What Is Consciousness? Neuroscientist May Have Answer…

[Christopher O'Brien]

[A thought-provoking article examining the conundrum of human-consciousness, recommended reading! — chris]

Article HERE:

"None of us knows for certain how the brain produces consciousness, but the attention schema theory looks promising. It explains the main phenomena. It is logical, conceptually simple, testable, and already has support from a range of previous experiments. I do not put the theory in opposition to the three or four other major neuroscientific views of consciousness. Rather, my approach fuses many previous theories and lines of thought, building a single conceptual framework, combining strengths. For all of these reasons, I am enthusiastic about the theory as a biological explanation of the mind—of consciousness itself—and I am eager to communicate the theory properly." REST OF ARTICLE HERE:

 

[Wade]

A pbs series featuring David Eagleman just wrapped up and while it wasn't directly about consciousness it did touch on it. Recommended Viewing...and probably reading but I've yet to purchase it.

The Brain with David Eagleman

http://www.amazon.com/dp/1101870532/?tag=rockoids-20

 

[Randall]

[A thought-provoking article examining the conundrum of human-consciousness, recommended reading! — chris]

Article HERE:

"None of us knows for certain how the brain produces consciousness, but the attention schema theory looks promising. It explains the main phenomena. It is logical, conceptually simple, testable, and already has support from a range of previous experiments. I do not put the theory in opposition to the three or four other major neuroscientific views of consciousness. Rather, my approach fuses many previous theories and lines of thought, building a single conceptual framework, combining strengths. For all of these reasons, I am enthusiastic about the theory as a biological explanation of the mind—of consciousness itself—and I am eager to communicate the theory properly." REST OF ARTICLE HERE:

Great primer for the "Consciousness and Paranormal" thread. The obvious question of course" What about those who believe that consciousness is not an emergent property of the brain? Even these days those people aren't to hard to find. Not naming names, there's at least one or two who frequent the forum, and the rationale they use isn't simply lalaland woo-woo nonsense.

But I'm not of that persuasion myself. I do believe that consciousness is an emergent property of the brain, or more specifically a normally functioning brain-body system in a state of some lucidity, and even more precisely, centered on the Thalamocortical system. Up to this point, this approach is backed up by scientific study, and appears to identify the primary component of our consciousness generator. Yet this still leaves consciousness itself a matter of speculation. From there I step off the ledge into my own lala land, speculating that the sensory loops in the Thalamocortical system generate fields analogous to magnetic fields, but rather than carrying the "fundamental" property of magnetism, they carry the "fundamental property" of consciousness.

This of course still doesn't really explain anything. So called "fundamental properties" like gravity are as big a mystery to science as they ever were, and simply because it might eventually get labeled as something that is imparted onto some particle or whatever still won't answer the question of where it came from in the first place in order to be "imparted", like onto the Higgs Boson ( or whatever they smash next ). The best I can come up with on that, is that our entire universe is some kind of massive construct; an ultra-powerful, super high-resolution simulation, where properties are imparted onto our universe by rules imposed by that system, analogous to the way rules are imposed on video games and their AI characters.

Surprisingly, that view has actually gained some traction in recent years by some thinkers higher-up in the food chain than me. But even if they're right, that still doesn't explain the totality of existence. We still get into the old "Turtles all the way down" scenario. However, if either of the options above turns out to be accurate, there would still be some seriously huge practical applications for anyone who figures out how to generate a consciousness field or interact with the "Big OS". Occasionally, I've mused that perhaps that's what is happening with prayer, or remote viewing, but on a really weak level.