In order to begin to understand the complexity and depth of the phenomenon of consciousness, it is imperative to first become familiar with the hard problem. In summary, the hard problem is explaining why any physical state is conscious, rather than unconscious. The phrase “the hard problem” was first coined by Chalmers in 1996. Chalmers states, “what makes the hard problem hard and almost unique is that it goes beyond problems about the performance of functions”. By this, he means that the hard problem reaches beyond problems associated with functional roles such as learning, analyzing, and reasoning. The phenomenon of consciousness, as stated by the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, cannot be examined by functionality like many psychological …show more content…
He describes it as “the problem of experience” rather than a problem of conceptualizing and learning about stimuli. As stated in the video shown in class, a person can know all there is to know about the brain functions that occur when a person sees a color but without conscious experience of that color, the person still doesn't know what it's like to experience that color. These processes in the brain occur only through experience, not “in the dark” unaccompanied by experience, as stated by Chalmers. The hard problem is one without a solution. Because consciousness is of it's own entity, like time and space, it proves difficult to examine from either a romantic or a reductionist point of view. But before attempting to examine consciousness through a romantic or reductionist lens, one first must fully grasp …show more content…
Under the heading, Small Chunks of Gray Matter Mediate Specific Content of Consciousness, Koch examines different scenarios in which people experience some sort of brain trauma and as result lose bits of their conscious experience (color blindness, face blindness)(32). These examples provide an argument that consciousness not only holds some physical form within the brain, but these examples allow us to get one step closer in identifying key areas of the brain where consciousness may hide. This information provides reconciliation to the reductionist perspective because it can be reduced to the neurons and the areas in the brain that form consciousness. Romanticism shows unreconcilable aspects in the notion that it does little to elaborate on the phenomenon of consciousness. The question of “why?” is less crucial to consciousness than the question of
Smart argues from the stance of identity theorist and believes that mental sensations are identical to a corresponding brain-process. Much of Smart’s paper is a counter argument against an identity theorist’s greatest rival, the dualist. Most of the human body has been explained by science in terms of biology, chemistry, and physics; though the brain remains largely mysterious. Recent technological advances regarding the research of the brain has allowed us to understand the mind in much better ways which is why Smart feels “that science is increasingly giving us a viewpoint whereby organisms are able to be seen as physicochemical mechanism” (61). He introduces the concept of Ockham’s razor and feels that scientists use it to introduce simplicity into their theories, which makes their explanations of concepts simpler. This simplicity is preferred because it also adds a sense of beauty to the laws discovered. With regards to his lightning example, Smart highlights how our experience of lightning is the physical process of discharged electrons from the ionization of water vapor in the atmosphere. Important to note here is that the two cannot be separated; you will not have a flash of lightning and then an electric discharge, rather lightning is electric discharge. This metaphor is crucial essay’s argument that sensations are identical to brain-processes. Ockham’s razor eliminates unnecessary nomological danglers from scientific theories, so why not apply the same concept to a theory of mind? We wouldn’t describe in our theory of lightning the ‘flashiness’ or ‘jaggedne...
Chapter 4 discusses the several states of consciousness: the nature of consciousness, sleep and dreams, psychoactive drugs, hypnosis, and meditation. Consciousness is a crucial part of human experience, it represents that private inner mind where we think, feel, plan, wish, pray, omagine, and quietly relive experiences. William James described the mind as a stream of consciousness, a continuous flow of changing sensations, images thoughts, and feelings. Consciousness has two major parts: awareness and arousal. Awareness includes the awareness of the self and thoughts about one's experiences. Arousal is the physiological state of being engaged with the environment. Theory of mind refers to individuals understanding that they and others think,
... sight: A case of hemineglect. In J. A. Ogden, Fractured Minds (pp. 113-136). New York: Oxford University Press.
There is almost no doubt that there is a relationship between psychology and philosophy. Indeed, many people actually considering that the philosophies related to and concerned with the mind and thought are the precursor to modern psychology. Of course, most of these philosophies were decidedly western, or popular in the west. However, the problem with our western views of consciousness in philosophy and psychology is that often times the way we view the conscious process leads to a so-called "infinite regression." That is to say, if we see consciousness as a set of rules guiding our experiences in life, there must also be another set of rules that defines how we know when to use those rules, and so on and so forth. (Kurak 2001, 18-19). In this paper, I will attempt to show how we can turn to Buddhist principles to help us gain a better understanding of human consciousness.
