The Person and the MindThis article will address the general form of the argument for the identity of the person (mind) with the body (brain). This argument will be deemed unfounded because it is invalid and because the premises on which it is based are, in fact, false. This analysis will include a critical examination of logical behaviorism, a theory that supports this argument. The argument is based on two premises (P):P1: The mind is subject to understanding and control by science.P2: Only that which is quantifiable and sensible -perceptible is subject to the control of science. Therefore, based on these two premises, the following two conclusions can be reached (C): C1: The mind is quantifiable and perceptible by the senses. C2: The mind is the same as the body (brain). The validity of an argument is found when, if the premises are true, the conclusions would follow logically from those premises. According to the premises established in the argument, the first conclusion would naturally follow. The argument seems logical and the conclusions actually follow from the premises. Furthermore, starting from the premises we can also reach the second conclusion, but only by presupposing that the body is the part of the person that is quantifiable and perceivable by the senses. Since this assumption is considered true, the second conclusion follows in the argument. It would therefore appear that the overall form of the argument is valid. This, however, is not the case because argument is a way of asking the question. Asking a question is a logical fallacy in which the conclusion is presupposed before it has been proven. In this case, the first premise, arguing that the mind is subject to cont...... middle of paper ......g that the mind is nothing other than the brain, and that the person is nothing other than to the body, science downplays the extent to which individuality can define a person. To say that we are nothing more than a collection of cells and that our thoughts are nothing more than chemical processes is to say that the entire human existence is useless. Our thoughts are meaningless and we are purely response-driven beings. We react to our environment and nothing more. We simply have a better vocabulary. But that's not the case. Every day, humans make decisions and behave in ways inexplicable by science. They are behaviors that require reflection and serve to give us the experiences that shape our identities. The argument is unfounded, not only because it is invalid but also because its premise is false, the mind is in no way fully understandable by science.