Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
I'm wondering what consciousness existing inside the brain is and what that leads to.I think a main thing is that... even if there is consciousness existing outside of the human brain... what exactly does that and can that lead to?
No .. not really .. I'm just suggesting another way to think about the problem which may, at least, stand a chance of producing something useful.We can't prove consciousness in biology, now physics paints a different picture.
The latter of which, is an active demonstration of his pseudoscientific approach .. Blackmore is on point about this and you are blinded by someone's professional expertise when they use an unrelated approach.All . You should recognise parnia is no kind of religious believer
He is a renowned expert on the processes of death, keeping people alive , and the nature and science of consciousness.
He is convinced , as are many neurologists and neurosurgeons , cardiologists and ed specialists that consciousness is not a process of the brain, but instead it interacts with the brain.
Its a great question for @Mountainmike. I predict he'll just come up with some kind of deflection or condescension .. but I can't resist having a stab at it by asking a slightly different question, (more of myself than necessarily anyone else) .. ie: something along the lines of:So if the consciousness is not of the brain or even from the brain, where is it from?
"It took them only an instant to cut off that head, but a century may not produce another like it."
Maybe not deeper? Could a variety/type of consciousness be as simple as the electrostatic attraction that draws atoms towards each other to form a chemical bond? Or that consciousness in it's variety of infinite forms might be one of the foundations of the universe? Must our models of consciousness be anthropocentric? Are there other ways of understanding consciousness? Just a bunch of questions.If consciousness is a material property of at least some objects, what does it do, or cause in the world, that might be observed only for those objects that have it? Does that approach then stand a chance of maybe exposing evidence which might then lead towards something deeper which, in turn, might then explain what consciousness is and why it exists?
Well I suppose one can always pose one's own questions and then research those oneself(?)Maybe not deeper? Could a variety/type of consciousness be as simple as the electrostatic attraction that draws atoms towards each other to form a chemical bond? Or that consciousness in it's variety of infinite forms might be one of the foundations of the universe? Must our models of consciousness be anthropocentric? Are there other ways of understanding consciousness? Just a bunch of questions.
My badWell I suppose one can always pose one's own questions and then research those oneself(?)
I'm gonna choose the more scientific route here which started out with a conditional, scientifically hypothetical question of: 'If consciousness is a material property of at least some objects ..', which at least gives a fighting chance to research it from a well-known, familar objective basis, ie: the physics of matter, (which includes chemical bond interactions). I don't see that as being anthropocentric beyond the simple recognition that its us doing the research starting out with well-understood Physics, using the scientific method.
You have absolutely no idea.The latter of which, is an active demonstration of his pseudoscientific approach .. Blackmore is on point about this and you are blinded by someone's professional expertise when they use an unrelated approach.
One of the aspects of the foundation of the universe perhaps?I think a main thing is that... even if there is consciousness existing outside of the human brain... what exactly does that and can that lead to?
.. or a redefinition of whatever we mean by 'consciousness' .. (which is fair enough given that we don't have any meaty, workable definitions for it in the first place).One of the aspects of the foundation of the universe perhaps?
.. or a redefinition of whatever we mean by 'consciousness' .. (which is fair enough given that we don't have any meaty, workable definitions for it in the first place).
(FWIW): I am sceptical about treating it as a fundamental property of the universe without any evidence for that.
I can't see how that approach can lead to anything other than more opinions, beliefs and pseudoscience .. and let's face it, philosophers have also made zero in-roads after playing that game for centuries now.
There are actually deterring reasons for not going back down that rabbit-hole also. I mean the universe is unimaginably huge and consciousness could be extremely rare. Setting science off on that scavenger hunt based on a pure belief, presently looks to be a forlorn exercise because of the vastly, untravellable and the ever diminishing quality of useful information able to be retrieved over ever increasing distance spans the further out we look. Better clues are more likely to be found right under our noses .. as in Earth-based labs(?)
I prefer viewing consciousness as a pointer to, (or a window for seeing), something that's currently completely missing in our understanding of behaviours of highly complex configurations of (organic) matter, in highly specific physical and very specific evolutionary contexts. There's plenty of potential research scope left to investigate there .. (IMHO).
PS: This post isn't necessarily directed at yourself .. I'm finding your position on all of this as being useful 'triggers' .. thanks for your well-considered inputs .. they are appreciated.
until you study some of it you will have no idea.
Parnia traces the history of death research and the lack of any true binary moment , and how to prolong the period of bringing back from death , it is an entire discipline. what actually causes brain damage after arrest will surprise most people, but not you, you dont study.
As for consciousness as a brain process , there are multiple Nobel laureate neurophysiologists and neurosurgeons who dispute it, having earned thei Prizes studying brain process, and many others less known. I bet you cannot even name them..
As for consciousness influencing what we observe and reality. Slamdunk, proven, Realism is dead.
i prefer study, you prefer pseudoscientific opinion, even wiki!!
I can not only name them, but I have read their books and papers - and those of their protégés - and I heard some of them speak.Can you even name these 'multiple Nobel laureate neurophysiologists and neurosurgeons'?
I can not only name them, but I have read their books and papers and I heard some of them speak.
I have read their books and papers. As a sceptic in the scientific sevse,
Thats Because I study science a lot before comment on it.
it is a disappointment to me that on a so called “ science “ forum, most want an opinion before study
they are ideologists not scientists Who even quote wiki on occasion,
Study ot warden it is fascinating. I’ve told you a few places to start, in books which refer to the previous science.
One of the posters here remarked mockingly, from his apriori ideology (not science ) he would only believe that death was not an anbrupt halt, if one in the cemetery came back.
It is exactly the same nonsense as if in sailing ship days they only believed information about far off countries from the boats that never returned. But let that pass.
On thre medical front , If he read the book I suggested he would know pig brains have been revitalised after days of decapitation. , indeed cadaver human brain cells have also been propagated.
One of the hardest definitions in medicine is death. The evidence only starts to make sense as a dualist.
They do not.as are many neurologists and neurosurgeons , cardiologists and ed specialists that consciousness is not a process of the brain, but instead it interacts with the brain.
Nope, I am going to force you to study other than your own opinions! If you read the books I named you will find references.But you didn’t.
Nope, I am going to force you to study other than your own opinions! If you read the books I named you will find references.
i am urging a science forum to study science then comment!
Laziness on your part not mine.That's just sheer intellectual laziness. Since you are the person who is saying they can name these "multiple Nobel laureate neurophysiologists and neurosurgeons", then the onus is squarely on you to provide their names.
Saying "OH! Read the books, and look at the references!" is absolute bunk and shows us that you don't even care about the topic you claim to give two poos about.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?