Does the body need consciousness?

Creationism, Evolution, and other science issues

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
AgnosticBoy
Guru
Posts: 1614
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2017 1:44 pm
Has thanked: 203 times
Been thanked: 153 times
Contact:

Does the body need consciousness?

Post #1

Post by AgnosticBoy »

If there is no bodily function for consciousness, or if the body can operate without it, then is it valid to say that consciousness is tied to the brain? If consciousness is not tied to the brain then could that mean that it exists as a separate entity? Keep in mind that being separate does not always mean no relationship or interaction. The brain and consciousness can be separate entities but still work together, just as my brother and I are two different people, but yet we can still work together and interact.

I know of at least one case or condition that shows the body can operate completely on its own without consciousness, and that is the condition of sleepwalking or parasomnia.
Sleepwalkers are capable of performing a variety of activities, from simply getting up and walking around the room to driving a car or playing an instrument.

Sleepwalking isn't the only parasomnia. There's also sleepsex, sometimes called sexsomnia or SBS (somnambulistic sexual behavior). It's pretty much what it sounds like — sexual behavior during sleep. People with this condition might touch themselves sexually or initiate sex while asleep. They only know it happened when their roommate or partner mentions the incident. One man was actually acquitted of rape after using the defense that he was asleep at the time of the assault
Source: HowStuffWorks

On another thread, DrNoGods tried to counter by saying that sleepwalkers are conscious.
I'd argue that the sleepwalker is still conscious in that the brain is working and some sensory input is working, but while still in a state of sleep. Such people can apparently navigate a room, make it to the fridge and eat a snack, etc. which would not be possible without some of the usual sensory inputs and processing by the brain.
It seems that he or she is forgetting that sensory information can be processed unconsciously, e.g. 'subliminal perception'. The body can also move on its own or without conscious will, and we have plenty of examples when it comes to reflexes and other types of involuntary movements. This convinces me that the body is capable of being an automaton or in zombie-like mode. Again, if the brain/body has no need or function for consciousness, then we can't say that consciousness is tied to the brain. Also, the experts define sleepwalking as "unconscious" behavior.

For debate:
1. IF there is no functional role for consciousness, then does that mean it is not tied to the brain? If not tied to brain, then can it exist separately?

2. Is sleepwalking a valid example of the brain/body being able to function without consciousness? And by that I mean being able to perform virtually all possible bodily actions that we tend to describe as being "conscious" or alert behavior, such as eatting, talking, driving?
- Proud forum owner ∣ The Agnostic Forum

- As a non-partisan, I like to be on the side of truth. - AB

William1972
Newbie
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2022 1:43 am
Been thanked: 1 time
Contact:

Re: Does the body need consciousness?

Post #2

Post by William1972 »

A p-zombie is a figment of one's imagination. As a result, there is no real-world instantiation.

Sleepwalking is a real-life occurrence. It's dubious whether it can teach us anything conceptually valuable. I can't think of any philosophers who have utilized it for anything - though there may be someone out there (I only know a tiny fragment).

We're used to individuals moving or speaking in their sleep, therefore I don't think we should see sleepwalking as a distinct case in and of itself. It's a well-documented phenomenon that occurs when individuals are asleep.

However, they are actual individuals. We can communicate with them. We know they're in a sleep state and that they can awaken - they don't live in a condition we might name "p-zombie." The thought experiment isn't "completed" by locating a time slice in which anything might be posited without considering the context.

So, my view is that this is not an instance of "p-zombiehood," but rather of a typical live individual engaging in what we would term involuntary activity while sleeping.

User avatar
AgnosticBoy
Guru
Posts: 1614
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2017 1:44 pm
Has thanked: 203 times
Been thanked: 153 times
Contact:

Re: Does the body need consciousness?

Post #3

Post by AgnosticBoy »

[Replying to William1972 in post #2]

Good points!

With the advent of cloning, I think it is possible to create a zombie. It might even be easier since a zombie is less complex than a fully functioning/alert human.

Just wanted everyone to keep in mind that my point in post #1 is a variation of the Hard problem of consciousness. But whereas, the Hard Problem only is about scientists not being able to explain the 'subjective' or qualitative aspect of consciousness, I go a step further and say that scientists can not even explain or account for the form and function of consciousness.

