sci.physics.particle

On Mar 18, 11:20=A0pm, "Robert J. Kolker" wrote:
> Alen wrote:
>
> > You are right, and I say that such problems can never
> > be solved by science alone, because they are too much
> > involved with the inescapable concepts of the mind. The
> > conceps of the mind will have to be dealt with in themselves,
> > i.e., philosophically, if any clear picture is ever to emerge.
>
> What mind? =A0A non-physical substance (res cogitens) has never been
> observed. Scan a human body or slice it open and all you will find is
> physical stuff.
>
> The Mind-Body problem is solved. There is only Body.
>
> Bob Kolker

The concepts I referred to in the context of mind
have been observed. That is, they are written in my
post, and in the posts of others, so they exist. A
question about the nature of mind itself is a separate
discussion. As far as such concepts are concerned,
the mind, in the narrowest sense, refers simply
to that which produces and uses them.

As far as your reference is concerned, however, I
think it would not be surprising if a non-physical substance
was not observable by physical means, would it?

Alen