deaf can hear again when having an out of body experience as well. Also, the physiology of the brain completely works against his theory based on the fact that the cortex of the brain is no longer active in a lot of these cases. For, his case to work he would have to show that lower cortical processes in the brain can somehow take over the function of higher ones in cardiac arrest. However that has never happened. Yes their is no doubt their is undetected brain activity that can't be picked up by EEG however those have not been discovered in deeper areas of the brain that are not of the cortex part of the brain.



I am happy to say that I know some people have found some very good information on this blog of mine. So I will definitely continue this blog. Their has been a lot of things lately happening in my life, such as i went for an interview to get on a job program. Today i took a CAAT test to test my IQ. It was very fun to do.


If i get the job program it looks like i will indeed be much better off than i am now. Which is a very good thing for sure. I have lately been think a lot about the h1n1 vaccine and this shortage problem well i know i will definitely be getting the shot as well as the seasonal flu shot. Starting too see how of the christmas commericals on tv lately it is wonderful. I love christmas time it's my favorite holiday.

Does Science Need Naturalism?

Many philosophers along with scientists would concede so. That any alternatives to naturalism must be avoided. That would include idealism along with dualism. It is true in nature all we see is natural phenomena, even though naturalism has succeeded in many frontiers. It runs a road block when it comes to consciousness itself and the nature of reality. The fact is dualism can explain all of the successes that naturalism can because dualism implies both natural phenomena and paranormal phenomena. Of course, if you concede that consciousness is just an illusion generated by the brain along with free will, and that no paranormal phenomena exist, then just monism[naturalism] is correct. One of the big reasons why most scientists are naturalists is because of the fear of god or religion is one of the best reasons for believing naturalism is right.


Of course, that reasoning is an appeal to fear than it is of following the evidence wherever that may leads us. When i say a fear of religion i don't mean a fear of going to church. What i mean is a fear of being associated with anything that sounds religious such as ghosts, poltergeists, mental mediumship etc. Of course, while mainstream scientists who the majority are naturalists feel no need to be associated with anything that sounds religious. Some mainstream scientists such as William James along with other scientists gathered an enormous amount repeatable scientific evidence that support the survival hypothesis. This is of course not what these psychical researchers ever imagine would happen. They wanted to show that all psychics were frauds, cold readers etc. I will say however there are some naturalist's are are openfully honest about their position [Searle, Lycan, Nagel along with a few others].

My Response To The Shameless Atheist

Here are my responses of a debate i had with the blogger you owns this blog. To see his responses go to his blog

http://shamelesslyatheist.wordpress.com/2009/07/14/dualism-why-do-people-cling-to-such-archaic-nonsense/




Rather you like it or not their is strong evidence that nde’s are evidence for an afterlife. Let me explain why, yes their is deep level brain activity in deep levels of the brain. However, EEG can read the cortex of the brain and when flat lined people still have nde’s and obe’s. The flat line EEG indicates their is very little brain activity left in the cortex when blood flow is cut to the brain when someone goes into cardiac arrest. Jason Braithwaite said that those deep lower processes of the brain is more than sufficent to account for near death experiences. However it order for his theory to work. Their would have to be evidence that stimulating those processes of the brain when someone is flat lined can bring about complex though processes etc that are reported in nde’s.

I quote

“By late 2008 an advertisement for a previously unknown public appearance by Gage had been discovered, as well as a report of his physical and mental condition during his time in Chile, and a description of what may well have been his daily work routine there as a long-distance coach driver. This new information suggests that the seriously maladapted Gage described by Harlow may have existed for only a limited time after the accident—that Phineas eventually “figured out how to live” despite his injury,[40] and was in later life much more functional, and socially much better adapted, than has been thought”.[41]

So as we see that his personality back, however their is good reasons to doubt Harlows account.

I quote

“The uncertainty of Harlow’s sources for the changes he describes in Gage, combined with the fact that he waited almost twenty years (between his first and second papers) to communicate those changes, constitute one of the main puzzles of the case.”

So as we still it is looking more and more less likely that he suffered dramatic personality change to the point of showing evidence for full blown mind-brain dependency. This case is often cited by full blown support for very strong mind-brain dependency. But as i have shown it’s no where near supportive of it.

As far as free will goes ok go away deny the all so obvious. How do you explain why a person’s arm goes up. Now you can say well that is the thing with the arm sometimes it goes up and sometimes it doesn’t. But the fact is it does.

The chinese room argument, put forth by philosopher John Searle, is a powerful argument that shows why computationalism is wrong. The many world’s interpretation if correct would show that quantum immortality is possible that when a person dies. Consciousness continues on to another parellel universe.




