Is there one?
Why not?
I would think some radical off the wall brainiac genius scientist of some sort would at least come up with something.
Anyone?
Hypothesis for consciousness apart from the physical body
Moderator: Moderators
-
SeaPriestess
- Student
- Posts: 89
- Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2018 7:08 am
-
TSGracchus
- Scholar
- Posts: 345
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 6:06 pm
- Been thanked: 1 time
Re: Hypothesis for consciousness apart from the physical bod
Post #41[Replying to post 38 by William]
William: "He understands that mainstream science is not interested as it is ill equipped and not the best medium through which to study OOBEs."
Well, the bases of cognition are not best studied by physicists. But, mainstream neuroscience is indeed interested, is well equipped, and out of body experiences and near death experiences can be studied and have been studied by neuroscientists. Such phenomena have even been chemically and electromagnetically induced. All those deities and demons, spirits and spooks, are being chased out of the dark corners of the mind simply by shining the light into them.
William: "He understands that mainstream science is not interested as it is ill equipped and not the best medium through which to study OOBEs."
Well, the bases of cognition are not best studied by physicists. But, mainstream neuroscience is indeed interested, is well equipped, and out of body experiences and near death experiences can be studied and have been studied by neuroscientists. Such phenomena have even been chemically and electromagnetically induced. All those deities and demons, spirits and spooks, are being chased out of the dark corners of the mind simply by shining the light into them.
-
William
- Savant
- Posts: 15673
- Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
- Location: Te Waipounamu
- Has thanked: 998 times
- Been thanked: 1891 times
- Contact:
Re: Hypothesis for consciousness apart from the physical bod
Post #42[Replying to post 40 by TSGracchus]
He understands that mainstream science is not interested as it is ill equipped and not the best medium through which to study OOBEs.
I suggest that before making such sweeping statements you might want to research the fellow first and at least get some background.
By all means, stay aloof if that is your preference and consider yourself 'in the know' as to what is going on as you wish. But don't conflate that with actual experience and expect to be taken seriously by those with the experience. Calling them 'woo' and inferring anyone who takes my position on the subject is somehow ignorant of the 'light' of science and still believes in "those deities and demons, spirits and spooks" is no way to win friends, let alone arguments.
Just sayin'
He understands that mainstream science is not interested as it is ill equipped and not the best medium through which to study OOBEs.
Yep you go on believing that TSGracchus - by all means.Well, the bases of cognition are not best studied by physicists.
I suggest that before making such sweeping statements you might want to research the fellow first and at least get some background.
So you are told and so you believe what you are told. I have delved into the subject of these studies you mention and have yet to find anything therein which can faithfully repeat through chemically and electromagnetically induced methods, anything which I have experienced re the phenomena, and think it safe to say I - as someone who has experienced OOB - would not be surprised if this was the case for most individuals who have experienced OOBs.Such phenomena have even been chemically and electromagnetically induced.
By all means, stay aloof if that is your preference and consider yourself 'in the know' as to what is going on as you wish. But don't conflate that with actual experience and expect to be taken seriously by those with the experience. Calling them 'woo' and inferring anyone who takes my position on the subject is somehow ignorant of the 'light' of science and still believes in "those deities and demons, spirits and spooks" is no way to win friends, let alone arguments.
Just sayin'
-
TSGracchus
- Scholar
- Posts: 345
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 6:06 pm
- Been thanked: 1 time
Re: Hypothesis for consciousness apart from the physical bod
Post #43[Replying to post 41 by William]
William: "I suggest that before making such sweeping statements you might want to research the fellow first and at least get some background."
Actually, I did that. I found this: "Upon completion of My Big TOE, Campbell sent copies of the book to leading physicists, and fellow scientists, but received little response. This prompted Campbell to forgo enlisting support from "the top," in favor of reaching out to lay audiences as a better way to share and spread his ideas about consciousness and the nature of reality."
It seems his peers were unconvinced by his book, so he decided to sell it to the to the gullible throng.
And, by the way, although I only accumulated 18 semester credits in psychology, and only 20 in biology, I have had both the OBE (surgery) and the NDE (trauma). I found no good reason to suppose they were anything but manifestations of brain physiology.
.
William: "I suggest that before making such sweeping statements you might want to research the fellow first and at least get some background."
