Tiffany Johnson 20 December 2023

Glad to visit this informative blog, love it! Thanks for sharing it with us.

James Song 28 October 2023

   
Thanks for sharing!

TiborZ Koos 5 July 2023

Mr. Kastrup has created a long science fiction series that he sells to make a living. Fine. The problem is that it is hard to believe that he is just a silly person writing silly things because he does not know better. Mr. Kastrup holds two doctoral degrees in fields relevant to the metaphysics of consciousness. He cannot claim ignorance about the difference between a string of words and an explanation (even a hypothetical one). His claim about the relative parsimony of idealism over materialism on the ground that his "theory" only uses one substrate, "universal consciousness", as opposed to the 17 quantum fields of the standard model is dishonest (or disqualifyingly ignorant) considering that of course he has neither unified these fields nor propose any new way of deriving them for the simple reason that the construct he calls "universal consciousness" has no stated (or even fantasized) properties. Calling it Cthulhu would have been just as appropriate. These kind of absurd claims are then mixed with false or misleading ones. No, physics did not "prove" physical realism wrong. What has been argued is that physical "facts" may be relational, but no serious physicist agree today that this has anything to do with consciousness. Connecting the two is deliberately misleading. Similarly, in direct contradiction of Kastrup's characterization, few if any physicalist explanations of consciousness consider phenomenal states as causally ineffective epiphenomena.
I believe in the free and unrestricted communication and publication of ideas. Mr. Kastrup should have all the chance and fora to communicate his ideas, including here at IAI. I also believe that anyone who stakes a claim to be taken seriously has to be prepared for the most direct and honest criticism. Explicit rejection of ideas that are sophomoric or argued in bad faith should not be withheld just to be polite and nice. If correct Kastrup's metaphysics would be the greatest insight into the fundamental nature of reality. Does he believe that or does he knows deep inside that the things he writes are only fantasies.

Steve Smith 1 27 January 2022

Thanks

Daniel Hager 14 January 2022

“Perfect idealism, to show itself stronger than all the materialism in the world, must deprive matter of none of its meaning. It must endow it with more.” (Sir Henry Jones, The Life and Philosophy of Edward Caird, p. 258) #idealism #materialism #consciousness #Philosophy

That was the quote I meant to share. There doesn't seem to be a way to edit my post so it was posted here.

Daniel Hager 14 January 2022

Sandro Magi said 'This is false. Materialism does not need to posit 'mentality' in addition to 'matter', there is only 'matter' from which the behaviour we attribute to mind ultimately springs. I could just as easily say that idealism, the philosophy which you seem to espouse, is clearly less parsimonious because mental substance now needs explain apparently unconscious matter in addition to conscious matter. It's a basic failure to deal with a theory from its own premises.'

This is a misunderstanding of Analytical Idealism. Matter is still in the cognitive landscape of universal consciousness which makes it objective.

Everything is in consciousness although not everything is conscious.

Under physicalism you have two categories of reality mental and matter. It is better to shave off matter as a category and just have the mental category. All can be explained with the mental category and it doesn't fall prey to the impossible problem of consciousness.

What people call matter still exists it is just ultimately in the contents of UniversalConsciousness. "In order for metaphysical Idealism to be superior to matteralism it must deprive matter of non of it's meaning, instead it must give it more meaning." I forgot who originally said that quote however I will find out on Twitter.

"Yes, and the additional observation that science has refuted all prior human claims to uniqueness. Shall I list some? That the Earth was flat, that the Sun revolved around the Earth, that the Earth was the center of the universe, that we were created in God's image, and most like this recent drive to claim consciousness is unique: that there is something special distinguishing living matter from non-living matter, known as vitalism. And like vitalism, which advancements in biology drove extinct long ago, neuroscience will soon shred the pedestal we've built for consciousness, and all this philosophical nonsense like dualism and idealism will also go the way of the dodo."

The study of biology was in the 3rd person perspective/functions of life. Whereas consciousness is purely in the 1st person perspective/subjective.

Science only deals with the study of extrinsic relations in 2nd and 3rd person perspectives

Tommy Jones 24 November 2021

I am amazed by Ohikhobo's remedy. I Have had herpes for over 6 years with frequent outbreaks. Sometimes I average 2-3 times per month. Before one breakout could end, the next would begin. Nothing has helped me. I came online in search for a possible way to see how I can fight this virus so I found Ohikhobo here online after seeing a lot of testimonies of how he cured herpes and other diseases with natural herbs so I decided to give it a try I only took his remedy for two weeks and I was completely cured. I recommend Ohikhobo's remedy to anyone suffering from herpes that wants to be completely cured too.