Getting back to sleepwalkers, I'm willing to bet that we'd see the same brain activity for tasks done while sleepwalking as we'd see for the same tasks being done by someone who is alert or aware. If that's the case, why should we call that a neural correlate of consciousness if the same neural activity can occur without consciousness being involved (e.g. the neural activity seen during sleepdriving is also the same neural activity seen when driving while alert)?
- Proud forum owner ∣ The Agnostic Forum

- As a non-partisan, I like to be on the side of truth. - AB

User avatar
AgnosticBoy
Guru
Posts: 1614
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2017 1:44 pm
Has thanked: 203 times
Been thanked: 153 times
Contact:

Re: Does the body need consciousness?

Post #4

Post by AgnosticBoy »

One example of complex behavior during sleepwalking.. the case involving Kenneth Parks.
During the night of May 23, 1987, Kenneth Parks rose from his bed and wandered out of his house and into his car, driving 14 miles to the home of his mother- and father-in-law in the neighboring town. Upon arriving at their home, he took a tire iron from the car and entered the house. He then beat his mother-in-law to death and choked his father-in-law. Now a blood-spattered mess covered in cuts and bruises, he drove to a nearby police station. In a confused manner, he told the police that he “thought” he killed someone. Though still confused, he identified his in-laws, murmuring that it was “all his fault.” Eventually, Parks was tried for one charge of murder and one charge of attempted murder. His defense claimed that, during the entire episode, he was sleepwalking [1].
...
Examining Parks’ account of his episode and the nature of the actions, it is arguable that Parks was most likely in an episode of somnambulism rather than RBD. First, his episode was quite lengthy, allowing him to drive 14 miles. Furthermore, Parks had absolutely no memory of the situation, not even a minor recollection of any fragmented dreams, which would occur with RBD. Finally, Parks still appeared out of sorts when he arrived at the police station after the incident [1].
...
Parks was acquitted of both charges.
Source: Neuroethics
- Proud forum owner ∣ The Agnostic Forum

- As a non-partisan, I like to be on the side of truth. - AB

User avatar
DrNoGods
Prodigy
Posts: 2716
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2017 2:18 pm
Location: Nevada
Has thanked: 593 times
Been thanked: 1642 times

Re: Does the body need consciousness?

Post #5

Post by DrNoGods »

[Replying to AgnosticBoy in post #1]
It seems that he or she is forgetting that sensory information can be processed unconsciously, e.g. 'subliminal perception'. The body can also move on its own or without conscious will, and we have plenty of examples when it comes to reflexes and other types of involuntary movements. This convinces me that the body is capable of being an automaton or in zombie-like mode. Again, if the brain/body has no need or function for consciousness, then we can't say that consciousness is tied to the brain. Also, the experts define sleepwalking as "unconscious" behavior.
The brain can work at different levels of "consciousness" to carry out its functions. We know the hindbrain (rhombencephalon) regulates key bodily functions without any need for us to be "awake." If a boxer is knocked out he still breathes, his heart beats, he can move muscles to some extent, etc. The basic mechanisms for many of these functions seem to be pretty well known even if the details are not at the cellular level.

For example, when CO2 levels in the blood rise to certain levels (monitored by chemoreceptors) muscles in the diaphram will contract to cause the lungs to expand, reducing the pressure inside which pulls in air from the nose and mouth. This added O2 is recognized and is followed by the diaphram relaxing and air (with waste CO2) is exhaled and the process repeats even for the knocked out boxer. There is no need to be conscious (awake) for this to happen, and the brain still controls the process. But we can also force breathing voluntarily (conscious breathing) and the physical mechanism is the same (contraction and relaxation of the diaphram muscles). We can "tell" ourselves (think) to breath while fully conscious and invoke the exact same physical mechanism of diaphram contraction and relaxation as the unconscious breathing mechanism.

Dreams are another example of the brain creating "stories" that play out in sometimes wild ways as we sleep (who hasn't been able to fly and all kinds of other crazy things during dreams?). These often involve people we know, or experiences we've had, woven together in random ways and jumping from one scenario to another as the dream continues. This semiconscious state of sleep does not shut off all of the chemistry and neuron firing, etc. that occurs during fully awake states, but sort of "mushes" things together. Sleepwalking may be a similar state where the usual abilities the person has as far as walking, seeing, talking, eating, etc. are present, but they (for some reason) are unable to "wake up" as most people would to realize they are dreaming or in some sort of intermediate state between sleep and awake.

I don't see how consciousness can be anything special and some sort of entity on its own independent of a brain. I'd argue that there are degrees of "awakeness" that vary between the unconscious boxer and the fully aware human being, with every step in between only representing the degree to which the brain is able to carry out its functions.
In human affairs the sources of success are ever to be found in the fountains of quick resolve and swift stroke; and it seems to be a law, inflexible and inexorable, that he who will not risk cannot win.
John Paul Jones, 1779

The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read.
Mark Twain

User avatar
Swami
Sage
Posts: 510
Joined: Mon Dec 27, 2010 1:07 am
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 14 times

Re: Does the body need consciousness?

