246 thoughts on “Sean Carroll and Steven Novella debate life after death with Eben Alexander and Raymond Moody”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
The Skeptical Zone
"I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible that you may be mistaken."
Me, a unique patterned process of electrochemical interactions taking place in this unique body/brain.
That’s not true. I can imagine unicorns and dragons, and they don’t even exist. I can imagine all sorts of things that don’t exist without ever having seen anything like them. Although usually, when I imagine something, I form a picture of it in my mind – hence the word imagine.
Millions, not thousands. Our forerunners already had to deal with the very real challenges of the world. It was out to get them, after all, whether they believed in it or not.
Because knowing is a conscious process. It’s like asking ‘why do you need sight to see‘?
Because you never left it. You are your brain, or rather, the configurations of matter and energy involving the neural structures and pheromonal interactions in your brain and throughout your body. Sometimes that pattern can enter a stable, somnolent state – varying from light meditation to sleep to deep unconsciousness – but barring any serious disruption of the pattern, it can return to its ‘active’ state again.
You are. But not on any conscious level. It’s like asking a computer programme to measure the voltage in a particular part of its circuitry: if the computer is a general purpose computer, it’ll know bits and bytes, but nothing about the physical representation of that logical layer.
Unless you employ more advanced tooling: as long as it’s physical, it can be measured. But I get where you’re going: you’re saying that we’re unable to apply science to un-physical things.
And I say that’s wrong. We can, as long as there’s a way to independently verify its existence, by measuring it, for instance.
The sensory signal reaches the brain and triggers a cascade of further signals. The neurochemical pattern that is our consciousness alters as a result: we are aware of the pain.
Try, for an instant, to not think of pink elephants. See how difficult it is to control even conscious thought? And sensory perception is way below that.
That having been said, there are people, or so I’ve been told, who’ve such a high degree of control over their mental processes that they can filter out the pain, either ignore or suppress those qualia.
If we knew that, we’d have a couple of Nobel Prizes in our closets. That having been said, it’s unlikely to be just one part of the brain. More likely it’s various distinct parts of the brain working in concert to produce the sensation of consciousness. We can already zoom in on particular aspects of that process, such as situational awareness, religious experiences, and so on, and manipulate them. It’s conceivable that we’ll be able to manipulate conscious thought just a few short decades from now.
Are you saying that you accept that consciousness is a product of the brain? Because all the alternatives to that thesis basically have the same flaws as the notion of the homunculus: they all multiply entities beyond the necessary.
I suggest you contact the owner of this blog, who is, as I understand it, a neurologist. She’ll doubtlessly be able to give you a few pointers towards the latest research in this area. My examples and words are hammers, and more than likely I am hitting my thumb with every other sentence. She’ll probably be able to give you the equivalent of tweezers.
It is my opinion that any appearance of continuity of consciousness is just that: appearance. Could we say that we are the same person as yesterday, if our memories did not tell us that we are? Perhaps something earthshattering occurred yesterday – some revelation completely changed the way you think, or you awoke from a coma after severe head trauma. In both cases, you might not be the same Sriskandarajah at all! And yet you feel you are, because your memory spins a thread between you-now and you-then.
This is why I say: memory is identity. And I don’t mean that our personalities are formed entirely by our memories (although they surely play a large part), but that your memories provide you with a sense-of-self, a sense of continuity.
keiths:
Sriskandarajah:
keiths:
Sriskandarajah:
Yes, but that doesn’t answer my question. Are you trying to argue that my consciousness creates my brain, rather than vice-versa?
keiths:
Sriskandarajah:
Okay, so it sounds like you accept the idea that you are “located” in your brain, yet you deny that you are your brain. Correct?
We don’t know yet. Brain science is still young. But the fact that we have no existence apart from our brains is clear. The evidence for that is overwhelming, as Carroll and Novella point out in the debate.
We’ve talked about this before. The Mississippi River is still the Mississippi River even when all of its molecules have been replaced by different ones. Same with Sriskandarajah. You are a continuity, not a fixed set of molecules.
No, I use the phrase “the real Sriskandarajah” because in the brain transplant scenario, we don’t believe that Sriskandarajah vanishes. We also don’t believe that Sriskandarajah is duplicated.
If there is one Sriskandarajah before the transplant operation and one Sriskandarajah after it, then the question is obvious:
To ask that question does not imply that you are “something separate”.
I think it’s the other way around. Most humans have a strong intuition that they are something other than their bodies. It’s only when they think about it carefully and learn the science that they come to realize that we are just our bodies.
So the brain feels the pain sensation. Brain makes the pain sensation and also feels the pain sensation. Is it so? But you don’t make pain sensation. You only feel the pain sensation. Is it correct? So why is this difference if you are the brain? What is that interactions of matter and energy taking place in your brain? What is the result of those interactions of matter and energy?
Different thread, different life, different persons, different me all those changes happens even before any transplantation. We go through all changes due to our physical changes, emotional changes, financial changes, social changes, intellectual changes, carrier changes etc. I don’t mean all that.
If you are an atheist, when you get up in the morning your memory keeps you informed that you are an atheist. The memory gives all other identities such as your name, your position, your physical condition etc. This is how your memory gives the sensation of identity. This is the psychological continuity of existence. It is a breaking continuity. Until you are an atheist there is an unbroken thread in the memory of atheism. If you become a theist then the continuity breaks and it takes another movement. The thread is broken. If you identify yourself with this psychological continuity then there is different life, different person, different you. But such identity is not real.