Email: drohikhoboherbalcenter @ gmail com

WhatsApp +1740-231-2427

Breana Michael 12 August 2021

Thanks for sharing this great article, I like the content as well. roofing contractors

Denis Charles 12 August 2021

I was cured from 5 years of Genital Herpes Virus and Itching Blisters on my genital part within 21 days with Doctor Nelson Salim Herbal Medicine. I was recommended to Dr. Nelson through this news site and his information was shared by his previous clients who have been cured from different diseases. I decided to try Doctor Nelson product which I placed an order and within 4 days I received the product on my address through DHL. And with Dr. Nelson instructions I used the product for 21 days after concluding the herbal product, I was advised to go for another Genital Herpes PCR test which I did and to my surprise my result was negative with no trace of the virus on my blood. I highly recommend him to anyone suffering from HEPATITIS, HERPES ZOSTERS, FIBROID, WEAK ERECTION, KIDNEY CYST, COPD, PROSTATE ENLARGEMENT, ERECTILE DYSFUNCTION, HIGH BLOOD PRESSURE AND SUGAR his information; E-mail; drnelsonsalim10@gmail.com
Whatsapp / call +2348116522191.

Joana Davidson 11 August 2021

Materialism has been shown to ruin people's relationships, increase a person's depression and anxiety levels, and make a person less satisfied with their lives as a whole. I'd rather spend on my wall repair than be materialistic. Best regards!

Adam Park 4 August 2021

I read Why Materialism is Balogna and really enjoyed it. I did have some questions:

Doesn’t explain why there is inherent structure(frequencies)—this would inevitably lead to a discussion about ‘design’ which might have been too big a side note to go into and I get that. Kastrup appears to be Buddhist so I can’t assume whether he’s interested in the idea of ‘creation’ or not.

Where does time fit into all this?

Where/how does information storage occur

Could have used more about law of attraction/reinforcement of belief and how we can affect the whirlpool outside of us and within us

We share the surface, but could it be potentially one ‘reality’ out of many

Would love to distinguish between extra-sensory ripples and ‘reality’ ripples

I liked to entertain the idea that our ‘whirlpools’ might be inside an even BIGGER single whirlpool—as in reality as we know it is the dream of some god or consciousness.

Was a good read and blows materialists out of the water easily. This book inspired a lot of curiosity and thinking in me. I think it’s definitely one of the most state-of-the-art reality maps out there today.

In my free time I like to read articles on various topics, mainly about the gaming industry, music, and films. Today I came across one interesting article https://www.filmink.com.au/how-do-you-make-deposits-at-an-online-casino/ about online casino deposits. Since I often play in online casinos, the article turned out to be very useful and informative for me, in short, in the article itself I learned about the safety of depositing, that is, I know that while playing my money is completely safe about bitcoin stores and more Many things...
For those who are interested in the world of gambling, I advise you to read this article, here you will find a lot of useful information for yourself and highlight something new and interesting for yourself.

Madison Wilson 30 July 2021

His book does not require any creed, dogma or illogical conclusions. It not only explains why our universe came into existence and why consciousness is fundamental, it also solves decades-old questions like why the speed of light is a maximum velocity in our universe or why entangled particles exchange information in real-time without any delay at all and thus at a speed beyond the lightspeed.

( Austin Wood Refinishing )

Misty Floyd 22 July 2021

awesome!
https://missionhillscarwraps.com/fleet-vehicle-vinyl-wraps/
https://cardeaconcrete.com/stamped-concrete/
https://constantpressurewashing.com/commercial-pressure-washing/
https://westhollywoodpressurewashing.com/commercial-pressure-washing/
https://kirkscustomcabinetsinpomona.com/custom-kitchen-cabinets/
https://cardeacabinets.com/custom-hardwood-countertops-in-santa-monica/
https://digitalsignbrothers.com/

Misty Floyd 22 July 2021

<a href = "https://shepardcustomcabinetsanaheim.com/">https://shepardcustomcabinetsanaheim.com/</a>;

Sean Evans 13 July 2021

the fact that we can even think these things shows that that’s not really the universe we live in.
Crown Sterling