Post #6

Post by Swami »

Does the body need consciousness?

Consciousness does not need the body, but the body needs consciousness.

mac_
Student
Posts: 10
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2022 1:38 pm
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: Does the body need consciousness?

Post #7

Post by mac_ »

AgnosticBoy wrote: Wed Apr 13, 2022 9:54 pm If there is no bodily function for consciousness, or if the body can operate without it, then is it valid to say that consciousness is tied to the brain? If consciousness is not tied to the brain then could that mean that it exists as a separate entity? Keep in mind that being separate does not always mean no relationship or interaction. The brain and consciousness can be separate entities but still work together, just as my brother and I are two different people, but yet we can still work together and interact.

I know of at least one case or condition that shows the body can operate completely on its own without consciousness, and that is the condition of sleepwalking or parasomnia.
Sleepwalkers are capable of performing a variety of activities, from simply getting up and walking around the room to driving a car or playing an instrument.

Sleepwalking isn't the only parasomnia. There's also sleepsex, sometimes called sexsomnia or SBS (somnambulistic sexual behavior). It's pretty much what it sounds like — sexual behavior during sleep. People with this condition might touch themselves sexually or initiate sex while asleep. They only know it happened when their roommate or partner mentions the incident. One man was actually acquitted of rape after using the defense that he was asleep at the time of the assault
Source: HowStuffWorks

On another thread, DrNoGods tried to counter by saying that sleepwalkers are conscious.
I'd argue that the sleepwalker is still conscious in that the brain is working and some sensory input is working, but while still in a state of sleep. Such people can apparently navigate a room, make it to the fridge and eat a snack, etc. which would not be possible without some of the usual sensory inputs and processing by the brain.
It seems that he or she is forgetting that sensory information can be processed unconsciously, e.g. 'subliminal perception'. The body can also move on its own or without conscious will, and we have plenty of examples when it comes to reflexes and other types of involuntary movements. This convinces me that the body is capable of being an automaton or in zombie-like mode. Again, if the brain/body has no need or function for consciousness, then we can't say that consciousness is tied to the brain. Also, the experts define sleepwalking as "unconscious" behavior.

For debate:
1. IF there is no functional role for consciousness, then does that mean it is not tied to the brain? If not tied to brain, then can it exist separately?

2. Is sleepwalking a valid example of the brain/body being able to function without consciousness? And by that I mean being able to perform virtually all possible bodily actions that we tend to describe as being "conscious" or alert behavior, such as eatting, talking, driving?
If you're interested in conditions where consciousness may operate separately from the body, I'd recommend the book "The Self Does Not Die".
Non-religious theist.

User avatar
AgnosticBoy
Guru
Posts: 1614
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2017 1:44 pm
Has thanked: 203 times
Been thanked: 153 times
Contact:

Re: Does the body need consciousness?

Post #8

Post by AgnosticBoy »

DrNoGods wrote: Fri Apr 15, 2022 12:23 am [Replying to AgnosticBoy in post #1]
It seems that he or she is forgetting that sensory information can be processed unconsciously, e.g. 'subliminal perception'. The body can also move on its own or without conscious will, and we have plenty of examples when it comes to reflexes and other types of involuntary movements. This convinces me that the body is capable of being an automaton or in zombie-like mode. Again, if the brain/body has no need or function for consciousness, then we can't say that consciousness is tied to the brain. Also, the experts define sleepwalking as "unconscious" behavior.
The brain can work at different levels of "consciousness" to carry out its functions. We know the hindbrain (rhombencephalon) regulates key bodily functions without any need for us to be "awake." If a boxer is knocked out he still breathes, his heart beats, he can move muscles to some extent, etc. The basic mechanisms for many of these functions seem to be pretty well known even if the details are not at the cellular level.

For example, when CO2 levels in the blood rise to certain levels (monitored by chemoreceptors) muscles in the diaphram will contract to cause the lungs to expand, reducing the pressure inside which pulls in air from the nose and mouth. This added O2 is recognized and is followed by the diaphram relaxing and air (with waste CO2) is exhaled and the process repeats even for the knocked out boxer. There is no need to be conscious (awake) for this to happen, and the brain still controls the process. But we can also force breathing voluntarily (conscious breathing) and the physical mechanism is the same (contraction and relaxation of the diaphram muscles). We can "tell" ourselves (think) to breath while fully conscious and invoke the exact same physical mechanism of diaphram contraction and relaxation as the unconscious breathing mechanism.