If you close your eyes, forget all what your memory tells or free from the known and remain for one hour or one day. There is no psychological continuity. There is unbroken thread. There is a continuity of existence, which is timeless. Because of this continuity I am able to transplant the organs and tissues.
You say that person changes. In what sense the person changes?
There are two kind of different persons.
(1) You and I are different persons.
(2) I was an uneducated person. Now I am an educated person.
Which kind of person you refer to in your explanation?
That is true. But in my explanation I don’t mean that. You can’t imagine what exists beyond your senses. You may imagine even what exists beyond your senses but that would not be a reality.
So knowing is consciousness. Is it so? Known is the brain. So which is aware of the brain? Is it also brain? That can’t be.
If my brain is damaged and if Medical scientists are able to regenerate the damages, can’t I come back again where I left my old brain?
There are many things my brain does without my knowledge. Those things I don’t do. So I am not the brain. I use the brain. I am not doing the unconscious functions. That is very clear. You are wrong. I don’t need to explain that very simple thing. Please do not bring the computer in this discussion. I am talking about you and me.
Do you accept that there may be any existences beyond our sensations? Un physical things and things beyond sensations are different.
That is not answering. Liver produces bile. Both are molecules. Brain produces sensations. Here both are not molecules. Molecules involve in signals, further signals and neuro chemical pattern. You are aware of the pain. What is that you?
If you are the brain definitely you should produce the pain sensation. So, why can’t you stop producing the pain sensation. I don’t mean to suppress it or ignore it but not to produce it.
If so, why did Scholars like Carroll and Novella come with definite conclusions without knowing the answer to this question? Put the Nobel prizes aside. However this is an important question. Various distinct parts involve in the arising of sensations. But that is not the problem. Which is aware of the sensations? That is the very important question. Nobody knows.
No!No! The materialistic Neurologists and atheists say that.
There is only one. No need multiple entities. That one is not the brain. Brain is not one. Brain contains many areas with billions of neurons.
Consciousness is a product of a brain is a superstition in Neuro science. Materialistic Neurologists say that consciousness is not a separate thing. If it is a product it can be separated. Product is a bad term being used. It is not like a factory product.
If I am a king my memory tells me that I am a king. It is in my memory that I am a king so I continue to exist as a king. This is a sense of self and sense of continuity. Does the brain always make me remember that “You are the king! You are the king! Can’t I continue to exist during the time when my brain doesn’t tell that I am the king? Should I always remember that I am the king to continue to exist?
What will happen to my sense of self if I lose my kingdom? My identity as a king is lost. Am I get lost? So this sense of self and this sense of continuity are illusions.
All mental images arise from the memory. Identity of memory is not real. My memories provide me with a sense of self, a sense of continuity which are not real.
Memory creates the psychological time, past and Future. But there is a timeless existence which is always in the now.
I didn’t say consciousness creates your brain. Only thing I want find out what really exist and what is really happening. Without consciousness you can’t recognize the brain. So I ask you don’t you need consciousness to know the brain? You answer this question.
We don’t know what consciousness is and what brain is. So what is this argument? Consciousness creates the brain and brain creates the consciousness are arguments out of ignorant. The reality is not either of them. Because there are no two realities. There is only one thing which is the observed. The thought makes the division. I am not arguing any such thing. Further “create” is a wrong term. Whatever already exists undergoes changes or manifests. Creation is already over. We make things from the stuff already created and say that we can create. That is wrong and misleading.
I am located in the brain doesn’t mean that I am the brain. At death it dislocates. My desire is the cause for its location in the brain.
They are debating something against some wrong beliefs. They are talking after life and heaven. I am talking about continuity of existence not life after death. I think we cannot have a worldly life without a physical body. They are not aware of my questions and they don’t know answers to my questions. However in the darkness they debate.
You agreed that you don’t know yet. That is good. If your science is young please wait to understand what you are till it matures. Until we know the answer we cannot come to any conclusions.
It is not the answer. I am not talking about rivers and mountains. I am talking about you and me.You say that I am continuity not a fixed set of molecules. I can continue without a fixed set of molecules. That is what I want to say. So how does this continuity is maintained? So I continue with changing molecules and changing neuro chemical process. If I can able to continue with the changing molecules and changing neuro chemical process why can’t I continue in the same manner from one body to another?
What is it that keeps me to exist? Please don’t give a one word answer “brain” or “electrochemical process”. Which part of the brain is responsible for my existence? What is the specific function that keeps me conscious and keeps “I am”?
If you are an atheist then you are not something separate. If you a strong person then you are not something separate. If you a well educated person then you are not something separate from your brain and memory. If you are a kind hearted person then you are not separate from your brain. All these identifications may come to an end. When they come to an end, if you can understand what you are without any such identifications then perhaps you may see that you are something separate. That doesn’t mean that you are homunculus.
Intuition is different from belief. Intuition is not acceptance of what others say. Intuition is an understanding which arise automatically and naturally. How does that strong intuition arise to most of the humans?
It is the science of the brain made that me to understand very clearly that I am not the physical body. What is science of the brain? It doesn’t know how a subjective experience arises from the material molecules. It doesn’t know the reality of the stuff which made the brain. If we are physical bodies we also should know the reality of the stuff which made our physical body. Do you know the reality of the stuff scientifically? What is it? All cells are material molecules with energy? What is the reality of matter and energy? What is the connection I have with the molecules?