Hello Shamelessly Atheist,

The Phineas Gage case yes their was significant personality changes however that is not incompatiable with dualism. Based on the fact that the issue is the brain producing mind and consciousness like a productive function? or is the brain a receiver of the mind.?

As far as the split brain experiments go they no where near demonstrates their are two separate conscious selves.

http://www.geocities.com/athanasiafoundation/Dualismlives.htm

There are a lot of powerful arguments that the view that materialism is wrong .

http://www.geocities.com/athanasiafoundation/metasubjectivemind.html




Phineas Gage lost his personality permanently?. It looks that is not the case, because of the fact that he was more functional and social shortly after his accident.


“The strange case of Phineas Gage,” History of the Human Sciences

http://hhs.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/20/1/115



After his death, Gage slowly morphed into the lecture room legend. According to Kotowicz,

” Most of the subsequent descriptions of Gage were based on hearsay. Some of them were quite florid; Gage was portrayed as having fits of temper when not getting his own way, as being disinclined to work, as having a reduced libido, as being an aimless drifter and so on. A typical description of him would say that before the accident Gage had been a diligent, reliable, polite and socially adept person: after his accident, he subsequently became uncaring, profane and socially inappropriate in his conduct”.

In neurophilosophy we learn this http://neurophilosophy.wordpress.com/2006/12/04/the-incredible-case-of-phineas-gage/

The Documentary Evidence

Kotowicz begs to differ:

However, after examining closely the accounts of Phineas Gage as given by the doctors who knew him, Harlow and Bigelow, one must conclude that the supposed psychopathic traits are not evident.

The drastic discontinuity was not so much between Phineas Gage pre- and post-tamping rod but between Phineas Gage (1823-1860) and the lecture room legend.

What we can learn from contemporary accounts of Gage’s post-trauma life is this: For a while after the accident, he drifted, and even ended up briefly in P. T. Barnum’s freak show, exhibiting himself and the tamping rod. But he then settled down and worked a year and a half in a stable. Later, he went with a friend to Valparaiso in Chile where he cared for horses and drove a coach and six for eight years.

Kotowicz points out the obvious,

Working in stables is not a job for a psychopath. Horses are very sensitive and they require discipline and calm; they have to be attended to regularly, seven days a week, and work begins early.

Malcolm Macmillan of Deakin University School of Psychology in Victoria, Australia, where he maintains a Phineas Gage page. He writes:

Most of the accounts of Gage’s life after 1848 are strange mixtures of slight fact, considerable fancy, and downright fabrication.

Now contrasts all of the above information to this materialist account of Phineas Gage’s personality.

http://books.google.ca/books?id=_aG5U2ippNkC&pg=PA32&lpg=PA32&dq=Phineas+Gage+Burlington+skull&source=bl&ots=ZeG5NyLLO8&sig=rF-6PMGWCgSl2xeyaPI4MpvxOT4&hl=en&ei=mdvJSY7cHtTvnQfGrJSNAw&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=7&ct=result#v=onepage&q=Phineas%20Gage%20Burlington%20skull&f=false


As far as i know and yes i read lots of articles, and go to skeptical sites to, neuroscientists haven't been able to induce key aspects of obe's. Instead what the people who had a part of their brain electrically stimulated reported distortions of their body from above [such as their legs becoming shorter, and arms becoming shorter. If you compared nde cases brought on by cardiac arrest with induced ndes you see their are big differences. Yes in some cases that is possible that details can be added but not by patients who were interviewed shortly after being unconscious.

Also what is your opinion on Richard Wiseman's statement that ESP has been proven by the scientific method but requires a higher level of evidence. Denial there for sure, nowhere does he mentions what his higher level of evidence would be?. The scientific method is the best method we have at getting at the truth.

As far as the science of violation goes. The only thing that can be demonstrated by this type of evidence is that there is some brain mechanism involved to facilitate consciousness during our incarnated existence. This does not at all mean the contents of consciousness are themselves caused by the brain mechanism. In other words, the evidence can be perfectly interpreted in terms of the transmitter-receiver hypothesis.





Brain scanners can see your decisions before to make them

http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2008/04/mind_decision

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/08/18/BANFRK1TG.DTL< [One of the main responses seems to me that there is an interaction of brain and mind, so that the role of the brain does not exclude a separate role of the mind[.

