DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**Julik19** · 04-06-2012, 10:30 AM

In modern scientific circles, the brain is often argued to be at the root of selfhood, and this holds true to a certain, limited extent. Although our likes/dislikes, predispositions, biases, opinions, personality traits, and sense of distinction from other people can be said to be contained in the brain - wired by means of conditioning and neuroplasticity - the network of connections that make up this cortical seat of consciousness is in no way stable or the same from one moment to the next.

And not only from neuroscience Abhaya; Social sciences in this postmodern era have realized the fact that there is no such entity called a self as is the main approach of social constructivism whose foundational ideas can be found in Herbert Mead's analysis of reality:

Mead believed in the reality of many perspectives and of many presents. Mead took time seriously, as do all process thinkers; and this view commits Mead to a pluralism and a qualified relativism. This pluralism and objectivity of perspectives, plus his stress on the primacy of experience, adds up in Mead's case to what we have called a "social idealism". The individual is ultimate; but his reality is not complete if isolated. It must be achieved in part, through being related to a wider process.

The Social Self, by Paul E. Pfuetze. 1954.
I think this is an evidence, once again, that approaches us to understand the fact of anatta.

04-06-2012, 10:30 AM	#24
Julik19 Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 468 Senior Member	In modern scientific circles, the brain is often argued to be at the root of selfhood, and this holds true to a certain, limited extent. Although our likes/dislikes, predispositions, biases, opinions, personality traits, and sense of distinction from other people can be said to be contained in the brain - wired by means of conditioning and neuroplasticity - the network of connections that make up this cortical seat of consciousness is in no way stable or the same from one moment to the next. And not only from neuroscience Abhaya; Social sciences in this postmodern era have realized the fact that there is no such entity called a self as is the main approach of social constructivism whose foundational ideas can be found in Herbert Mead's analysis of reality: Mead believed in the reality of many perspectives and of many presents. Mead took time seriously, as do all process thinkers; and this view commits Mead to a pluralism and a qualified relativism. This pluralism and objectivity of perspectives, plus his stress on the primacy of experience, adds up in Mead's case to what we have called a "social idealism". The individual is ultimate; but his reality is not complete if isolated. It must be achieved in part, through being related to a wider process. The Social Self, by Paul E. Pfuetze. 1954. I think this is an evidence, once again, that approaches us to understand the fact of anatta.
	Quote