Is the human brain is the creator of human consciousness?

[William]

The topic of whether the human brain is the sole creator of human consciousness invites an exploration into the intricate relationship between science and philosophy.

While substantial evidence links brain activity to conscious experiences, the complex and subjective nature of consciousness raises profound questions. From the philosophical "hard problem" of explaining the subjective aspect of consciousness to the emergence of conscious states from neural complexity, this debate question delves into the heart of understanding human nature and spotlights the differences between philosophical views of materialism and other philosophies of human belief systems.
Question For Debate: Is the human brain the creator of human consciousness?

Please prove that the human brain is the creator of human consciousness.

[Eloi]

I think it is important to point out here that the creative ability exists instinctively even in many animals, so that ability cannot be ascribed solely to a developed human brain.
https://www.jw.org/en/bible-teachings/s ... -artistry/

So artistic ability and human consciousness should not be inextricably linked. I clarify it because of the obvious error involved in this comment from another forum member:

...
You'll find that this encephalization process resulted in progressively larger brains (eg. from Homo habilis to Homo sapien), and more structural changes. A result of this was progressively higher intelligence levels, and eventually the ability to engage in abstract thought, art, music and other things humans do. Included in that, somewhere along the line, the idea that exposing ones private parts in public was wrong.

Nonhuman apes don't have sufficiently developed brains to engage in the abstract thoughts that humans do ...

The concept of (human) consciousness is intuitively understood, but this understanding is not enough... What human capacities could be attributed solely and exclusively to consciousness?

[William]

[AgnosticBoy]

Question For Debate: Is the human brain the creator of human consciousness?

Please prove that the human brain is the creator of human consciousness.

I think the materialist would fare better to say that consciousness is just a medium for the brain. That makes less assumptions and allows for a wider range of explanations ranging from brain consciousness to Cosmic consciousness, and most or all of the implications of each.

My own position is that the brain doesn't tell us about the form and function of consciousness. For instance, if consciousness were a product of the brain, then I'd expect that observing physical brain activity alone would tell us about consciousness or lead us to it. To date, the ONLY way scientists would know about consciousness is when we report it to them. That's why correlations between neural activity and conscious experience often is based on what we report to them.

In terms of brain needing or showing some functional role for consciousness, even that is lacking. Scientists are showing more and more how the brain can perform complex behavior without consciousness, like sleepwalking, sleep eating, sleep driving, hypnosis, etc. In conclusion, the brain doesn't need consciousness even if the two interact with each other.

[alexxcJRO]

Question For Debate: Is the human brain the creator of human consciousness?

Please prove that the human brain is the creator of human consciousness.

I think the materialist would fare better to say that consciousness is just a medium for the brain. That makes less assumptions and allows for a wider range of explanations ranging from brain consciousness to Cosmic consciousness, and most or all of the implications of each.

My own position is that the brain doesn't tell us about the form and function of consciousness. For instance, if consciousness were a product of the brain, then I'd expect that observing physical brain activity alone would tell us about consciousness or lead us to it. To date, the ONLY way scientists would know about consciousness is when we report it to them. That's why correlations between neural activity and conscious experience often is based on what we report to them.

In terms of brain needing or showing some functional role for consciousness, even that is lacking. Scientists are showing more and more how the brain can perform complex behavior without consciousness, like sleepwalking, sleep eating, sleep driving, hypnosis, etc. In conclusion, the brain doesn't need consciousness even if the two interact with each other.

"The prefrontal cortex is thought of as the “personality center” and is the cortical region that makes us uniquely human. It is where we process moment-to-moment input from our surroundings, compare that input to past experiences, and then react to them."
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK4 ... 0to%20them.

The PFC mostly shuts of during sleep.
While sleep-walking, sleep-talking and so on the motor cortex (which control movement), visual cortex, balance and speech parts of the brain become active without the activation of PFC. The Cerebellum and brainstem are also active and assure certain task independent of PFC.
PFC is a part of the brain that all mammals have. Cats, dogs dream, twich, kick the air with their legs, make noises during sleep.

Analogy:
It's like this: the PC for example when goes into idle.
The PC does only basic function during idle. There is no user interaction via the mouse or keyboard, no major apps open, CPUS is at the lowest usage.
The consciousnes of the PC so to speak is linked to the material PC. When the PC is in load conditions-active(we have user interaction via the mouse or keyboard, major apps open, we have load on CPU) we have it in its concious state.

C: The same therefore when PFC is active we have the brain in conscious state. The consciousness seems to be linked to the material PFC.

[boatsnguitars]

The topic of whether the human brain is the sole creator of human consciousness invites an exploration into the intricate relationship between science and philosophy.

