THE NATURE OF MIND

New Zealand Listener, Volume 30, Issue 769, 15 April 1954, Page 5

THE NATURE OF MIND

Sir-I. have to thank "Psychiatrist" for his clear definition, in your issue of March 19, of what he means when using the term "mind." His statement that "brain" must not be confused with either "soul" or "mind" agrees with the latest findings of science to the effect that the brain is merely part of the mechanism through which the mind, by means of a very complicated electrical system, controls the body. This appears to suggest that the brain, of itself, has no power to institute either ideas or actions, What

is needed now is an expert (or experts) in electricity, physiology and psychology to explain, in terms that can be understood by a man of average intelligence, how very closely our system of communication by means of electricity follows that of the human body. When this point is understood it will leave the way clear to concentrate on the difference (if any) between mind and soul. Opinion on this point appears to be divided into two camps, the first of which holds that the terms mind and soul are interchangeable, and that they have the same functions. "Psychiatrist" apparently holds views similar to this. Another group holds the view that the soul is part of the spiritual side of man while mind controls the mechanism of the material body. Briefly, the idea of this group is that the mind thinks or feels, reasons and wills (in that order), hence the terms "principle of thinking," "intellect," etc., applied to it. It governs the body by means of a most efficient electrical system. Like the soul, it continues working while the body rests in sleep or is unconscious; but, unlike the soul, it probably ceases with the change

called death.

R.J.

T.

(Auckland).

(Doubt and Certainty in Science, the Reith Lectures for 1950, by Professor J. Z. Young, since published in book form, should give our correspondent his starting point.-Ed. )