Sean Evans 13 July 2021

Materialism has the advantage of being simple: You are your body. Your mind is your brain. The universe is a collection of rocks floating around. <a href="https://www.crownsterling.io/">Crown Sterling</a>

Zorida Oyena 8 July 2021

Materialism leads to endless misery!!
Grease trap pumping Dayton Oh
Line Striping Springfield Ohio
Excavation Dayton OH

Rae Karts 24 June 2021

Materialism has always been dangerous. Talking about it as a dead end makes sense. Though I doubt people admit materialism within itself, that is a pretty interesting headline.
Rae | roof repairs

Phedra jones 10 June 2021

Great post! I didn’t knowral of these resources and I’m going to go check them out now! (https://fall-guys.co/)

Yang Ruflo 31 May 2021

Interesting. Such perspective must have been thought thoroughly. Also exciting that the comment section is somewhat divided should I say to the article. We have our own ideas, but hearing out other won't be bad too. Thanks!
Yang | <a href="https://www.westaucklandcarpetcleaning.kiwi/">carpet cleaning</a>

david depape 28 May 2021

In reply to Sandro Magi

"The very fact that we can reliably and consistently demonstrate these facts shows that reality exists outside of your mind, which by itself entails that there is an objective world with properties that we can measure. If there weren't, then how can I objectively claim that reality does not respect at least one of the above properties? " - Sandro Magi

No. The fact that you can reliably and consistently demonstrate something means it is consistent and reliable. It DOES NOT prove material existence. I consistently have dreams. Does the fact that my mind has the consistent ability to create a reality immerse me within it and convince me it's real prove that all my dreams big banged, abiogenesised and evolved to the point where I am now experiencing them?

Consistency does not prove materialism. It only proves consistency. Your entire argument is based upon logical fallacies, the bias of pre conceived notions, inability to self reflect and lack of critical thinking skills.

"we cannot empirically observe matter outside and independent of mind, for we are forever locked in mind. All we can observe are the contents of perception, which are inherently mental. Even the output of measurement instruments is only accessible to us insofar as it is mentally perceived." - Bernardo Kastrup

This one statement the author made destroys all your arguments if you understood it. Since you didn't understand let me explain it another way.

Their was a scientist once who did prove materialism. He designed an experiment that was capable of measuring matter independent of the consciousness effect he even won several nobel prizes for his contribution to science. Then do you know what happened?

His alarm clock went of and he woke up. Ya turns out that was all just a figment of his imagination.

No matter what argument you make it relys upon ignoring the logical fallacies that you are making and stretching to prove things you haven't proven.

Here's the thing their is actually a ONE WAY street of evidence.

You can NEVER prove the primacy of matter because anytime you do. You could be dreaming and your entire argument is rendered null and void. The content of your mind can NEVER be used to prove that the content of your mind exists external to your mind and..... EVERYTHING is the content of your mind.

You can only ever PROVE the primacy of Consciousness. The content of your mind CAN prove that the content of your mind IS the content of your mind. For example. When you wake up you have proven that the previous content of your mind was in fact the content of your mind.

Before you make the absurd assertion that waking up proves materialism. It does nothing of the sort because it is also content of the mind and can't be proven to be anything other. If I have a dream where I wake up in a dream does that prove all dreams big bang, abiogenesis and evolve to the point where I am now dreaming them? Clearly not.

You can ONLY ever prove the primacy of consciousness and you can NEVER prove the primacy of matter.

Sandro Magi 1 April 2021

With all due respect, I'm not sure that a single claim about materialism in this entire article is true.

> For starters, there is nothing about the parameters of material arrangements—say, the position and momentum of the atoms constituting our brain—in terms of which we could deduce, at least in principle, how it feels to fall in love, to taste wine, or to listen to a Vivaldi sonata. There is an impassable explanatory gap between material quantities and experiential qualities, which philosophers refer to as the ‘hard problem of consciousness.’

Conjecture. Neither you, nor anyone else, have successfully proven that "parameters of material arrangements" CANNOT deduce even in principle, "how it feels to fall in love, to taste wine, or to listen to a Vivaldi sonata." Neither have materialists demonstrated that they can, but your assertion that it cannot be done even in principle is, at best, a god of the gaps fallacy. The assertion of an
"impassable gap" is just that, an assertion. Not a proof, and not evidence. The intuition pumps, like Mary's Room, reveal only our own innate biases, limited imaginations and scientific ignorance.