Here is a good paper by Titus Rivas and Hein Van Dongen showing why epiphenomenalism is untenable.

http://www.geocities.com/athanasiafoundation/epiphenomenalism.html


Also, other cases of brain damage to the frontal lobes of the brain are similiar to the case of Phineas Gage above. Their is no doubt that his personality was probably changed a lot however not so dramatically changed that it is evidence that the mind and brain are so linked that their is no way that personality could survive death.

In Defense Of Substance Dualism

Recently i have been debating on infidels forum about the mind body problem. One of the members mentioned how my receiver theory along with other substance dualist theories have far less parismony then the production hypothesis. I disagree, and i will show why. First he is using occams razor to use the simplest explanation, but occams razor doesn't work in all problems. Second, he mentions that Dr. Wilder Penfields conclusion on his work with epileptics is irrational, again i disagree. The same with Dr. Sir John Eccles when he mentions his conclusion is also irrational. Why, because of these scientists admitted evidence for dualism, that goes against the dominant view in mainstream science. The member also says that experiments have shown the casual connection between the brain and the mind. I disagree it assumes that their is very tight dependency so tight that their is a casucal connection.


Here is why the receiver theory has more parismony

- It accounts for the overwhelming evidence for survival of bodily death
- It accounts for the evidence for psi phenomena
- It accounts for the subjective nature of consciousness itself
- It accounts for other strange phenomena that are attested for in biomedical journals such as stigmata, maternal impressions etc.
- It accounts for free will

The major problems with the production theory

- Doesn't account for the evidence for survival of bodily death
- Doesn't account for the subjective nature of consciousness, tries to get around it by saying it's either epiphenomenal or an emergent property of the brain
- Doesn't account for free will
- Doesn't account for for things such as stigmata
- Doesn't account for the evidence for psi phenomena

Which Worldview Is Correct?

Is new age and eastern religions compatible with psi?, where evidence for survival is compatible with dualism over idealism?. This is where my thinking gets me in trouble, because how do we know which view of reality is correct?. Or perhaps idealism and dualism are both wrong ways to look at reality. That perhaps neutral monism is the answer which can support psi and survival of bodily death.

Then their is materialism which isn't compatible with either survival of bodily of death and psi. Also what about the view of an infinite number of parellel universes, could we be interacting with these universe, without no decoherence. We know that these universes could have completely different laws of physics. Also what about poltergeist phenomena?, could it be just quantum fluctuations being taped by our minds to create effects of poltergeist phenomena?.


But does that really hold?, it appears it may not their are cases of furniture being moved etc. These large objects couldn't be possibility moved by small quantum fluctuation effects from the vacuum.


According to the researchers Brovetto and Maxia believe that the extra fluctuations triggered by the pubescent brain would substantially enhance the presence of the virtual particles surrounding the person. This could slowly increase the pressure of air around them, moving objects and even sending them hurtling across the room.

Here is an new scientist on this

" They're here: the mechanism for poltergeist activity.

However Brian Josephson, a Nobel laureate physicist who is on the editorial board of Neuroquantology.

"This looks distinctly flaky to me," Josephson commented.

That would explain it seems cases of apparitions where people claim to see their people with past wounds. Such as a entity with a hole through his head but show that physical impression tide with his soul.

Can Dualism Account For Changes In Personality With Brain Damage?

I shall argue that it can. For example with the evidence for a soul, it is claimed by many materialists that Phineas Gage personality change was not just temporary but permanent. This however appears not to be so.

For example

Recently, an advertisement for a previously-unknown public appearance by Gage has been discovered, as have a report of his behavior during his time in Chile and a description of what may have been his daily work routine there as a long-distance coach driver. This new information suggests that the seriously maladapted Gage described by Harlow may have existed for only a limited number of years after the accident—that in later life Phineas may have been far more functional, and socially far better adapted, than has been thought. If this is so then (along with theoretical implications) it "would add to current evidence that rehabilitation can be effective even in difficult and long-standing cases," according to Macmillan.[36]

Now the materialists would say well that is just one case, what about other cases?. Those other cases that do show permanent change but perhaps instead of personality changed permanently maybe the personality is being constrained and restricted. With the overhype that Phineas Gage's personality change being permanent, it should make materialists not jump to an conclusion. if their are cases that may show that brain damage also results in permanent personality change.

Also their are accounts and physician Benjamin Rush an physician author of the first American treatise on mental illness. He observed that most mad people discover a less degree of reason in the last days or hours of their lives.