Sriskandarajah:
Gralgrathor:
Sriskandarajah:
No, I would not make that distinction quite as sharply. I am my body, including the brain, the central and peripheral nervous system, the skin with its receptors, et cetera. So in a sense, one could say that it is I who generate the signals that eventually reach the brain. The most complex processing, of course, takes place in the brain. It is there that qualia are produced.
Sriskandarajah:
Gralgrathor:
Sriskandarajah:
Yes, indeed. Continuity could be said, in a way, to be merely an illusion.
Sriskandarajah:
But it doesn’t just tell me about my life. It’s not like a database of facts about my life loading from a harddrive. It is much more: it gives me a sense of continuity – the absolute knowledge that I-now am the same person as I-then. With all the various little facts of my life in place, that still needn’t have been the case. Memory and self, memory and consciousness, are inextricably intertwined.
Sriskandarajah:
Hm?
Sriskandarajah:
No, it doesn’t. The sense of self does not depend on any particular belief or fact. Well, in most people it does not. I’m certain that various creationists may feel that their identity depends on their beliefs about the Bible being right, and that a severe psychological discontinuity could follow if such a core belief was ever challenged – but my atheism is not a core belief: it is the absense of beliefs where none are merited by the available data.
Sriskandarajah:
In many ways. Usually changes are no more significant than the knowledge of having lived through yet another day, with its many little encounters, joys, discomforts and other perceptions. Sometimes a person learns something that truly changes his whole outlook on himself and the world. People really can and do change. Not many, not often, but it does happen. Sometimes a person encounters the misfortune of being physically forced to change – damage to the brain or a change in brain chemistry through trauma, disease or substance use may do that. The complete mental pattern of a person may change through such events. The pattern before is not the pattern now. Yet the sense of continuity persists – fabricated by our consciousness on the basis of the thread our memories offer.
No! You are mistaken. Not thinking about a brain and the brain itself. Keiths said that the brain is the representation in consciousness. When we are conscious only we are able to see the brain or know the brain. I think that is representation. So to represent the brain, don’t we need consciousness? That is my question.
I am not any such nonsense. Please don’t bring the “ist”. You divide the people according to their false concepts and identify them with those false labels such as soulist, atheist, theist, solipsist, materialist, naturalist etc. These are the images which are not real and which create hatred among people. We have only sense of experiences. That is very simple. What is the difficulty to understand that? Our sense of experiences makes the things as they appear to exist. That is very clear. Your answer has no relevance to my question. Since we understand that our senses are limited there may existence outside our senses. We only know what we perceive as sensations. We don’t know the reality of the existence which causes the arising of the sense of perception.
How many identity labels people carry in this world with their limited knowledge? I want to tell you that I don’t carry any such labels. I am not any such stupid “ist”. I exist. So I want to know the truth. That’s all.
If you have a severe pain like toothache you can’t escape from the suffering unless you take a pain killer. It is not a mixing of pain and myself. I associate with the pain sensation. I cannot separate me from the pain sensation. That is why I said so.
That is not the point. When the pain sensation dies I will not die with it. That is the point.
Sriskandarajah:
Whut? I very much doubt that he said such a thing. Perhaps you misinterpreted his words? Or perhaps you’re simply not representing his position very clearly.
Well yes, of course. Like I said: knowing and seeing depend on conscious mental processes; they involve conscious thought. You cannot have conscious thought without consciousness. So in order to consciously think about brains, we must be conscious. Makes sense, no?
Alright, not exactly solipsism then, but still dangerously close to the whole brain-in-the-vat notion. You acknowledge that an objective reality exist, but then you state we can not (never?) learn its true nature, right?
But you do. Everybody does. Nobody is unique. Furthermore, the human capacity for perception is, as you say, limited. If we don’t label stuff, then no discrete subjects for thought exist, and the amount of thought required to consider the same subjects rises exponentially. So please, put things in their little boxes. Invent as many new boxes as you need – but then do use them: it’s the human thing to do.
… Okay. Well, that would be expected, right? The pain exists as a neurochemical process in your body. You exist as a neurochemical process in your body. Or rather, the pain is a modification to the ‘normal’ patterns of the neurochemical process that is you.
Nope. I’m still not getting it.
I can. and have done on a number of occasions after serious injuries and surgery. Lots of people can. It’s very useful to be able to say that my hand hurts, rather than I hurt. A useful trick while trying to lose weight, to be able to dissociate hunger from self.
Sriskandarajah:
petrushka:
Yes, very useful. It’s also a skill that can be strengthened by certain types of meditation. The painful sensations are still there, but you gain a certain emotional distance from them. You learn the difference between pain and suffering.
Sriskandarajah, you mentioned above that you meditate, correct? What type of meditation do you practice?
Sriskandarajah:
Gralgrathor:
You’re right, Gralgrathor. I’m not sure where Sriskandarajah got that idea. I thought I was pretty clear:
Sriskandarajah,
Why do you believe this? What, specifically, is the “it” that “dislocates”? What evidence can you provide for these claims?
By the laws of physics. As long as your brain is (relatively) intact and functioning, you remain you. When you die, or if your brain is damaged severely enough, you cease being you. I know a guy who suffered a severe head injury in a car crash about twenty years ago. Everyone who knew him then will tell you the same thing: he’s not the same person he was before the brain damage.
Just like Phineas Gage.