Underlying each of these claims is the theme of the unification of body and mind into a state of consciousness which greatly facilitates clarity and order in one's awareness. Through the deep periods of rest achieved during levels of transcendental consciousness, t...
Much like Freud’s attitude to the understanding of consciousness, Stuart Sutherland seems accepting of the fact that regardless of psychologists perceptions and interpretations of what consciousness is, it is somewhat worthless trying to depict the true definition of the theory, as there is no...
To conclude this essay, I like to emphazise that Rosenthal's HOT is more of an empirical hypothesis, rather than an analysis of the term ‘consciousness.’ His aim is precisely to explain the phenomena of consciousness in relation to other mental states, such as thought and perception, and while achieving this, he has elaborated a theoretical structure for comprehending the functions of our mind.
“Contrary to what is commonly assumed by contemporary philosophers, there is no genuine conflict discovered so far between our natural understanding of what it takes to be conscious on the one hand and what we know about the world on the basis of physics, biology and neurobiology on the other. If this is correct, then the strong conviction so common among philosophers today that subject body dualism need not even be seriously considered as a theoretical option has no solid rational basis” (2).
The brain has four major lobes. The frontal lobe, the parietal lobe, the occipital lobe, and temporal lobe are responsible for all of the activities of the body, from seeing, hearing, tasting, to touching, moving, and even memory. After many years of debating, scientist presents what they called the localization issue, Garret explains how Fritsch and Hitzig studied dog with conforming observations, but the cases of Phineas Gage’s accident in 1848 and Paul Broca’s autopsy of a man brain in 1861 really grabbed the attention of an enthusiastic scientific community (Garret 2015 p.6)
Lilly was a psychoanalyst and neurophysiologist who set out to create an environment in which he could conduct scientific research on the brain and explore its electrical activity. He was seeking to answer questions which had evaded him thus far in the several decades of his prior research. After concluding that he could go no further in his research of the correspondence between brain and mind without harming or changing the brain, Lilly began seeking answers in a different realm, the brain’s consciousness. In particular, he was curious about what was required for the brain to remain in a conscious state. At the time, science had two contrasting theories on this matter. The first was that the brain required external stimulus to remain conscious.
Renner, T., Feldman, R., Majors, M., Morrissey, J., & Mae, L. (2011). States of Consciousness. Psychsmart (pp. 99-107). New York: McGraw-Hill.
"Artificial Intelligence and Consciousness." Encyclopedia of Consciousness. Oxford: Elsevier Science & Technology, 2009. Credo Reference. Web. 26 April 2011.
“Consciousness is defined as everything of which we are aware at any given time - our thoughts, feelings, sensations, and perceptions of the external environment. Physiological researchers have returned to the study of consciousness, in examining physiological rhythms, sleep, and altered states of consciousness (changes in awareness produced by sleep, meditation, hypnosis, and drugs)” (Wood, 2011, 169). There are five levels of consciousness; Conscious (sensing, perceiving, and choosing), Preconscious (memories that we can access), Unconscious ( memories that we can not access), Non-conscious ( bodily functions without sensation), and Subconscious ( “inner child,” self image formed in early childhood).
But, “human persons have an ‘inner’ dimension that is just as important as the ‘outer’ embodiment” (Cortez, 71). The “inner” element cannot be wholly explained by the “outer” embodiment, but it does give rise to inimitable facets of the human life, such as human dignity and personal identity. The mind-body problem entails two theories, dualism and physicalism. Dualism contends that distinct mental and physical realms exist, and they both must be taken into account. Its counterpart (weak) physicalism views the human as being completely bodily and physical, encompassing no non-physical, or spiritual, substances.
...have struggled with the nature of human beings, especially with the concept of “self”. What Plato called “soul, Descartes named the “mind”, while Hume used the term “self”. This self, often visible during hardships, is what one can be certain of, whose existence is undoubtable. Descartes’s “I think, therefore I am” concept of transcendental self with just the conscious mind is too simplistic to capture the whole of one’s self. Similarly, the empirical self’s idea of brain in charge of one’s self also shows a narrow perspective. Hume’s bundle theory seeks to provide the distinction by claiming that a self is merely a habitual way of discussing certain perceptions. Although the idea of self is well established, philosophical insight still sees that there is no clear presentation of essential self and thus fails to prove that the true, essential self really exists.