It is possible that brain is a property of mind if, and only if, the
cyclist is a property of cycling, a car is a property of locomotion. I
could provide much cruder examples but I will leave that to your
imagination!
Now explain in simple language how it is possible for a multifunctional
entity (a cyclist) to be subsumed into the single function (cycling).
Do you believe that the part can be greater than the whole?
As to Hegel,  me think his think has long since gone!

You have never perceived 'mind' in the absense of brain matter!  Yet,
in the absence of this perception, you claim mind  may exist
independently! How do you reconcile this with ..."If a tree falls in a
forest"... and all of that."?

Do you know the answers to your questios regarding 'dark matter'? Do
you think they are meaningful? If so inform me. Mind is a 'catch all'
word for the neurological functions of the brain so  I presume it must
have the same size, weight, color and location as do cycling and all
other functions (including the  crude functions I did not describe).

Presumably, things that are not 'necessary'' remain in hiding?
Zinnic

A common view of the mind body dichotomy is that brain (body) somehow
gives birth to consciousness, et. al. (mind).  Brains, however, are
fleeting, lasting only a few years, while it is possible that
consciousness (mind) lives on.

A brain without consciousness would lack focus and probably not
function at all, or at least not normally.  Vegetative maybe?
Consciousness without brain may live on either separately or in
sequence with other brains phenomena.

Of course, consciousness may cease when the brain ceases and this would
make the two somewhat equivalent.

Mind is associated with perception while brain is a perceived object.
Is the observed greater, more encompassing, then the observer?

I would not describe mind as a "catch all" for the neurological
functioning of the brain.  Inherent in 'neurological functioning' is
observable entity, which mind is not.  Chemical and/or electronic stuff
is not mind stuff.  Perhaps, you are referring to 'motion' here.
Motion is, indeed, a little like mind and dark matter.

Mind and dark matter are alike in that they do not appear in our
dimension, except for their affects.

We determine the existence of mind, for example, by the introspection
of multiple phenomena coming and going witin a certain grouping.  This
grouping is not, itself, phenomenal but is required to establish
relations between the various phenomena within the grouping.  Relations
that, by the way, are used and formulated in scientific endeavour.

The 'doing' of scientific observation shows that mind exists.  Just as
the 'doing' of scientific observation shows that dark matter exists.
Both are exposed by the relations they establish in the world of
phenomena.

Brains just sit there and ooze blood.


tomcat