I understand what you say. Although it is not easy for all but if you can do that really I appreciate you. Good. It is not my argument that no one can control their pain at will. You do it because the pain sensation comes to you to make you feel. You don’t want to be with the pain so you dissociate the pain from you. But what I want to tell it that when the pain ends by your own effort or by healing you will also not end with it. You continue to exist. So you are not the pain sensation. Although it becomes part of you it is something separate.
In your explanation I have noted two things for which I need you to make it clear. (1) My hand hurts, rather than I hurt. What it refers to “I” (2) Dissociate hunger from self. There is a separation of hunger and self. What do you mean by that self?
The real self dislocates. It never annihilates. But dislocation of temporary selves which are the result of brain function and memory being taken place during life and when physical body stops its function the last temporary self end for ever. The appearance of your physical body, mental images about your status, your family,your country, your behaviors, your beliefs, your conclusions, your experiences all such things continues in your memory as “you”, the changing temporary selves which can be identified by evidences. If you realize your real self, the real “you”
then you will not ask for any evidences.
I asked how does your continuity is maintained. Not the continuity of molecules for which the laws of physics apply. If you buy some tasty food and keep it to eat and enjoy the taste to morrow, there should be a continuity of you. I mean that you which is connected to the sense of experiences.
What changes you observed in the person who had a severe head injury in a car crash?
One brain sees the existence of other brains( not directly). What it needs in itself to see the other brains other than the eyes and nerves? Here I don’t mean the external factors such as light etc.
There is no subject and object. There is only one which is the observed. The thought makes the division subject and object. What exist beyond observed is beyond our speculation. I don’t say that a subjective reality exist or objective reality exist but there should be a truth beyond the noise of our mind.
No harm to label the product stuff which is necessary. Why do you the label the human beings?
Scientists have found how our intestine digest the food we ate. Biology tells us all chemical reactions involved in the process of digestion.
Please tell me the neuro chemical process that produce the pain sensation and the neuro chemical process that is I am.
The point is when the pain sensation ends you will not end with it. You continue to exist.
Gralgrathor: Please see what Keiths says above. I stated what he said. I didn’t say what he means. That is different.
On what the brain depends to know that it exists?
Don’t you feel very peace,clear, without any stress and tension when your mind is calm, very quiet and still?
How to get the stillness of mind without any disturbance of thought?
What is the cause that our mind is not still, quiet? Please don’t think that we should stop thinking. That is wrong. We need to think to do our daily activities.
When you get up in the morning, sit straight, better in padmasanam a yogic posture close your eyes and observe what is going on inwardly and outwardly. Don’t control your emotions and thoughts. Just observe. Feel that you exist. How mysterious and wonderful! Think that all the people should live peacefully and happily. Think not to hurt anyone. Observe the inhalation and exhalation of your breathing.
If you can do breathing exercise under correct guidance. Do this meditation one hour or at least half an hour and then start your normal activities.
It is good to give up all habits including over eating which are harmful to health.
Keiths, I am not a guru. Since you asked me about my meditation I wrote it. It is up to you to see it good or bad.
Correction.
Please read as follows:
If you like to do breathing exercise, better do it with proper guidance before meditation. It helps to relax the body and mind.
Keiths;
I mean the bad habits only to give up. We should not do anything which are harmful to our body.We have to give maximum care to our physical body as far as possible. We also have to keep our mind clean. It helps to meditate.
Sriskandarajah to Gralgrathor:
No, you said this:
…and I said something altogether different:
.
keiths:
Sriskandarajah:
Sriskandarajah,
I’m not asking for advice. I’m a long-time meditator and I’m happy with my practice (which is mainly mindfulness meditation/vipassana). I was just curious about the kind of meditation you practice, because you wrote this:
One of the things that mindfulness meditation strengthens is the ability to put some psychic distance between oneself and pain (or other unpleasant sensations and emotions). I was wondering if the technique you practice also teaches that skill.
keiths:
How do you know that?
How do you know that “the real self” does not end when the brain dies?
We’ve already been through this a zillion times, so let me try a different tack. Do you agree that my liver is still my liver even though it has changed greatly since I was a baby? Do you understand that it is still my liver even if all of the molecules have been replaced?
Confusion, poor memory, moodiness, a quick temper, inappropriate behavior.
[Hey walto, have you hit your head recently? :-)]
Sensory organs, nerves, light, sound.
Sriskandarajah:
O. Nothing then. We perceive the world through our senses, nervous system, media like light and sound. That includes the other brains that are in that world.
Sriskandarajah
Yeah yeah yeah. All the New Age hippie talk aside: do you or do you not believe that there is some reality external to you that accounts for the observations of other people as well as yours?
Sriskandarajah:
It’s convenient. Saves me from having to do a full assay every time I shake a hand. And nine times out of ten, a quick provisional labelling is accurate enough to work with.
Sriskandarajah:
Wikipedia sez:
Etc, etc, etc.
Sriskandarajah:
Well, that depends on what was causing the pain. I’d say that if it was caused by a diesel locomotive hitting you at 120 km/h, there’s a good chance that your personality-pattern won’t outlast the pain-sensation.
But okay.
What’s your point?
Mindfulness meditation/vipassana is also a part of my meditation. I focus on my breathing, inhaling and exhaling. When I do that meditation my mind settle down between my eyebrows. I do not concentrate there. It is a resting place. Here I make the inquiry about what I am.
What do you mean by oneself?