Actually, I did that. I found this: "Upon completion of My Big TOE, Campbell sent copies of the book to leading physicists, and fellow scientists, but received little response. This prompted Campbell to forgo enlisting support from "the top," in favor of reaching out to lay audiences as a better way to share and spread his ideas about consciousness and the nature of reality."
It seems his peers were unconvinced by his book, so he decided to sell it to the to the gullible throng.
And, by the way, although I only accumulated 18 semester credits in psychology, and only 20 in biology, I have had both the OBE (surgery) and the NDE (trauma). I found no good reason to suppose they were anything but manifestations of brain physiology.
.
-
William
- Savant
- Posts: 15673
- Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
- Location: Te Waipounamu
- Has thanked: 998 times
- Been thanked: 1891 times
- Contact:
Re: Hypothesis for consciousness apart from the physical bod
Post #44[Replying to post 42 by TSGracchus]
Perhaps you conflate said experiences with OBE and NDE and what you experienced was really nothing like those?
You have to admit that one who is taught to believe such experiences are simply of the brain, is going to assign his own as manifestations of brain physiology. That in itself doesn't mean it is so, it only means it is so for you. Of the two of us, in the end, only one of us gets to say "I told you so."
As said, it is hard for the reader to make the same call you have made, when the details remain hidden...
If that is how you wish to interpret his work you are simply reacting the same as the scientists Tom tried to share that work with. Delve more into that information and you will understand why Tom chose the path he did. Until you do, your assumptions re Tom's motivations, remain invalid.It seems his peers were unconvinced by his book, so he decided to sell it to the to the gullible throng.
Well it is easy to make such a claim but how is the reader to know, if the details are not shared?And, by the way, although I only accumulated 18 semester credits in psychology, and only 20 in biology, I have had both the OBE (surgery) and the NDE (trauma). I found no good reason to suppose they were anything but manifestations of brain physiology.
Perhaps you conflate said experiences with OBE and NDE and what you experienced was really nothing like those?
You have to admit that one who is taught to believe such experiences are simply of the brain, is going to assign his own as manifestations of brain physiology. That in itself doesn't mean it is so, it only means it is so for you. Of the two of us, in the end, only one of us gets to say "I told you so."
As said, it is hard for the reader to make the same call you have made, when the details remain hidden...
-
TSGracchus
- Scholar
- Posts: 345
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 6:06 pm
- Been thanked: 1 time
Re: Hypothesis for consciousness apart from the physical bod
Post #45[Replying to post 43 by William]
William: "If that is how you wish to interpret his work you are simply reacting the same as the scientists Tom tried to share that work with."
What reasons can you present to show that his peers were wrong?
William: "You have to admit that one who is taught to believe such experiences are simply of the brain, is going to assign his own as manifestations of brain physiology."
If the manifestations can be explained by neuroscience, there is no reason to invoke spirits or leprechauns.
William: "That in itself doesn't mean it is so, it only means it is so for you."
Reality is the same for everyone, believe it or not. I go with the evidence. It would seem that you go with unsupported wishful thinking.
William: "Of the two of us, in the end, only one of us gets to say 'I told you so'."
Except that, at the end, neither of us will have a word to say.
William: "As said, it is hard for the reader to make the same call you have made, when the details remain hidden..."
Right back at ya', kid. For all we know you are off your meds. My point was, though, that having an experience is not evidence that your interpretation of that experience was accurate. Having an experience does not make you an expert. Lots of people have the experiences, and they interpret them according to their individual frames of reference.
BUT: Where does the neurological evidence lead?
.
William: "If that is how you wish to interpret his work you are simply reacting the same as the scientists Tom tried to share that work with."
What reasons can you present to show that his peers were wrong?
William: "You have to admit that one who is taught to believe such experiences are simply of the brain, is going to assign his own as manifestations of brain physiology."
If the manifestations can be explained by neuroscience, there is no reason to invoke spirits or leprechauns.
William: "That in itself doesn't mean it is so, it only means it is so for you."
Reality is the same for everyone, believe it or not. I go with the evidence. It would seem that you go with unsupported wishful thinking.
William: "Of the two of us, in the end, only one of us gets to say 'I told you so'."
Except that, at the end, neither of us will have a word to say.
William: "As said, it is hard for the reader to make the same call you have made, when the details remain hidden..."
Right back at ya', kid. For all we know you are off your meds. My point was, though, that having an experience is not evidence that your interpretation of that experience was accurate. Having an experience does not make you an expert. Lots of people have the experiences, and they interpret them according to their individual frames of reference.