> Second, materialism lives or dies with what physicists call ‘physical realism’: there must be an objective world out there, consisting of entities with defined properties, whether such world is being observed or not.

Literally no experiments have refuted physical realism, and if you think they do, then you don't understand the experiments in question. What experiments have shown is that reality does not respect at least one of the following properties: locality, counterfactual definiteness, statistical independence.

The very fact that we can reliably and consistently demonstrate these facts shows that reality exists outside of your mind, which by itself entails that there is an objective world with properties that we can measure. If there weren't, then how can I objectively claim that reality does not respect at least one of the above properties?

> Third, a compelling case can be made that the empirical data we have now amassed on the correlations between brain activity and inner experience cannot be accommodated by materialism. There is a broad, consistent pattern associating impairment or reduction of brain metabolism with an expansion of awareness, an enrichment of experiential contents and their felt intensity. It is at least difficult to see how the materialist hypothesis that all experiences are somehow generated by brain metabolism could make sense of this.

It's very simple: your brain works hard at filtering out irrelevant sensory data in favour of data that's more important to survival. This is clearly adaptive and therefore favoured by evolution by natural selection. Impairing brain metabolism or other brain function, such as via mind-altering substances, breaks down established filtering mechanisms thereby boosting sensory data that we had previously learned to mute or entirely disregard as unimportant.

> Materialism is unparsimonious because, in addition to or instead of mentality—which is all we ultimately know—it posits another category of ‘substance’ or ‘existent’ fundamentally beyond direct empirical verification: namely, matter.

This is false. Materialism does not need to posit 'mentality' in addition to 'matter', there is only 'matter' from which the behaviour we attribute to mind ultimately springs. I could just as easily say that idealism, the philosophy which you seem to espouse, is clearly less parsimonious because mental substance now needs explain apparently unconscious matter in addition to conscious matter. It's a basic failure to deal with a theory from its own premises.

> The popularity of materialism is founded on a confusion: somehow, our culture has come to associate it with science and technology, both of which have been stupendously successful over the past three centuries. But that success isn’t attributable to materialism; it is attributable, instead, to our ability to inquire into, model and then predict nature’s behavior.

Yes, and the additional observation that science has refuted all prior human claims to uniqueness. Shall I list some? That the Earth was flat, that the Sun revolved around the Earth, that the Earth was the center of the universe, that we were created in God's image, and most like this recent drive to claim consciousness is unique: that there is something special distinguishing living matter from non-living matter, known as vitalism. And like vitalism, which advancements in biology drove extinct long ago, neuroscience will soon shred the pedestal we've built for consciousness, and all this philosophical nonsense like dualism and idealism will also go the way of the dodo.

Humans, or any animal for that matter, are simply not special in this way. We are special in other ways, but almost certainly not this way.

Sam Nuzbrokh 30 March 2021

I love the content, These article contents slap the reality and this is definitely happening nowadays, Let's embrace ourselves for worse might happen.

Sam | https://massagewestport.com

Thomas Groover 6 March 2020

In response to Logan Leatherman: I'm wondering if your work is more successful than materialist investigations into mental health and mental illness, which despite a century and a half of effort, has been a colossal failure.

And in support of the blogger, the advent of non-reductionist investigations into mind have been quite revealing, and as Stanislav Grof put it, non-ordinary states of (human) consciousness have yielded by far the most useful information in regards to the human mind. And to further the somewhat dire predicament of the materialist perspective, the burgeoning field of psychedelic research is populated entirely by dualist researchers (with exceptions being a handful of brain imaging experts intent on "proving" that mind is physical). This is because, except for the imaging data, the research is non-reductionist and questions of why psychedelics are such a powerful tools cannot escape the dependence upon the subject's experience, in evaluating outcome. So to summarize, evaluations of the effectiveness of this research are necessarily non-reductionist, and if you have not studied the extensive literature as I have, you have no position from which to debate effectively. And to advise against further digging a hole for oneself by belittling philosophical questions, I can reassure that the psychological benefits experienced by subjects in this research are supplemented in virtually all cases by major shifts in philosophical outlook.