It is not that. If you do so then it creates a friction and struggle between you and pain. The brain may get exhausted due to energy wastage. It is to fully aware of the pain without trying to control it. Become one with the pain. Then the pain sensation exists in its place but I am not troubled.
What you said or not said is not so important to me.
Are you dependent on brain or consciousness?
If it is real it can’t be annihilated. Only thing you should understand that there should be a real self other than this physical body and sense of experiences.
It is wise to understand what you are rather than searching a real self. To see what you are you should understand first what you are not. If you identify yourself with your body then you will die for ever when body dies. But that “you” is not a real one. So no problem, let it die. Real self never dies because there is nothing to die. It consists nothing.
You need evidences for all these things. Unfortunately evidences are sense of experiences. The real self is beyond sense of experiences.
When I say “real self” you think that it is something. But it is nothing. If you think that then it cannot be real. Because thought arises from memory which contains only past records.
Do you understand that there should be a real self other than the physical body and sensations?
What do you mean? I don’t understand what you want to say.
Was he aware of the changes occurred in him? Did he worry that he was not in a normal condition?
Sometimes when we feel irritated we don’t like to have such bad feelings.
Experiences, emotions, memory depend on the brain. If the brain is damaged all these things get affected. It is the big mistake of the neurologists who identify our emotions and behavior as person. For the purpose of communications they may do so. But such personality is temporary. Not a real person.
I was very angry in the morning. Others identified me as hot tempered person and said he was a different person. In the evening I became very cool. They said he is the same person now. People recognize me a different person. But I am aware of my changes and I know that I am the same person. In our daily life we go through many emotional changes. Our behaviors also change depending on the emotions. Changes in behaviors and emotions do not change the real person.
I was feeling an intense pain while a man close by was singing a sweet song. He asked me later “How was my song”. I replied that I didn’t hear any thing from him.
Sensory organ my ears, nerves, brain and sound were there. But why didn’t I hear his music?
There is only the observed. That is the truth. We are used to see things as subject and object. It may be bitter for you so you mention the hippies out of the way.
The physical presence of the person and his name are enough to shake a hand. Why do you need a label in addition?
It is good to shake the hand with kind regards without forming any images about the person. The labels are images of different ideas which are barriers to shake a hand with real concern.
Is it your answer? What is Etc, etc, etc? Does a neuron fire a sensation?
In search of truth it is not a way to answer questions. You are not interested in understanding yourself.
Perhaps you were distracted. Happens sometime. People can be talking to me for hours before I notice them if I’m preoccupied.
What’s your point?
I don’t know what you think you’re saying, but to me this means nothing. Perhaps you could rephrase in more comprehensible terms?
I thought that was understood. I need a quick assessment of their most likely reaction patterns so that I can deal with them more easily. And I need it without first doing a three-hour interview.
Neuronal activity lies at the basis of all thought and perception. Thought essentially is an evolving pattern of neuronal firings.
Do you say that because my understanding of the nature of thought does not match your beliefs? If not, why then?
I’m still curious: what was your point in observing that pain does not necessarily terminate consciousness?
Gralgrathor, to Sriskandarajah:
I think he’s arguing that since you can outlast any particular sensation, you are not your sensations. I suspect you’d agree with that.
What I’d like to know is how he gets from “you will outlast any particular sensation” to “you will outlast your death”.
To a degree, yes. I’ve earlier argued that, just as I am my body, my sensations are basically a modification to the pattern of activities (chemical and neuronal) that is me, and therefore, in a sense, are me.
But they’re transient modifications to the pattern. There is no need for the pattern to cease if the modifications expire.
So there should be an existence which is attracted by sensations whether pain or pleasure, whether like it or not. According to the point of view of materialists there should be a particular center in the brain to involve in attraction and distraction to sensations. It is a neurological question I don’t know whether anyone could answer. Normally when talking we say your mind is attracted or distracted by a thing. In atheist point of view there is no mind as a separate existence jointly or concurrently function with the brain.
In your answer you say that you were distracted. What do you mean by that “you”? Is it a particular area in the part brain or something like mind or the unwanted thing soul or something nameless?
It is very simple. You look around. Observe the things around you. What are they? They are what you observed. The forms with color and shapes. The neurology says that as a result of brain process you see the color and shapes. So don’t you think that it is a creation of your brain in the perception of Neurologists? So according to science the brain makes the colors and shapes. You only know that. What was there before the brain making the colors and shapes? Can you tell a thing without colors and shapes and which is not made by brain? That is why I said that there is only the observed.
In our observation we see the births and deaths which are assemble and de assemble of molecules. So we say that you also die for ever when the body dies. This statement comes from what is observed. What is beyond what is observed? Can there be birth and death of you and an end for you forever?
Now what you know as “you” is also an observed which ends forever.
It is ok to assess only the ability and integrity of a person to give him a job. Why do you need to know for any purpose whether he is an atheist or theist or materialist or spiritualist or dualist or monist or any other “ist”? Are these labels necessary to live in this world when nobody knows the truth?
It is a very bad term being used by the Neurologists as a way of escapism. Don’t you know the meaning of firing?
Beliefs are not truth. Truth is same to all.
Please make me clear what you mean by saying that pain does not necessarily terminate consciousness.
What do you mean by the term pattern? What it refers to?
Molecules react with molecules and make molecules. How can the molecules in the brain make a sensation which is not molecules? That is the crucial question. If you touch the fire your hand will be quickly taken out from the fire. I don’t mean that. That is a movement or an action. A robot can do that.You can explain that with your neuron firings and all the chemical and electrical reactions. But at the same time you feel a heat sensation. How does it arise?