BUT: Where does the neurological evidence lead?
.
-
William
- Savant
- Posts: 15673
- Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
- Location: Te Waipounamu
- Has thanked: 998 times
- Been thanked: 1891 times
- Contact:
Re: Hypothesis for consciousness apart from the physical bod
Post #46[Replying to post 44 by TSGracchus]
We shall have to see when that time comes.
Either that or you are just saying you have had these experiences but really haven't at all.
Point being, if you make the claim at least share the data of your experiences so that the reader can get some kind of bearing on what you are talking about and can then question you further etc.
No one in this world is more expert on my own experience than I am. Not even if they believe that they are.
Re: Near Death Experiences
Dr. Bruce Greyson - studies of NDEs and ongoing results summary.
NDEs are;
Reported profound experiences in which individuals seem to leave their physical bodies and move beyond the boundaries of time and space
Have been reported by many diverse ancient cultures and appear in the writings of Plato, the Bible, in Tibetan, Indian, Egyptian, Chinese, Japanese writ, And in South Pacific and Native American folklore.
The interpretation of the experience may vary from one culture to another but the basic experience is the same over the centuries and around the globe.
The study of NDEs has been going on for the past 50 years
Not all experiences are like Jeffs and they are not all the same
There is a core which is similar in all NDEs
It is hard to study NDEs because when people are asked to share what happened to them they often start by saying 'well it can't be put into words - there are no words for this!'...and researchers say 'great! Tell me all about it!'
Thus the researchers know that but getting people to put their experiences into words that they are distorting the situation.
They do not study the experience but what they are told about the experience.
Studies at the university of Virginia, United Kingdom and Holland have shown that among people who have documented brushes with death, between 10-20% will report having NDEs, remembering the experiences clearly, and are able to put that into words and choose to do so
The generally guideline created through studying hundreds and hundreds of NDEs used in order to understand the NDEs are;
Group Features of NDEs
1: Changes in thinking and thought processes
Sense of time distorts or is missing entirely.
Thinking is faster and often clearer than ever before.
Life review with panoramic memory
Sudden understanding and revelation.
2: Changes in emotions feelings
Sense of peace and well-being
Feelings of Joy
A sense of cosmic unity and oneness with everything
Encounter with bright light being who is characterized as unconditional love
3: (so-called) paranormal feature of experiences.
Extraordinary sensory vividness
Frank extrasensory perception
Visions of the future
A sense of leaving the physical body
4: Otherworldly features
Finding oneself in a mystical unearthly realm of existence
Encountering mystic beings or presense
Seeing deceased spirits or religious spirits
Coming to a boarder which you cannot go past if you are to survive and have to return to your body.
Most NDEs have some of all of these features in them.
Research with NDEs is always retrospective. Sometimes the experience happened many years before and what happened has to be reconstructed.
NDEers will typically say that 'it was like it happened yesterday' as the vividness has not gone away.
We know that our memories are faulty, and we distort things over time. How can we know that the memories of NDEs are accurate?
Skeptics argue that the experiences retold, are embellishments.
Because the studies have been going on for 5 decades now, this gives opportunity for researches to address this question.
In 2002 Dr. Greyson began tracking down people he had interviewed about their NDEs in the early 1980s and he asked them to again describe their experiences to him. Something very interesting was found in this...in the retelling there were no noticeable embellishments, changes in thinking, feeling, etc...after 20 years. NDE memories are reliable over time. Thus retrospective research is also reliable.
The phenomena is the same re going through a long dark space to get to a light, although different cultures explain this in different ways using different metaphors.
The UVA has been collecting NDE reports since the early 1960s and the collected data.
They compared 24 of the best cases they had before 1975 with 24 cases from the last decade (2000s) matched in terms of age, race, gender, religiosity, how they came close to death and how close to death they came.
In those cases there were no significant differences when compared.
After-effects; in both sets of samples, 100% on those who experienced NDEs reported dramatic attitude changes, less fear of death, having difficulty telling other people, increased belief in survival, and others corroborating what they experienced OOB in terms of saying (example) "yes that is what happened, but how could you have known that when you were in a coma (seen as being unconscious)?"
The test above was given to see if the NDEs were influenced by any wide public knowledge of Dr. Raymond Moody's Near-Death Experience Research and best selling book which was published after 1975
Interpretations of NDEs may be influenced by culture (such as JWs belief that these are caused by 'demons'.) but the basic experience is not determined by ones culture.