While substantial evidence links brain activity to conscious experiences, the complex and subjective nature of consciousness raises profound questions. From the philosophical "hard problem" of explaining the subjective aspect of consciousness to the emergence of conscious states from neural complexity, this debate question delves into the heart of understanding human nature and spotlights the differences between philosophical views of materialism and other philosophies of human belief systems.
Question For Debate: Is the human brain the creator of human consciousness?

Please prove that the human brain is the creator of human consciousness.

I'm sorry, I missed something. What else would be the creator of human consciousness if not the brain? The spinal cord? The heart? The skin? The eyes? Can you elaborate?

[Tcg]

The topic of whether the human brain is the sole creator of human consciousness invites an exploration into the intricate relationship between science and philosophy.

While substantial evidence links brain activity to conscious experiences, the complex and subjective nature of consciousness raises profound questions. From the philosophical "hard problem" of explaining the subjective aspect of consciousness to the emergence of conscious states from neural complexity, this debate question delves into the heart of understanding human nature and spotlights the differences between philosophical views of materialism and other philosophies of human belief systems.
Question For Debate: Is the human brain the creator of human consciousness?

Please prove that the human brain is the creator of human consciousness.

I'm sorry, I missed something. What else would be the creator of human consciousness if not the brain? The spinal cord? The heart? The skin? The eyes? Can you elaborate?

You bring up a good question for the author to address.

It seems to me that it is more than the brain alone. A brain alone would be useless. It needs input from the five senses or at least some number of them. Without that, the brain would not be aware of anything including itself.


Tcg

[William]

Question For Debate: Is the human brain the creator of human consciousness?

Please prove that the human brain is the creator of human consciousness.

I think the materialist would fare better to say that consciousness is just a medium for the brain. That makes less assumptions and allows for a wider range of explanations ranging from brain consciousness to Cosmic consciousness, and most or all of the implications of each.

I don't think that materialists are seeking ways which might make their position vulnerable to such concepts. The underlying philosophy has to ensure nothing of the sort is let lose within the confines of that position.

My own position is that the brain doesn't tell us about the form and function of consciousness. For instance, if consciousness were a product of the brain, then I'd expect that observing physical brain activity alone would tell us about consciousness or lead us to it. To date, the ONLY way scientists would know about consciousness is when we report it to them. That's why correlations between neural activity and conscious experience often is based on what we report to them.

Yes. One would expect that a brain would understand its own product.
Consciousness is thus left with the task of explaining itself.
It "could" be a product of the brain. Then again, it "could be" an aspect of a much larger conscious "field".
It even "could be" a product of the interactions of both.

In terms of brain needing or showing some functional role for consciousness, even that is lacking. Scientists are showing more and more how the brain can perform complex behavior without consciousness, like sleepwalking, sleep eating, sleep driving, hypnosis, etc. In conclusion, the brain doesn't need consciousness even if the two interact with each other.

Has it been shown at all that no consciousness is involved in these activities? What about "sub"?

Still, it is clear that no one has yet been able to prove human consciousness is the sole product of brains.

(I wonder if "brain-worship" is a "thing"?)

When we "wonder" about anything (physical/conceptual) is it the brain doing the wondering or consciousness...I would say it is consciousness (aka "the self" {re human consciousness}) which is doing the wondering - largely within the context of the human experience - including the body (not just the brain and its sensory system) and this interaction shapes the human personality to some extent, yet the personality is not obliged to "fit" into the demands of the human instrument and "be" whatever the brain "say's" it "should" be...because ...well how is a brain to tell someone anything without it being some type of conscious entity uniquely separate from the human consciousness, pulling "strings" et al?

[AgnosticBoy]

"The prefrontal cortex is thought of as the “personality center” and is the cortical region that makes us uniquely human. It is where we process moment-to-moment input from our surroundings, compare that input to past experiences, and then react to them."
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK4 ... 0to%20them.

The PFC mostly shuts of during sleep.
While sleep-walking, sleep-talking and so on the motor cortex (which control movement), visual cortex, balance and speech parts of the brain become active without the activation of PFC. The Cerebellum and brainstem are also active and assure certain task independent of PFC.
PFC is a part of the brain that all mammals have. Cats, dogs dream, twich, kick the air with their legs, make noises during sleep.

Analogy:
It's like this: the PC for example when goes into idle.
The PC does only basic function during idle. There is no user interaction via the mouse or keyboard, no major apps open, CPUS is at the lowest usage.
The consciousnes of the PC so to speak is linked to the material PC. When the PC is in load conditions-active(we have user interaction via the mouse or keyboard, major apps open, we have load on CPU) we have it in its concious state.