Well, yeah. Our brains have evolved to deal with circumstances arising in the world around us. And as a consequence of self-awareness and abstract thought arising, we also generate sensations ourselves. Sometimes two sensations, external and internal, compete for focus.
No. Why? We’re not sure how awareness works yet, but it could be a holistic – a holographic – principle, involving many parts of the brain acting in concert.
No one has answered it yet – at least, not in any great detail, with any great confidence. But that doesn’t mean it can’t be answered. We’re making good progress in the fields of neurology and endocrinology.
Ng? A whut? Could you skip the pseudo-science and explain in simple terms what you mean here?
Me, the evolving pattern of neurochemical interactions taking place in this body.
No, I don’t think so. It’s various parts of the brain acting in concert. The rest of the body is part of it too, through its central and peripheral nervous and its endocrine system.
No, I don’t think anything like that is required to explain consciousness.
You’re talking about perception. You’re saying that there’s no objective reality, only perception – is that right? You don’t think that there is a physical reality lying at the basis of those perceptions? That your mind exists in a real world, where real rays of light enter your eyes to cause real neural impulses causing your awareness to interpret real stimulae?
Of course, the world in my awareness is an interpretation of the stimulae my senses receive. But those stimulae are nevertheless real, and emanate from real objects in the really real physical world. There is an objective reality that provides the sounds and light based on which your awareness forms its image of the world, don’t you think?
What, you mean in the evolutionary sense? Simpler central nervous systems. Or in the causal sense? Then see above.
Well, obviously that which is not observed. Beyond that ship on the horizon is an ocean, and beyond that ocean probably lie other lands and seas.
Sure. Why should the period after my death be any different from the period before my birth, as far as I’m concerned?
Not just for jobs; socially too. When you first meet somebody, you shake hands, and form a quick image of that person. Is this somebody I could relate too? Can I speak to him in familiar terms, or should I be more formal? How will this person react to a particular brand of humour? You assign quick labels, and then proceed with the socialization. Later, as you get to know this person better, you will perhaps adjust a few of those labels, or drop them altogether, replace them with a more comprehensive understanding of the person.
Because you want to know if there are certain things you can or can’t say without risking offense. Perhaps later, when you know a person better, and a certain amount of trust is earned, you can risk offense by bringing up those subjects. But bringing them up now could cut short the entire process, and ensure that you’ll never get to know this person well.
I’m not sure they’re necessary. But they sure are convenient. And everybody uses them, whether they consciously realize it or not. The world you perceive is all labels. When you walk through a park, you label things ‘tree’ and ‘grass’. But the reality is so much more complex than those mere labels could possibly suggest.
Firing is a bad term? … Eh? Firing means this:
You’re certainly a bit of a strange lad.
Sriskandarajah:
Gralgrathor:
Sriskandarajah:
That’s not a point, Sriskandarajah. That’s stating the obvious. What were you hoping to achieve by stating the obvious, Sriskandarajah?
I wasn’t. I was saying that the end of pain does not necessarily mean the end of consciousness.
I can give you as much as this: physical reality is physical reality, no matter how it is interpreted by consciousness. That doesn’t exactly translate to “truth is same to all”, but it’s close enough. That still leaves the question:
Sriskandarajah:
Why do you say that?
When we think, experience, feal, dream, etc, our neurons intermittently fire. By pattern I mean the sequence, amplitude, modulation and three-dimensional path of the collection of neuronal firings during mental processing (ie. thought, dreams, etc). Imagine a three-dimensional film showing what neurons fire in the brain, each neuronal firing colour-coded for amplitude, modulation, and so on. That’s what I mean by pattern.
Well, okay, I usually include the rest of the body in that pattern too: the entire central and peripheral nervous system, the chemical signals produced by glands and other tissues, and so on. I’ll never make a good mind/body dualist: for me, the mind doesn’t end with neural activity in the brain, but is a product of the entire body.
But it is. Or, more accurately, sensation is the interaction of molecules in our neurochemistry. Action potentials flashing hither and tither, hormones flushing, and so on.
Are you able to see that you are the evolving pattern of neurochemical interactions? Or do you refer to any books written by the neurologists? So you see yourself through the limited knowledge of someone else. You see yourself in a book. Can’t you yourself directly? I don’t see any neurochemical process in me. I only feel sense of experiences. In that sense of experiences I am aware of my existence not in any neurochemical activities.
You are the pattern of neurochemical interactions. But that “you” is temporary. That is mortal. That includes your thoughts, memory, your free will, your emotions and feelings, your behaviors, your physical appearance and the labels. That “you” arise and die with the brain process. There is a real “you” that is not neurochemical process.
So please explain consciousness?
Not only perception but observation. It includes all the sense of experiences. We only know the sense of experiences. Nothing else. That is very simple. We don’t need any neurological or philosophical knowledge to see that.
What I want to say is that we only know what is observed. I don’t say that there is nothing beyond what is observed. Really what is beyond is unknown.
According to you that there are two worlds. One is an interpretation in your awareness. Other is the real world. Which world do you see? The real world or the interpretation? Real world is beyond your consciousness. You can’t see that, Even there is no evidence that the real world exist independently.
You don’t understand what I ask you. What is there without colors and shapes?
You may not go beyond the ship but beyond this world, beyond this solar system even beyond the galaxy. Still all these things are observed. Whatever you observe is within your senses and brain. What is beyond your senses and brain?