How are the experiences explained?
There are no variables known as of yet which can predict if someone is going to have an NDE or what kind of NDE one is going to have.
Age, gender, race, religion, history of mental illness, none of these things are associated with NDEs or specific types of NDEs.
Speculation re physiological causes which may be related to NDEs;
Lack of oxygen
Endorphins
Temporal lobe seizures
The bottom line with all these explanations is that one cannot reconcile the enhanced mental functioning and heightened perceptions - faster and clearer thinking, detailed memories, with the fact that the brain is not functioning.
Why care about NDEs?
1: That they lead to a consistent pattern of changes in attitudes, beliefs and values.
These have been confirmed through long term studies of NDEers over decades as well as with interviews with their significant others, and often the changes have increased over time.
Dramatic increases in;
Spirituality
Compassion and concern for others
Appreciation fro life
Sense of meaning and purpose
Confidence and flexibility in coping with the stressful.
Belief in survival after death
It is noted that some of these things happen to many who come close to death (but do not experience NDEs but others are unique to NDEers.
Decreases after NDE;
Decrease or absence of fear of death
Interest in material possessions
Interest in personal status
Competitiveness (more interest in cooperation and altruistic activities)
Sometimes the changes are so marked that they seem to be different people than they were before the experience.
2: What they tell us about the possibility of survival after death. NDEs provide some evidence bearing on this possibility.
Is death the end of ones existence or just a change of state?
Evidence of survival from NDEs
Enhanced mental function with impaired brains (Example of this 44:42 in video.)
We cannot explain, using the materialistic model, that 'the mind is what the brain does' when there is no brain function but there is enhanced mind function.
Accurate perception from OOB location (Example 46:23)
Visits with deceased persons, especially those in which accurate information is communicated and deceased persons not known by the NDEer to have died. (Examples 48:32 and 49:00)
The bottom line suggests that mind and brain are not the same thing. The NDEs show that the mind functions well - and even better - when the brain is not functioning.
NDEs allow one to question basic assumptions about our existence and purpose[/quote]
What reasons do you have to show that his peers thought he was wrong?What reasons can you present to show that his peers were wrong?
I will have to google " leprechauns and NDE experiences" and see what hits I get. For now though, your mention of them is irrelevant. NDEs are not fairy stories. Much as you are convinced otherwise.If the manifestations can be explained by neuroscience, there is no reason to invoke spirits or leprechauns.
You go with the interpretation of the evidence, same as everyone does. Wishful thinking doesn't factor into it, so your muddied observation as to what motivates me is facetious.Reality is the same for everyone, believe it or not. I go with the evidence. It would seem that you go with unsupported wishful thinking.
Your beliefs are evident.Except that, at the end, neither of us will have a word to say.
We shall have to see when that time comes.
That was uncalled for.Right back at ya', kid. For all we know you are off your meds.
Your claim was that you have had both NDE and OOB experiences and that you have decided from those that they were just " manifestations of brain physiology". At least others are willing to share their experiences. I would say I wouldn't be too far off the truth to think that you would rather not share because you might be judged as needing meds.My point was, though, that having an experience is not evidence that your interpretation of that experience was accurate.
Either that or you are just saying you have had these experiences but really haven't at all.
Point being, if you make the claim at least share the data of your experiences so that the reader can get some kind of bearing on what you are talking about and can then question you further etc.
Unless it is you having an experience?Having an experience does not make you an expert.
No one in this world is more expert on my own experience than I am. Not even if they believe that they are.
Lots of people have the experiences, and they interpret them according to their individual frames of reference.
Re: Near Death Experiences
Dr. Bruce Greyson - studies of NDEs and ongoing results summary.
NDEs are;
Reported profound experiences in which individuals seem to leave their physical bodies and move beyond the boundaries of time and space
Have been reported by many diverse ancient cultures and appear in the writings of Plato, the Bible, in Tibetan, Indian, Egyptian, Chinese, Japanese writ, And in South Pacific and Native American folklore.
The interpretation of the experience may vary from one culture to another but the basic experience is the same over the centuries and around the globe.
The study of NDEs has been going on for the past 50 years
Not all experiences are like Jeffs and they are not all the same
There is a core which is similar in all NDEs
It is hard to study NDEs because when people are asked to share what happened to them they often start by saying 'well it can't be put into words - there are no words for this!'...and researchers say 'great! Tell me all about it!'
