Intelligent Design Mind Neuroscience

Michael Egnor: Atheist neuroscientist gets the brain wrong

Spread the love

Egnor is a neurosurgeon and can’t afford to get the brain as wrong as a materialist atheist neuroscientist can:

Atheist neuroscientist V.S. Ramachandran claims in a video at You Tube (Beyond Belief Conference, 2006) that brain hemispheres can have different opinions on the existence of God:

Perhaps it is relevant, in assessing such a bizarre claim, that Dr. Ramachandran also makes a statement about brain surgery that is false.

Corpus callosotomy is the “split brain” operation that I and many other neurosurgeons have performed. It involves cutting the corpus callosum that connects the cerebral hemispheres, in order to treat serious epileptic seizures. He claims that the operation also entails cutting the anterior commissure and the massa intermedia. That is not true.

The anterior commissure is a tiny bundle of nerve fibers in the anterior third ventricle that connects the temporal lobes and other parts of the brain. Its function is still the object of much research, but it is not cut during split brain surgery. It is located near a very delicate region of the brain (the hypothalamus) and cutting it would be quite dangerous. It actually touches the columns of the fornices, which are memory tracts and are vital for the formation of new memories.

The massa intermedia is a variable fiber tract in the third ventricle that connects the right and left thalamus. Its function is unknown, and it too is never deliberately cut, even in split brain surgery.

Keep in mind that Dr. Ramachandran is a leading neuroscientist who studies the mind-brain connection and yet he doesn’t seem to know even the most rudimentary facts about the surgical operations that he uses publicly to argue for materialism.

Michael Egnor, “My right hemisphere is an atheist! No, wait …” at Mind Matters News

Naturalist atheists can afford to be wrong because they are counted as right anyway in popular science media. No one requires accuracy of them. That’s part of what is making Darwinism, for example, ridiculous.


Further reading:

Yes, split brains are weird, but not the way you think. Scientists who dismiss consciousness and free will ignore the fact that the higher faculties of the mind cannot be split even by splitting the brain in half.

Some people think and speak with only half a brain. A new study sheds light on how they do it.

and

Four researchers whose work sheds light on the reality of the mind The brain can be cut in half, but the intellect and will cannot, says Michael Egnor. The intellect and will are metaphysically simple.

22 Replies to “Michael Egnor: Atheist neuroscientist gets the brain wrong

  1. 1
    Seversky says:

    What do Dr Ramachandran’s religious or philosophical beliefs have to do with his error concerning what nerve bundles are cut during a Corpus callosotomy procedure?

    Egnor also writes that the anterior commissure is not cut because of the risk involved and the role of the massa intermedia is unknown. But if, as Egnor believes, the mind is a separate entity from the physical brain, why should that matter? It should have no effect on the mind.

  2. 2
    AaronS1978 says:

    Hey Sev I actually cut my ethernet cable And the internet stopped working. Obviously they are one and the same, so a got a new cable and my internet came back. Thanks Sev good insight wonder how that cable produces all the internet like that

  3. 3
    polistra says:

    I’m not a neuroscientist, but I do write courseware on related subjects. I want the result to be as correct as possible wrt current knowledge, which is changing FAST. I wouldn’t dare to make an animation about specific details without checking with the book’s author and also checking with good online sources. You’d think a “neuroscientist” would have the same respect for basic facts.

    We can have different opinions and mixed feelings for an obvious reason that doesn’t begin to invoke hemispheres. Life gives us a variety of experiences related to one perception or thing or topic. We hold a variety of emotions, each triggered by a different set of current circumstances, each turning into a different opinion when verbalized. When we try to think more formally, we try to sort out these different emotions and find an appropriate mix, or pick the one that matches our verbal learning. But most mixed feelings don’t get sorted out at this formal level. A totally examined life is not worth living.

  4. 4
    FourFaces says:

    Christians have a lot to contribute to this topic whether or not they know it. Human beings are indeed two persons in one. It’s all yin and yang. The two hemispheres are analogous to the Godhead: the Son and the Father. The latter is the master (right hemisphere) and the former is the servant. The left hemisphere is the speaking hemisphere and is analogous to the Son or the Logos. It controls the right side of the body and is analogous to the Son sitting on the right side of the Father (The Lord said to my Lord, sit on my right side). It’s a position of honor and has no biological advantage. In fact, biologically speaking, the crisscrossing of the nerves is an unnecessary complexity.

    Seversky, if Michael Egnor believes that the brain has nothing to do with the mind (reference?), he would indeed be mistaken. It takes both the soul and the brain to make a mind. The brain is the seat of intelligence and the soul handles consciousness. And yes, if we are like God, two persons in one, the soul is also a dual entity, one for the left hemisphere and the other for the right hemisphere.

    PS. The metaphorical scriptures contain a wealth of “occult” (secret or hidden) information about the brain. It will all come out in due time.

    PS 2. Since this is about the Corpus Callosum, did you know that it contains about 200 million fibers. What makes this number interesting is this little verse in the Book of Revelation: “Now the number of the army of the horsemen was two hundred million; I heard the number of them.” Revelation 9:16 Enjoy!

  5. 5
    jawa says:

    “Atheist Neuroscientist Gets The Brain Wrong”

    “Atheist […] Gets […] Wrong”

    Fill in the blanks.

    🙂

  6. 6
  7. 7
    Seversky says:

    AaronS1978 @ 2

    Hey Sev I actually cut my ethernet cable And the internet stopped working. Obviously they are one and the same, so a got a new cable and my internet came back. Thanks Sev good insight wonder how that cable produces all the internet like that

    Cut the blood supply to a brain, it stops working and so does the conscious mind. Re-connect a blood supply the next day and it starts right up again and the conscious mind comes right back just like the Internet, doesn’t it.? Oh, that’s right, no, it doesn’t. Bad analogy.