Do you know the period of time before your birth and after your death? How long you can travel in the past and future? Does time really exist? Only the now exists. You exist in the now. No before and after. You see it yourself now.
A neuron emits an action potential is ok. Does a neuron emits a sensation like feeling hungry. When a man touches fire he immediately take his hand out. You can explain this action with your nerve impulse, spike,spike train and firing. But at the same time a heat sensation is felt by him. How it arises? Does a neuron fire the sensation of hungry?
Pain will disappear but I will not disappear after the end of pain.
So do you say that pain ends and the consciousness continues?
What is consciousness other than the neuro chemical process?
According to you the neuro chemical process produce sensations. Does the neuro chemical process create the consciousness too?
So do you say that the mind continue to exist even the neural activity in the brain ends?
Do you say that mind is a product of the entire body? If mind is a product it can be separated from the body by the Neuro scientists and they can put it in a test tube and do all their researches on that. Good. “Product” is a bad term in the explanation of mind. They could not find an appropriate term since they don’t know how signals are converted to sense of experiences.
Please explain the neuro chemical process in the brain that produces the taste sensation.
Sorry for the corrections.
Can’t you see yourself directly?
You have the same problem that Kariosfocus has over at UD.
If the physical body isn’t necessary, it is superfluous. A brick could just as well be conscious, since consciousness ins not a configuration of matter.
You seem to think there is something wrong with relying on the work of experts to form ones opinions. That your uninformed opinions are somehow preferable over the work of many people who have, through the ages, dedicated many years of their lives to asking questions about consciousness and seeking answers to them, based on sound scientific methodology. You also seem to think, as so many creationists and ID-proponents do, that not knowing every last detail of an answer means that the answer must be rejected in its entirety.
I reject such shallow sophistry. And the New Age pseudo-scientific warble used to expound it.
The world is of a vast, complex beauty. Trying to make it more amenable to your wishes by adding invented things to that beauty, as you seem to be doing, does not enhance its beauty: it detracts from it.
Why? And how can you demonstrate this? And why don’t you think that Ockhams Razor is a useful principle in such matters?
Answer these questions:
You don’t think that there is a physical reality lying at the basis of those perceptions?
That your mind exists in a real world, where real rays of light enter your eyes to cause real neural impulses causing your awareness to interpret real stimulae?
There is an objective reality that provides the sounds and light based on which your awareness forms its image of the world, don’t you think?
Of course not: that’s the point. I didn’t exist before my birth, and I won’t exist after my death. There’ll be no me for to know anything.
That’s a simplistic misrepresentation of what I was trying to say, and you know it. It is the complex of all neuronal firings and other physiological activities in the brain and body that produce thought and perception.
What. Is. Your. Point!?
Huh!? Certainly not. How did you get that from my comments?
Yes.
Possibly. Theoretically, it should be possible to simulate the neurons and other physical substrates on which the mind “runs”. The “simplest” way to do this would be to make a complete mapping of ones brain to the molecular level, and then implementing the map inside some super-computer, effectively simulating the mind. The technology for such mapping and the required computing power and speed don’t exist yet, but when they do you can rest assured that such experiments will be performed.
I don’t mean the good scientists who dedicated their lives and invented many great things by which the human beings are benefited enormously. There are good scientists who talked about consciousness in a sensible manner without coming to any conclusions.. I don’t mean them. I mean some neurologists who do not serve anything to mankind and who really dedicate their lives to write books on consciousness to mislead the people.
The world become beautiful when we are able to solve the problem of sorrow of death by understanding the real nature of our existence. It means to know what we are.
Since you think that you are the neurochemical activities in the brain you will never understand the real self. I understand how neurochemical process makes me moment to moment. Neurochemical process is responsible for my sense of experiences, emotions and behaviors. I take those forms when I identify my self with them.That “I” is temporary. When sense of experiences change with the change of neurochemical process I don’t die with them.That is the real I. That is very simple.
What do you mean by physical reality? What is the different between your perceptions and the physical realities? Don’t you think that the physical realities are either your perceptions or your imaginations?
In your awareness you see all those things which you interpret them as real.
Objective reality is still exists in the image of your world.
Are you sure? How do you know that?
How? Please explain.
Earlier scientists invented many good things. Now we can see many predictions only.There are some computer scientists very clever in making such predictions. .
It is a science fiction good for film producers. If you know what you are then you will never talk such nonsense for good. I think that there are all making a mess in the name of science.
You said that you are the body and neurochemical interactions. According to atheists that there is no independent existence as mind or soul. Now you say that something like mind can be separated and put in a computer. Now I am asking you what you are. Are you the body? Are you the neurochemical process in the brain? Are you the mind?
What is the benefit of the above experiment for the human beings?
If the mind can be separated why can’t it get separated in death and enter a new baby by a natural process? It is a good news to prove reincarnation which happens naturally may be in a similar process.
If you can separate the mind product of a person at the time of death and put it in a machine, can the same person come again and see the world again through the computer? What a great thing?
Some Computer scientists predict such immortality to mislead the people. If scientists can heal the brain and spine damages how many millions of people will be benefited and live with happiness not in a dead machine but in a real physical body which forms naturally.
In what form it exists after it is produced? What happens to all minds which are being produced in a series?
… Well, what’s the point in going on about something if you won’t come to any conclusions?
Conclusions are good. They’re what science is for. As long as you keep in mind that conclusions aren’t written in stone.