Thus the researchers know that but getting people to put their experiences into words that they are distorting the situation.
They do not study the experience but what they are told about the experience.
Studies at the university of Virginia, United Kingdom and Holland have shown that among people who have documented brushes with death, between 10-20% will report having NDEs, remembering the experiences clearly, and are able to put that into words and choose to do so
The generally guideline created through studying hundreds and hundreds of NDEs used in order to understand the NDEs are;
Group Features of NDEs
1: Changes in thinking and thought processes
Sense of time distorts or is missing entirely.
Thinking is faster and often clearer than ever before.
Life review with panoramic memory
Sudden understanding and revelation.
2: Changes in emotions feelings
Sense of peace and well-being
Feelings of Joy
A sense of cosmic unity and oneness with everything
Encounter with bright light being who is characterized as unconditional love
3: (so-called) paranormal feature of experiences.
Extraordinary sensory vividness
Frank extrasensory perception
Visions of the future
A sense of leaving the physical body
4: Otherworldly features
Finding oneself in a mystical unearthly realm of existence
Encountering mystic beings or presense
Seeing deceased spirits or religious spirits
Coming to a boarder which you cannot go past if you are to survive and have to return to your body.
Most NDEs have some of all of these features in them.
Research with NDEs is always retrospective. Sometimes the experience happened many years before and what happened has to be reconstructed.
NDEers will typically say that 'it was like it happened yesterday' as the vividness has not gone away.
We know that our memories are faulty, and we distort things over time. How can we know that the memories of NDEs are accurate?
Skeptics argue that the experiences retold, are embellishments.
Because the studies have been going on for 5 decades now, this gives opportunity for researches to address this question.
In 2002 Dr. Greyson began tracking down people he had interviewed about their NDEs in the early 1980s and he asked them to again describe their experiences to him. Something very interesting was found in this...in the retelling there were no noticeable embellishments, changes in thinking, feeling, etc...after 20 years. NDE memories are reliable over time. Thus retrospective research is also reliable.
The phenomena is the same re going through a long dark space to get to a light, although different cultures explain this in different ways using different metaphors.
The UVA has been collecting NDE reports since the early 1960s and the collected data.
They compared 24 of the best cases they had before 1975 with 24 cases from the last decade (2000s) matched in terms of age, race, gender, religiosity, how they came close to death and how close to death they came.
In those cases there were no significant differences when compared.
After-effects; in both sets of samples, 100% on those who experienced NDEs reported dramatic attitude changes, less fear of death, having difficulty telling other people, increased belief in survival, and others corroborating what they experienced OOB in terms of saying (example) "yes that is what happened, but how could you have known that when you were in a coma (seen as being unconscious)?"
The test above was given to see if the NDEs were influenced by any wide public knowledge of Dr. Raymond Moody's Near-Death Experience Research and best selling book which was published after 1975
Interpretations of NDEs may be influenced by culture (such as JWs belief that these are caused by 'demons'.) but the basic experience is not determined by ones culture.
How are the experiences explained?
There are no variables known as of yet which can predict if someone is going to have an NDE or what kind of NDE one is going to have.
Age, gender, race, religion, history of mental illness, none of these things are associated with NDEs or specific types of NDEs.
Speculation re physiological causes which may be related to NDEs;
Lack of oxygen
Endorphins
Temporal lobe seizures
The bottom line with all these explanations is that one cannot reconcile the enhanced mental functioning and heightened perceptions - faster and clearer thinking, detailed memories, with the fact that the brain is not functioning.
Why care about NDEs?
1: That they lead to a consistent pattern of changes in attitudes, beliefs and values.
These have been confirmed through long term studies of NDEers over decades as well as with interviews with their significant others, and often the changes have increased over time.
Dramatic increases in;
Spirituality
Compassion and concern for others
Appreciation fro life
Sense of meaning and purpose
Confidence and flexibility in coping with the stressful.
Belief in survival after death
It is noted that some of these things happen to many who come close to death (but do not experience NDEs but others are unique to NDEers.
Decreases after NDE;
Decrease or absence of fear of death
Interest in material possessions
Interest in personal status
Competitiveness (more interest in cooperation and altruistic activities)
Sometimes the changes are so marked that they seem to be different people than they were before the experience.
2: What they tell us about the possibility of survival after death. NDEs provide some evidence bearing on this possibility.
