I am not scholastically equipped to give you an intelligent response. The passage you quoted is based on the mind is produced by brain argument. I agree that there are apparent physiological changes associated with mental changes, but all of my reading indicates that is a cursory relationship.
The brain = mind model appears to fail when such characteristics as nonlocality and noncontact acquisition of information are considered. It completely fails when it comes to psychokinesis.
Clearly there is a mind-brain relationship. In the dualistic model, it is necessary to have a physical-nonphysical interface for the mind to impress movement commands on the body. Conversely, there must be a means by which signals from the body's senses are interfaced to mind.
I submit that the article you cited leans on an incomplete model.
The brain = mind model appears to fail when such characteristics as nonlocality and noncontact acquisition of information are considered. It completely fails when it comes to psychokinesis.
Clearly there is a mind-brain relationship. In the dualistic model, it is necessary to have a physical-nonphysical interface for the mind to impress movement commands on the body. Conversely, there must be a means by which signals from the body's senses are interfaced to mind.
I submit that the article you cited leans on an incomplete model.