Logan Leatherman 16 January 2020

This is why I’m glad I’m a scientist. My work has actual predictive and practical usage in the world. All armchair philosophy like this does is create its own parameters and then argue in circles within those parameters, using contrived terms and attempting to make sense of what’s not actually there. Most philosophy is a waste of time because of exactly this, but by all means continue to pat yourselves on the back because you’re such “great thinkers”. Let science, with the help of what philosophy is actually useful, continue to pull society into the future while you lot continue to pedantically talk in circles, contradicting each other with nothing more than your own respective conjectures. I sincerely hope your parents are proud.

Brian Steere 1 30 December 2019

Are we not participant in the ongoing or unfolding development of science as our cultural authority?
Or indeed the framer of our identity and worldview - which are twos sides of one currency.
But our science has become a corporate technologism sets a global framing of narrative dictates.
Consolidating to a technocracy of imposed or 'socially engineered' regulatory structure replacing political process, relational responsibility and the felt and share qualities of human being - with robotic substitution that parody life while enabling a corporate predator to effectively farm its carbon units, or mindshare?

While I have been opening broadly to the scientific realm (and thinking or cultural developments of the world) over the last decade or so my background is more intuitive and experiential - as a re-integrative willingness of alignment in being.

This gave me some advantages of being opened to the need for reintegration (wholeness, congruency, coherency) and freedom from reputational constraint in that I can and do look into anywhere or anything that resonates to my sense of self-honesty.

Self-honesty goes deeper than we think - to a quality of discernment of what we think - and the capacity to recognise the reality experience of the thought we accept and align in by acting from and embodying as true of us.

The relational nature of the reality of which we are an active extension is a whole in all its Parts - for which we have no image or form - indeed we have to align in a differentiation from pure experiencing in order to 'have an experience' in terms of a relational definition. To think about, or perceive the experience of facets of whatever is Happening - into terms of happened.

Many take the subjected mind of judgements and meanings as to what happened - as the mind - and see it as extremely frail - not unlike its 'body'.
Hardly the basis of Creative Power - excepting undeniably able to colour its own subjected experience according to the thoughts it accepts, runs or is conditioned and has acquired as adaptation to the world of definitions, meanings, and rules, that it seems to be almost entirely subject to - apart from its will to judge experience towards possession of control - set against a sense of chaos that is held out of awareness by rules, inhibitions, defences and deeper cultural and 'biological' filtering through the framework of the total personality structure.

So I witness to a split mind of order and chaos - that of course embodies our mythic archetypes in complex entanglements as the attempt to Cast Out rejected self - and survive or prevail thereby as separate, dissociated, private agenda, at expense of the quality of awareness of wholeness in all its Parts.

That Reality (this word can be used to mean many different things) simply Is always already true - is therefore prior to any 'discovering' or recognition - and yet is the magnetic impulse or our vibrational desire for experiencing. A-traction of recognition to embodiment of the extension of the idea of recognised appreciation and gratitude or coherent meaning.

I just felt to write something to say hello or introduce myself in terms not of personality but of a consciousness of Many in One in which there is a unifying quality in seemingly disparate facets. Embodiment doesn't end with a birth, or an adaptation to the prevailing culture - but unfolds to become an 'Instrument of Thy will' - that is to say a willingness to get our of our own way - such as to make way for recognition, and appreciation that wholes or heals and undoes the futility of struggle within impossible premises - to open a practical sense of unifying purpose in terms of movement of being - as distinct from an overlay of meanings that have come to be believed and reacted to as if 'built into' the world we perceive and respond to.
Movement within being is in terms of shifting focus and perspectives that are not really linear - and so experiential recognition allows some degree of thinking or talking about qualitative consciousness in parables or symbols - as long as it is remembered that we can only point to the 'living' and that we function best in doing so when we allow ourselves to be guided, directed and supported by a 'field relationship' in the same was a holding balance while playing around on a bike.

My general sense of 'thinking in the world' is "Seek but do not find!" - such that all apparent discovery serves to open a need for a greater budget of time and energy - that translates in socio-political terms as sacrifice of the 'living' to the idols of our seeking.

Just in terms of the idea of a dead Universe - I highly recommend
"New Views Of The Interstellar Medium”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=orFc_MzxjzU&t=4s
(Along with the Safire Project itself - and much of the perspectives of electrical underpinning to our 'Experiencing Universe' that a mainstream model is predicated against seeing - for reasons psychic-emotional, cultural and proprietorial).

Thoughts never leave the mind that thinks them - but we can cast out to sow and reap experience as if they have such power - from our own wish to BE or become free of the Mind that we live in, are of, and can only cover over or forget BY the intensity of invested emotional intent to differentiate or indeed deny, cast out and see something ELSE in substitution.