Is death the end of ones existence or just a change of state?
Evidence of survival from NDEs
Enhanced mental function with impaired brains (Example of this 44:42 in video.)
We cannot explain, using the materialistic model, that 'the mind is what the brain does' when there is no brain function but there is enhanced mind function.
Accurate perception from OOB location (Example 46:23)
Visits with deceased persons, especially those in which accurate information is communicated and deceased persons not known by the NDEer to have died. (Examples 48:32 and 49:00)
The bottom line suggests that mind and brain are not the same thing. The NDEs show that the mind functions well - and even better - when the brain is not functioning.
NDEs allow one to question basic assumptions about our existence and purpose[/quote]
In relation to the question of consciousness, it does not lead anywhere. Different interpretations of that evidence lead in different directions. One, into relative open space and the other to a brick wall.BUT: Where does the neurological evidence lead?
Re: Hypothesis for consciousness apart from the physical bod
Post #47It is important to factor in that we don't even have a proper science of consciousness.SeaPriestess wrote: [Replying to post 28 by William]
True! But I would just think that there might be some ambitious scientist out there who might come up with some theory even if it seemed "outlandish". I thought scientists were known to do that. You know, the "mad scientist"!
"To sum up, the modern West has developed a sophisticated science of behavioral and neural correlates of consciousness, but no science of consciousness itself, for it has failed to develop sophisticated, rigorous means of exploring the mental phenomena firsthand. And this is the first step toward developing an empirical science of any class of natural phenomena. Thus, with regard to exploring the nature, origins, and potentials of consciousness, cognitive scientists and neuroscientists are more like astrologers, who carefully examine correlates between celestial and terrestrial phenomena, than astronomers, who carefully examine celestial phenomena themselves."
Taken from book, Contemplative Science: Where Buddhism and Neuroscience Converge by B. Alan Wallace - pg. 57
-
TSGracchus
- Scholar
- Posts: 345
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 6:06 pm
- Been thanked: 1 time
Re: Hypothesis for consciousness apart from the physical bod
Post #48[Replying to post 46 by Razorsedge]
Razorsedge: "It is important to factor in that we don't even have a proper science of consciousness.
[font=Serif]"To sum up, the modern West has developed a sophisticated science of behavioral and neural correlates of consciousness, but no science of consciousness itself, for it has failed to develop sophisticated, rigorous means of exploring the mental phenomena firsthand. And this is the first step toward developing an empirical science of any class of natural phenomena. Thus, with regard to exploring the nature, origins, and potentials of consciousness, cognitive scientists and neuroscientists are more like astrologers, who carefully examine correlates between celestial and terrestrial phenomena, than astronomers, who carefully examine celestial phenomena themselves."[/font]
Taken from book, Contemplative Science: Where Buddhism and Neuroscience Converge by B. Alan Wallace - pg. 57"
Dr. Wallace has a PhD in religious studies. He has no credentials in neuroscience.
I recommend again lectures given by Robert Sapolsky at Stanford University on Human Behavioral Biology. These are available on-line at
Or, you could perhaps condescend to read one or more of his books to get a quick overview of modern neuroscience. For instances: https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_ss_i ... 4XUEC2S3ZW
Dr. Sapolsky is a very good speaker and writer, with frequent flashes of humor.
.[/color]
Razorsedge: "It is important to factor in that we don't even have a proper science of consciousness.
[font=Serif]"To sum up, the modern West has developed a sophisticated science of behavioral and neural correlates of consciousness, but no science of consciousness itself, for it has failed to develop sophisticated, rigorous means of exploring the mental phenomena firsthand. And this is the first step toward developing an empirical science of any class of natural phenomena. Thus, with regard to exploring the nature, origins, and potentials of consciousness, cognitive scientists and neuroscientists are more like astrologers, who carefully examine correlates between celestial and terrestrial phenomena, than astronomers, who carefully examine celestial phenomena themselves."[/font]
Taken from book, Contemplative Science: Where Buddhism and Neuroscience Converge by B. Alan Wallace - pg. 57"
Dr. Wallace has a PhD in religious studies. He has no credentials in neuroscience.
I recommend again lectures given by Robert Sapolsky at Stanford University on Human Behavioral Biology. These are available on-line at
Or, you could perhaps condescend to read one or more of his books to get a quick overview of modern neuroscience. For instances: https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_ss_i ... 4XUEC2S3ZW
Dr. Sapolsky is a very good speaker and writer, with frequent flashes of humor.