Here is a study involving this

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/79473/Alexandre-Jacques-Francois-Brierre-de-Boismont

Here's another link with more informaiton on the french studies

http://muse.jhu.edu/login?uri=/journals/nineteenth_century_french_studies/v033/33.1vatan.pdf

Infinite Regression Argument Against Substance Dualism Refuted

I like to make it clear that i think the soul is not a little man in the brain but is similar to the physical body. Nonetheless materialists argue that if there is an observer in the body that observer would require other observers and so on. The major problem with this is if the soul is immortal their wouldn't be no need for an infinite amount of observers [souls]. In the arena of neuroscience the common held view is that consciousness and the mind is an emergent property of the brain. Then their are some scientists who disagree and postulate that consciousness is an illusion created by the brain.

I think in order for us to solve the mind body problem we much embrace substance dualism. Obviously substance dualism has been tied to religion however their are some dualists such as me that don't go to church or read an bible. Also aren't associated with any other religions.

Is The Mind Material Or Immaterial?

I will argue that the mind is immaterial based on lots of arguments. I have discussed evidence before for dualism.

First by the introspection argument

The Argument from Introspection

"A more universal consideration is the argument from introspection. The fact is, when you center your attention on the contents of your consciousness, you do not clearly apprehend a neural network pulsing with electrochemical activity: you apprehend a flux of thoughts, sensations, desires, and emotions. It seems that mental states and properties, as revealed in introspection, could hardly be more different from physical states and properties if they tried. The verdict of introspection, therefore, seems strongly on the side of some form of dualism"

Another argument for dualism is the premise that we have privileged access to our mental states.


the premise that you have a special ways of knowing about your own mental states. This knowledge is not usually based on any evidence or observation. You can just tell that you're thinking about elephants. You don't have to infer it from any evidence. But other people do have to infer what you're thinking, from your behavior and from what you say. So you're in a better position to know what you're thinking than they are. You have a kind of special or privileged access to your mental states which other people lack.

You don't have any privileged access of that sort to your height or weight or shoe size. In principle, other people could be in a better position to know your height than you are.

Most philosophers will agree that we do have some kind of privileged access to our own mental states, even if it is difficult to spell that claim out in detail.

But some philosophers go further and argue that the only way we can explain or account for this privileged access is if facts about your mind are facts about what's happening in some private non-physical realm. Physical objects and their physical properties, on the other hand, are all publicly accessible. Other people can know more about your height, and your weight, and the physical state of your brain, than you know. So if your mental states were just physical states of some sort, like neurophysiological states of your brain, then that would make your mental states all publicly accessible.


Other arguments for dualism are discussed here by philosopher Edward Feser

http://edwardfeser.blogspot.com/2008/10/some-brief-arguments-for-dualism-part.html

New Scientist Article Called Creationists Declare War On The Brain

The Whole article is one bad piece. Why? Well first anyone who disagrees with the mainsteam science view that mind is produce by the brain are classified as creationists. Also it also puts intelligent design in the same way of thinking as creationism. But creationism is different then intelligent design. How? Well creationism relies on a bible as it's evidence. Where intelligent design relies on two facts that no scientist's denies.

1] Biological animals are intelligent
2] Their is design in evolution

Now biologists say they admit both of those things. But it's like biologists who are devoted to naturalism appear not very happy that those two things are facts. Also it's true that a lot of christians have used intelligent design to get their case across. I personally don't like that christians have hijacked intelligent design.

Here's what Patricia Churchland says in the article

Patricia Churchland, a philosopher of neuroscience at the University of California, San Diego, "it is an argument from ignorance. The fact something isn't currently explained doesn't mean it will never be explained or that we need to completely change not only our neuroscience but our physics."

But that's not what dualists are saying. Postulating that mind is seperate from the brain, that the brain is a filter of consciousness is an alternative that should be taken seriously.

Here's another piece from the article.

Schwartz and others argue that since the mind can change the brain, the mind must be something other than the brain, something non-material. In fact, these experiments are entirely consistent with mainstream neurology - the material brain is changing the material brain.

Consistent?. True it's consistent if you preconceive that the brain is doing the changing itself without a soul.

The deathblow to materialism is the fact that we have an inner life. How do emergent systems give rise to an inner life?. Of course they don't. Also their's another way out for materialism by positioning epiphenomenalism. The big problem with this is we know we have conscious experiences but it says consciousness is an illusion.

Facts That Support Substance Dualism

1. We have an inner life
2. Evidence from post mortem survival
3. Psi evidence
4. Neuroscientific evidence is compatible with neuroscientific evidence for example the brain is a transmitter decoder of consciousness. The information is received and decoded by the brain.
5. Other phenomena such as stigmata challenge that mind is an emergent property of the brain.