So science is alright, as long as it’s your kind of science, and as long as you like the conclusions it draws, right?
No, again, I reject such shallow sophistry. If that’s your position, then you’ll have to find somebody else to bore with it.
Your assertion. You’ve so far brought nothing to substantiate that anything more than what we already see is required to explain mental processes.
And again, if you’re just going to repeat bare assertions, then the audience will tune out sooner rather than later.
… Atoms? Photons? Molecules? Shit like that?
No no no, answer the question. Do those things have an underlying physical reality, according to you? If you get hit by a bus, does that bus really exist, or is it just a product of your mind?
There’s no reason to suppose anything else. The pattern that is me didn’t exist before my birth, and it won’t exist after I’ve died.
Again, the exact how is the subject of ongoing scientific investigation. You’ll have to look up the necessary neurological research if you want to know where they are at.
Ah. You don’t like the idea, so it must be nonsense. Is that it?
Not quite. Did you read my previous comment at all? I said it could be copied, and then simulated on a different physical substrate. But you’d still need that physical substrate. Call it a body-replacement, or a virtual machine for minds.
That’s a philosophical question, and not really relevant to this discussion. But for me, it would be the idea that something of me, in some form or other, for some time at least, survives my death. That there’ll be a version of me to experience what the future brings.
I don’t understand the question. What do you mean, what form? What do you mean, after it is produced? What do you mean, produced in a series?
What is the point to come to any conclusions about our existence without knowing answers to the following questions?
What is matter and how it came into existence?
How did all different things appear from the fundamental existence energy?
What really exist? What is really happening?
What Am I?
How does a sensation arise from the material molecules?
Which is aware of all sensations?
Consciousness is still a mystery to the good scientists. So they do not want to come with any wrong conclusions.
Conclusions put an end for further research. If you know the answers to the above questions then your conclusions have a real value. It is the truth. If you realize the truth then you will free yourself from all agonies. Then it doesn’t matter whether truth is written on a gold paper or in a stone.
I don’t find any meaning in what you say.
Know yourself. There is nothing to say more than knowing yourself. If you don’t know what you are then how can you know the reality of other things?
Can you see anything without your sense organs and brain? All these things are still connected to the brain process. So the problem is how the brain process makes us to feel the existence of atoms, photons, molecules.bus and all other things.
You always come with a violent example. Why? Whether hit by a bus or hit by a big rock or hit by the terrible hot sun still I feel only sensations. Seeing is also a sensation.
What is the pattern you mean? Do you have a permanent pattern? Your pattern represents many illusory selves. Molecules assemble to make your pattern. The molecules de assembles and your pattern disappears. Such pattern is an illusion.
There are in a state of confusion about consciousness.
Some Computer scientists predict such immortality to mislead the people. Such immortality in a plastic machine is very ugly.
Really. There is no sense in that idea. I don’t like misleading ideas.
I like immortality which is said by the Indian sages very long ago . They didn’t want to put me in a dead machine to achieve immortality which the computer scientists want to do.
Can’t it happen in a better way naturally in a process which is called reincarnation?
You say mind is a product of the brain. Visit a factory where things like soap, chocolates etc are produced.There you will understand these questions.
It is a human need to continue to live. It has nothing to do with Philosophy.This discussion is about life and death. So it is relevant to this discussion.
What is death? What is the meaning of death? What is it that dies? What is it that coming to an end?
To which the death is final? Really death is final to the physical body which is the cause for the arising of all sense of experiences. The one which is aware of all sense of experiences is the real self. Death is not final to the real self.
Sean Carroll and Steven Novella are not aware of the real self. So they make all wrong conclusions to mislead the people.
We cannot imagine or think what is beyond our sensations. There is something which we don’t know what it is. So we cannot name it. It is nameless. To understand the nameless all names and forms in our mind should come to an end. It is not death or unconsciousness. Complete awareness. Indian sages said very long ago that the mind which is cause for all names and forms should die for the other to be realized. Sean Carroll and Steven Novella do not know all these things. “No brain, No you.” This is the only think they know. They don’t know anything deep. What they know will not serve anything to human beings. They can write what they know in a gold paper and keep it in a gold box. But no use at all to anyone. Because they want to see what is beyond through their mind which could only function within the limits of senses. Meditation is the only way to understand your self.By scanning your brain you will never understand what you are.
However thank you for both you and keiths for responding my comments very patiently. I want to put a stop here. Where is Keiths? Good bye to both with my best wishes.
Sorry for the correction:
They are in a state of confusion about consciousness.
That too is nonsense. We don’t have to know how carbon came to be in order to know how it reacts with other elements. We can draw perfectly valid conclusions about the functioning of our nervous systems without knowing how it originated.
I’m not a great philosopher, but your arguments sound childish even to my untrained ear.
We’ve been talking about what you are, and what I am, for the past dozen exchanges now. And apart from that – seriously, what age are you?
No, they don’t. Like I already said, conclusions don’t have to be writ in stone to be useful as stepping stones to further research.
Seriously, if this is the level of intellect you display in the rest of your reaction, then I’m going to stop reading.
Yes, you do. You just don’t like what I’m saying about your statements.
Right. I don’t have the patience for this kind of drivel, and if I continue encountering dumb shit like this, then I’m going to become really impolite. Skipping ahead a few lines, I already glimpse shit that completely ignores everything I’ve said to you so far. So I’m going to terminate this exchange now. Bye!