.[/color]
-
Tired of the Nonsense
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 5680
- Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:01 pm
- Location: USA
- Been thanked: 1 time
Re: Hypothesis for consciousness apart from the physical bod
Post #49SeaPriestess wrote: Is there one?
Why not?
I would think some radical off the wall brainiac genius scientist of some sort would at least come up with something.
Anyone?
Wikipedia
Near Death Experience
A near-death experience (NDE) is a personal experience associated with death or impending death. Such experiences may encompass a variety of sensations including detachment from the body, feelings of levitation, total serenity, security, warmth, the experience of absolute dissolution, and the presence of a light.[1] NDEs are a recognized part of some transcendental and religious beliefs in an afterlife.
Different models have been described to explain NDEs. Neuroscience research suggests that an NDE is a subjective phenomenon resulting from "disturbed bodily multisensory integration" that occurs during life-threatening events.
Low oxygen levels (and G-LOC) model
Low oxygen levels in the blood (hypoxia or anoxia) have been hypothesized to induce hallucinations and hence possibly explain NDEs.[14][5] This is because low oxygen levels characterize life-threatening situations and also by the apparent similarities between NDEs and G-force induced loss of consciousness (G-LOC) episodes.
These episodes are observed with fighter pilots experiencing very rapid and intense acceleration that result in lack of sufficient blood supply to the brain. Whinnery[66] studied almost 1000 cases and noted how the experiences often involved "tunnel vision and bright lights, floating sensations, automatic movement, autoscopy, OBEs, not wanting to be disturbed, paralysis, vivid dreamlets of beautiful places, pleasurable sensations, psychological alterations of euphoria and dissociation, inclusion of friends and family, inclusion of prior memories and thoughts, the experience being very memorable (when it can be remembered), confabulation, and a strong urge to understand the experience.
Other models
French said that at least some reports of NDEs might be based upon false memories.[67]
According to Engmann (2008) near-death experiences of people who are clinically dead are psychopathological symptoms caused by a severe malfunction of the brain resulting from the cessation of cerebral blood circulation.[68] An important question is whether it is possible to "translate" the bloomy experiences of the reanimated survivors into psychopathologically basic phenomena, e.g., acoasms (nonverbal auditory hallucinations), central narrowing of the visual field, autoscopia, visual hallucinations, activation of limbic and memory structures according to Moody's stages. The symptoms suppose a primary affliction of the occipital and temporal cortices under clinical death. This basis could be congruent with the thesis of pathoclisis"the inclination of special parts of the brain to be the first to be damaged in case of disease, lack of oxygen, or malnutrition"established eighty years ago by Ccile and Oskar Vogt.[69]
Professor of neurology Terence Hines (2003) claimed that near-death experiences are hallucinations caused by cerebral anoxia, drugs, or brain damage.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Near-death_experience
"The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honorable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this." -- Albert Einstein -- Written in 1954 to Jewish philosopher Erik Gutkind.-
myth-one.com
- Savant
- Posts: 7492
- Joined: Wed Aug 09, 2006 4:16 pm
- Has thanked: 32 times
- Been thanked: 99 times
- Contact:
Post #50
Here's a proposed test:SeaPriestess wrote: Plenty of theories were once unproven because they couldn't be tested but then they were, we (well the geniuses) discovered the proof and now it's what we know and believe.
There are sedatives today under which those sedated have absolutely no consciousness of time passing.
After I reached a certain age, my doctor wanted me to have a colonoscopy every five years.
The day of the procedure, I put on the gown, laid down on the gurney, and the nurse inserted a syringe into my arm.
She stated that she would be right back to wheel me into the testing area.
She immediately returned, and I said, "OK, let's get started."
She responded, "Oh, it's finished. The doctor will be in soon to discuss the results with you."
I was out for 2-3 hours with absolutely no consciousness or awareness of anything. No dreams, thoughts, or sensations.
I simply lost that part of my "life."
It was a really strange and weird feeling. It was a total void in my life.
I've had one other colonoscopy since and the experience was the same.
=============================
Perhaps this could be made a repeatable test.
Things could be added to test for any signs of consciousness -- colored light, sounds, touch, etc. The subject of the test could be questioned about these events after the test.
If none of the subjects can recall any of the events while the body was sedated, then might we conclude consciousness cannot exist without a viable physical body?