Here's an interesting study on extracting images from the brain.

http://www.cell.com/neuron/abstract/S0896-6273(08)00958-6

Perceptual experience consists of an enormous number of possible states. Previous fMRI studies have predicted a perceptual state by classifying brain activity into prespecified categories. Constraint-free visual image reconstruction is more challenging, as it is impractical to specify brain activity for all possible images. In this study, we reconstructed visual images by combining local image bases of multiple scales, whose contrasts were independently decoded from fMRI activity by automatically selecting relevant voxels and exploiting their correlated patterns. Binary-contrast, 10 × 10-patch images (2^100 possible states) were accurately reconstructed without any image prior on a single trial or volume basis by measuring brain activity only for several hundred random images. Reconstruction was also used to identify the presented image among millions of candidates. The results suggest that our approach provides an effective means to read out complex perceptual states from brain activity while discovering information representation in multivoxel patterns.

It looks like they've been successful at developing a basic method for translating brain state/image correlates into perceptible images. It will lead to interesting new technologies, no doubt. Philosophically, however, it isn't surprising. Not exactly, but it's sort of like what a DVD player does on a TV screen when you pop in a DVD and hit play.

Objections To The Idea That Their Is a Soul

First is that materialist's say that people believe that only homosapiens have souls. Not everyone thinks that some believes we all have souls which is what I agree with.

Another is our thoughts, feelings appear to be fragile when the brain is affected. This argument though true to an extent. It does have a major flaw. That being it doesn't entail that thoughts, feelings etc.] can't go on without a brain. Why? Because as mentioned before their is more than one way to look at the mind brain relationship. If their's is an astral body which i believe their is those memories, thoughts, feelings are transmitted to that body when we die.

Of course I can only speculate but one thing is certain, at least to me that their is overwhelming scientific evidence for an afterlife of some kind.

Another piece of data that I haven't come across until now which also appears to support the view that the brain acts like a radio.

Doctor Gerald Schroeder has put forward a theory that the human brain acts as a “radio” - picking up the data of the mind, the mind which is external to the body, and adding individual experiences and feelings back into the collective.

This is supported by experiments conducted by the David Lynch Foundation - whereby where a large collective focus and meditate upon peace and love, the crime level is statistically and dramatically reduced for a short time in that locality.

Excellent Refutation Of The God Of The Gaps Argument Against Dualism

This blog is by philosopher Edward Feser

One of his posts rebuts the god of the gaps argument. Called some brief arguments for dualism part 1.

http://edwardfeser.blogspot.com/

Why Dualism is the best option

Dualism is the best option to take

materialism- overplays matter and energy as primary consciousness secondary

idealism- overplays consciousness and matter and energy secondary

dualism- takes both consciousness and matter seriously and does not reduce one or the other.

neutral monism- takes neither one seriously consciousness or matter seriously

Dualism

Here's arguments for dualism


The Mental is Private

Dualism holds that each of us has an immaterial mind or soul that exists in a non-physical realm. The physical world is in principle equally observable to all of us, but the mental is not. One of the most striking characteristics of dualism is therefore that the mental is private, that though each of us has access to our own mind through introspection, no one can directly observe anyone else’s mind. This position contrasts with that of substance monism, according to which minds are part of the physical, public world, and so could, in principle, be equally accessible to everyone.
Priveleged Access

Information that reaches us through our senses is notoriously fallible; though the world may appear to us to be a certain way, it may well be other than it appears to be. Our senses can lead us to make mistakes in describing the world.

Our knowledge of our own minds, however, is not like that; instead it is infallible. If I introspect and judge myself to be happy, or frightened, or to disbelieve a certain proposition, then my judgement will always be correct. This is because we have priveleged access to our own minds.
The Mental is Irreducible

Finally, and most fundamentally of all, substance dualism holds that the mental is irreducible, that it cannot be fully explained in purely non-mental terms. Dualists thus reject attempts to identify the mental with certain characteristics of the physical world, such as brain-states, or behaviour. There is more to mentality, says the dualist, than physicality, and so any attempt at a reductive definition of mind is doomed to failure.



Other Arguments for dualism is the brain in a vat argument and the evidence for the soul accurate near death experiences, out of body experience experiments, remote viewing experiments, xenoglossy, deathbed visions, past-life regressions, hynotic regressions, electronic voice phenomena experiment[the pye records], instrumental transcommunication experiments, the scole experiments, drop-in communicators, physical and mental mediumship, proxy-sittings, mental mediumship experiments, direct-voice, proxy-sittings, the cross correspondences, crisis apparitions, apparitions, hauntings, afterdeath communications etc.]