Not a little of my input is in alignment with A Course in Miracles - but by no means exclusively and always in terms of a consciousness that has grown in me rather than a pick and mix construct of social identity.

I don't like isms to become solid for they become identities and rule-sets. Embracing our physical as communication or indeed communion of a wholeness is in no way inconsistent with endeavour in the world of science or the arts - or the uncovering of the common roots of both.

Brent Meeker 13 December 2019

For scientists, materialism is just a working hypothesis. What mentalist fail to appreciate is that there is no fundamental understanding of matter either. Are quarks real or only types in our equations? Nobody cares so long as the equations give the right predictions. Meta-physical puzzles over whether the wave-function is real or is it path integrals or only useful in that they may suggest avenues of research...nobody worries about what's really real. The reason materialism is ascendant is that it has predictive power. It predicts that if given a certain drug you will become unconscious and give a different drug you will be conscious but not remember it. Psychology has a few reliable predictions too, mostly about illusions and propaganda (because of marketing research). But what has mentalism predicted? In the near future we will have artificial intelligent robots and we will design and manipulate their personalities and discussions of perception and feeling will be engineering questions. And like matter we still won't know what thoughts are, but we will be able to create them...instead of just having them pop into our heads.

Marco Masi 11 December 2019

A breath of fresh air. I think this is a well written piece that gets to the point. We are living in a society still dominated and permeated by a physicalist reductionist mindset. This is so pervasive that even those who claim to be not, more or less unconsciously cling at it nevertheless. This is not merely a philosophical issue, it is a question of how we practice science. While this exclusivism was once beneficial to science now it is severely hampering its progress.

Tronar Rhodan 26 November 2019

A very well written and logically arguing article about the fundamental truth of our existence. I guess anybody liking this article would probably also like to content of the book "My Big TOE" (TOE=Theory of Everything) written by nuclear physicist, NASA consultant and decade long consciousness explorer Thomas Campbell. He is basically saying the same, but with more detail and developing his entire Theory of Everything from only two simple assumptions. His book does not require any creed, dogma or illogical conclusions. It not only explains why our universe came into existence and why consciousness is fundamental, it also solves decades-old questions like why the speed of light is a maximum velocity in our universe or why entangled particles exchange information in real-time without any delay at all and thus at a speed beyond the lightspeed.

After reading that book, you truly get a new perspective on everything and any other book I have encountered so far is merely adding a piece to the puzzle that fits into the framework provided by My Big TOE.

Jason Barr 20 November 2019

Paul, We don't know how the mental creates what we observe, we just know that it's intelligible.

We know subjectiv experiences can cause other subjective experiences because they are in the same mental category.

A thought of my daughter can trigger and emotion of pride etc.

So this system of experience is intelligible because we start with consciousness.

So the idea here is that there's experiences in the mental domain beyond our personal psyches which then causes our perceptions of spacetime and objects.

It's just one experience causing another.

The issue if you believe in Physical Realism, as it has two problems:

Not only can it not explain how brain produces subjective experience, but the issue is that it's not even intelligible.

So we go off the lesser of two evils here.

What's a harder pill to swallow, that our conscious states are just extensions of universal consciousness (in the way whirlpools are extensions of an ocean), or that there's no continuity at all? There's a third-person, completely objective material quantitative reality which creates a radically distinct category out of nothing; the first-person, subjective, experiential and qualitative reality.

So neither idea can really explain rigorously "how it happens", the point is that there's intelligible way for it to possibly happen if Materialism is true.

At least Idealism is intelligible, dispite the lack of perfect mechanical steps of how it works - the mind is not fundamentally mechanical anyway.

Hope that helps :)

Paul Entwistle 19 November 2019

I find this broad argument attractive, and it certainly gives us an alternative perspective to questions such as 'how can our material brain - or neurons - either be or affect our 'mental' states?' and so forth.
But do we not have a conception of the mental domain as either transcendental, or at least, shall we say, intangible? A corresponding question then surely arises if we accept only a mental aspect, how do mental faculties create what we perceive as highly mass- and force- related effects, such as being run over by a train? (as in 'I refute it thus').
For a coherent proposition must we not equally have a view on how mind manages to perceive or create things we interpret as highly physical outcomes and processes?
Or do I continue to miss the point?