  8. 8
    ET says:

    seversky:

    Cut the blood supply to a brain, it stops working and so does the conscious mind.

    Does it? Have you tested that premise, seversky?

  9. 9
    FourFaces says:

    Seversky,

    Cut the blood supply to a brain, it stops working and so does the conscious mind.

    True but so what, though? It only proves that a functioning brain is essential to consciousness (to which I agree), but not sufficient. It’s easy to prove that the brain is not sufficient for consciousness. A neuron in the visual cortex that results in a red sensation when activated is identical to a neuron that results in a blue or green sensation. Color exists in neither the environment nor the brain and yet we experience it. How do you explain that?

  10. 10
    FourFaces says:

    I can’t believe that, as a Christian, I find myself disagreeing with other Christians about the brain and agreeing with an atheist/Darwinist about the necessity of the brain for the mind. Does Michael Egnor really believe that the brain is irrelevant to the conscious mind? If so, it does not speak well for the Christian stance on this issue, in my opinion.

    Even the Bible teaches that the eye is the window of the soul. Without eyes, without the optic nerve, the thalamus and visual cortex and its 100s of millions of cortical columns, there is no window for the soul.

  11. 11
  12. 12
    FourFaces says:

    The soul sees but it needs an eye, a retina, an optic nerve and a visual cortex with millions of cortical columns to do it. The brain is absolutely necessary for the mind.

  13. 13
    FourFaces says:

    The soul is not a homunculus in the ordinary sense. It is not required for intelligence. It controls the brain’s intelligence to a large degree.

  14. 14
    AaronS1978 says:

    @ 7
    So cut the Electricity to my computer and all the Internet came off too wow you’re a super smart guy I’ll remember that as well, God your analogies are brilliant! It’s almost like computers and humans are one in the same Thanks Sev !!!! Lol

  15. 15
    AaronS1978 says:

    @ 10
    He doesn’t
    He is a firm proponent of hylomorphism.
    He actually goes into great detail what parts of your thoughts are physical and one parts of your thoughts are not

    Most of your mind is physical according to him with the exception of abstract thinking and free will, You can also probably roll subjective experience into that as well because you don’t need to have a subjective experience to exist “Pzombies”

    But he does believe that the mind and the brain to intertwined with a few exceptions

  16. 16
    FourFaces says:

    AaronS1978 @15,

    From what you wrote, it follows that Egnor believes that the conscious mind requires both brain and soul. So why is Seversky claiming that Egnor believes the brain is irrelevant to consciousness?

  17. 17
    AaronS1978 says:

    @ 16
    Because he is Seversky
    This is the same guy that asked why religious people don’t just kill themselves to be with their Creator

    This is the same guy that believes there is no free will yet criticizes everybody for believing in something that they have no choice in believing

    He Constantly criticizes religion and even fallaciously so, to the point where he’s not even close to being right and has been corrected multiple times about his view, yet he does not correct it nor does he change

    And lastly he seems to be the most knowledgeable about an object that no human on this planet has any clue how it works, the human brain. we only have snippets and we are so dumbfounded by it’s insane complexity to the point where we believe that maybe evolution might not have given us the faculties to figure it out

    But severesky knows best

    That’s why

  18. 18
    FourFaces says:

    AaronS1978 @17,

    I get it. Seversky is one of those demon-influenced, lying jackasses from the church (synagogue?) of Satan. 😀

  19. 19
    Seversky says:

    AaronS1978 @ 15

    He doesn’t
    He is a firm proponent of hylomorphism.

    According to himself, in your very own Evolution News he’s a dualist

    Dualism, which is the theory that the mind and matter are separate substances, has its own problems, the most serious of which is: how can mind and matter interact if they are completely different substances? I favor dualism, because I accept the reality of immaterial causes, and dualism is consistent with our intuitive and nearly universal belief in the existence of the soul. Although dualism obviously leaves explanatory gaps, it retains free will and intentionality, which seems to accord with reality. Implicit or explicit acceptance of free will and intentionality is a precondition for a meaningful understanding of the mind-body problem. Our opinions have no meaning if they’re determined entirely by neurochemistry. Norepinephrine doesn’t have ‘meaning.’

  20. 20
    AaronS1978 says:

    Hey Sev
    Same place
    https://evolutionnews.org/2018/07/a-superb-new-website-introducing-aquinas-design/

    By the way if you actually paid attention to what he was saying he’s gone over this on mind matters news like only a million times

    It’s also a form of dualism if you didn’t know that already so why don’t you take a gander over at mind matters news too and start looking up all of his pieces about this

    Hell you can search here on UD

    Does dualist in your narrow definition of things mean the brain doesn’t matter

    If so thats not Michael Egnor’s fault, that’s once again you imposing your view on things and complaining about

  21. 21
    FourFaces says:

    Seversky @19,

    Dualism does not imply that the brain is not needed for the mind. Egnor does not say that. Why lie? Dualism implies two complementary substances. The idea that they are “completely different substances” comes from stupid and dishonest materialists. Opposites are of the same nature. Both matter and spirit are of the same nature. They’re just opposites: one can be created and destroyed and the other cannot.

    I was right about you being a liar and a deceiver. As Yoda might say, “Love Satan, you do.” 😀

  22. 22
    jawa says:

    FourFaces @10:
    You’ve raised a good question: is the material brain irrelevant to the immaterial conscious mind?
    I believe that within this earthly context, the physical (biological) brain is required for the conscious mind to interact with our body and with the surrounding environment. The interface between the two must be highly incomprehensible to us.

Leave a Reply