Dreams are another example of the brain creating "stories" that play out in sometimes wild ways as we sleep (who hasn't been able to fly and all kinds of other crazy things during dreams?). These often involve people we know, or experiences we've had, woven together in random ways and jumping from one scenario to another as the dream continues. This semiconscious state of sleep does not shut off all of the chemistry and neuron firing, etc. that occurs during fully awake states, but sort of "mushes" things together. Sleepwalking may be a similar state where the usual abilities the person has as far as walking, seeing, talking, eating, etc. are present, but they (for some reason) are unable to "wake up" as most people would to realize they are dreaming or in some sort of intermediate state between sleep and awake.
We're on the same page regarding different levels of consciousness. We also agree that the body can operate on its own, although we differ on the degree or extent that it does that. So far, you have not convinced me that sleepwalkers have to be conscious. If this was a court of law, I would say that I've provided enough circumstantial evidence to show that the body can function as an automaton or in some auto-pilot mode. Besides that, the experts talk about sleepwalking as not involving awareness. I would imagine that even the lowest level of consciousness would have to involve a person having some sense of what's going on.
DrNoGods wrote: Fri Apr 15, 2022 12:23 amI don't see how consciousness can be anything special and some sort of entity on its own independent of a brain.
Just think of it like this... Hypothetically-speaking, if scientists did not yet know about the existence of conscious experience, do you think they would ever discover it by just looking to neural activity? ( Remember, consciousness is brain activity according to materialists.) The probable answer is no. One obvious obstacle is that consciousness is insensible and undetectable from a third-person point of view. Scientists haven't even explained how neural activity leads to subjective experience WHILE knowing that conscious experience exist (and they know based on everyone's experience of it, and not from their knowledge of neural activity). The scientists in my hypothetical scenario would be even more in the dark by not knowing about consciousness at all since nothing points them to it. To date, ALL neural correlates of consciousness are discovered by using the subject's report of their conscious experience and we record the neural activity that goes with that. The epistemological gap, (not being able to know about consciousness just by studying the brain alone), points to a metaphysical gap. Physical explanations not being able to account for consciousness is consistent with consciousness not being physical.
mac_ wrote: Sun Apr 17, 2022 1:00 pm If you're interested in conditions where consciousness may operate separately from the body, I'd recommend the book "The Self Does Not Die".
I already bought it. It's on my to read list. :) 8-)
- Proud forum owner ∣ The Agnostic Forum

- As a non-partisan, I like to be on the side of truth. - AB

nobspeople
Prodigy
Posts: 3187
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2020 11:32 am
Has thanked: 1510 times
Been thanked: 824 times

Re: Does the body need consciousness?

Post #9

Post by nobspeople »

[Replying to AgnosticBoy in post #1]

1) Rather or not it's tied to the brain doesn't mean it has to have a function or no.
2) I don't believe so. I was a sleep walker when I was a kid. Much of the 'sleep walking' I did I can still remember (where I went, what I did/said, to whom I spoke with, etc). There are people who 'sleep eat', 'sleep drive' and even 'sleep sex' (my term). Sometimes they remember it, other times they don't. I don't see any reason to think the body (via actions) does or doesn't need consciousness.

Seems to my un-expert experience ;) is that we're making a scenario that, while may be true, may very likely not be true.
Have a great, potentially godless, day!

User avatar
AgnosticBoy
Guru
Posts: 1614
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2017 1:44 pm
Has thanked: 203 times
Been thanked: 153 times
Contact:

Re: Does the body need consciousness?

Post #10

Post by AgnosticBoy »

nobspeople wrote: Mon Apr 18, 2022 11:25 am [Replying to AgnosticBoy in post #1]

1) Rather or not it's tied to the brain doesn't mean it has to have a function or no.
AGreed. That's an alternative to keep in mind.

The question of function is important because it helps answer if consciousness is restricted to the brain. If the function of consciousness is just to process information, then we say that a computer is conscious since it processes information. The only difference would be anatomy or structure where it takes place, where instead of tissue, you have circuits.

I would say that if consciousness has no function in the brain, then it makes it easier or leaves the door open for the view that it is not tied to the brain. To say that it is tied to the brain would involve showing that it does something that could only occur in a brain.

The same logic applies to the definition of any term. How you define it determines how or where it applies.
- Proud forum owner ∣ The Agnostic Forum

- As a non-partisan, I like to be on the side of truth. - AB

Post Reply