C: The same therefore when PFC is active we have the brain in conscious state. The consciousness seems to be linked to the material PFC.

My argument regarding the brain lacking a functional role for consciousness is that the brain can carry out complex behavioral activity (including ones that we'd think would require consciousness) without consciousness. To discredit that, you'd need to show that consciousness is involved in the examples that I brought up earlier regarding complex behavior during sleep.

It seems that you define consciousness as the activity of the prefrontal cortex (PFC), and that the PFC is even active during sleep. If you are using that to say that consciousness is active (in some idle form, going by your analogy) during sleepwalking, then I disagree. If your claim is that consciousness is not active, even given the activity of the other brain structures you brought up (i.e. cerebellum, brainstem, etc.), then it doesn't take away from my argument. I have different reasons for disagreeing with the first point starting with the definition of consciousness, but I'll stick to one point.

One reason I disagree with the first point is that brain can process information about the environment w/out our awareness of it. And this can occur even when we are awake. Here's some scientific perspective on that:

...your brain can pay attention to something without you being aware that it’s there.
Usually, when people pay attention to something, they also become aware of it; in fact, many psychologists assume these two concepts are inextricably linked. But more evidence has suggested that’s not the case.

- PsychologicalScience.org

This would go against your analogy because we can still lack awareness even while awake (PFC should be fully active when we are awake). Now it's easier to imagine why someone would not be aware of their environment while asleep, but for us to be unaware of the sensory information processing even while awake (paying attention to something) supports my point even more - consciousness is not needed for complex behavior as previously thought. I expect for this case to become more solid as researchers find ways to study unconscious complex behavior.

Research evidence shows that in laboratory settings, people can process and respond to information outside of awareness. But this does not mean that we obey these messages like zombies; in fact, hidden messages have little effect on behavior outside the laboratory (Kunst-Wilson & Zajonc, 1980; Rensink, 2004; Nelson, 2008; Radel, Sarrazin, Legrain, & Gobancé, 2009; Loersch, Durso, & Petty, 2013).

Source: https://www.coursehero.com/study-guides ... erception/

[AgnosticBoy]

Yes. One would expect that a brain would understand its own product.
Consciousness is thus left with the task of explaining itself.
It "could" be a product of the brain. Then again, it "could be" an aspect of a much larger conscious "field".
It even "could be" a product of the interactions of both.

Agreed. When we don't know something, the last thing we should do is make it unnecessarily restrictive. The evidence that materialists use can be interpreted in different ways. In that situation, I'd rather opt for the more open interpretation (that brain is a medium) so that I don't inadvertently block progress/evidence for any of those positions you brought up. The only things I would not consider are views that are demonstrably false.

In terms of brain needing or showing some functional role for consciousness, even that is lacking. Scientists are showing more and more how the brain can perform complex behavior without consciousness, like sleepwalking, sleep eating, sleep driving, hypnosis, etc. In conclusion, the brain doesn't need consciousness even if the two interact with each other.

Has it been shown at all that no consciousness is involved in these activities? What about "sub"?

It has but the issue is that scientists may not fully accept it if they confuse attention with awareness. Sleepwalkers will say that they are not aware of their actions, they don't remember it. There's cases where sleepwalkers have done things that they wouldn't have done if they were awake, and I'm not just talking about basic things. Some have committed violent acts on others while asleep (things that plenty would say requires consciousness):

On the morning of May 24, 1987, sometime after 1:30 A.M., a 23-year-old Canadian named Kenneth Parks drove 14 miles to his in-laws' home, strangled his father-in-law to the point of unconsciousness, and beat and stabbed his mother-in-law to death. A year later he was acquitted of both assault and murder. After a careful investigation, specialists reached the astonishing conclusion that Parks had been sleepwalking—and sleep driving and sleep attacking—during the incident.

- Scientific American

More interesting details:

Defense attorney Marlys Edwardh said that on the night of the killing, Parks ''plunged into a deep, deep sleep. His next memory is seeing his mother- in-law’s face.’'

The attorney said he then regained consciousness, fled the house and drove to a nearby police station.

Staff Sgt. Bob Adair of the Toronto police homicide squad testified Parks said he had no idea how he got to his in-laws’ home and told officers he had no reason to harm them.

Testimony indicated Parks, married to the Woods’ daughter, Karen, was under pressure from gambling debts.

Ms. Edwardh said psychiatric evidence indicated that Parks was sleepwalking at the time of the killing.

She said Parks had a history of sleepwalking and asked the jury to acquit him because he was in ''a sleep-state in which ... there is no will or conscious mind directing (the activity).’'

- AP