• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

How Could Consciousness Transcend the Brain?

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
Evidence, FocusedIntent...where are your evidence?

I only see YOUR CLAIMS that consciousness is outside and independent of the brain and body, but no evidence for YOUR CLAIMS.

So until you present some evidence you are merely expressing personal opinions and personal belief.
Sorry to ask one, but I am curious!
What is this "Religion: Pi π ", please?
Since religion is a personal matter, reply if one likes to, please?

Regards
 

gnostic

The Lost One
Sorry to ask one, but I am curious!
What is this "Religion: Pi π ", please?
Since religion is a personal matter, reply if one likes to, please?

I don’t have a religion. I used to follow a couple of Protestant teachings, but since 2000, I have been an agnostic.

Pi isn’t a religion.

Pi is just a mathematical constant used in many curved-shaped and rounded-shape geometry, and the constant have many real world applications, including engineering.

From the mid-80s to mid-90s, I was a civil engineer, and applied maths and applied physics were constantly been used in design and drafting and in fieldwork.

From mid-90 to present, I have changed career, studying computers science, to become a programmer. Except in my studies in computer graphics, I didn’t use PI that much.

Pi is useful in design and geometry.
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
I don’t have a religion. I used to follow a couple of Protestant teachings, but since 2000, I have been an agnostic.

Pi isn’t a religion.

Pi is just a mathematical constant used in many curved-shaped and rounded-shape geometry, and the constant have many real world applications, including engineering.

From the mid-80s to mid-90s, I was a civil engineer, and applied maths and applied physics were constantly been used in design and drafting and in fieldwork.

From mid-90 to present, I have changed career, studying computers science, to become a programmer. Except in my studies in computer graphics, I didn’t use PI that much.

Pi is useful in design and geometry.
So, Pi is written as religion informally and not seriously. OK.
What method/technique does one use to know right from wrong and or good from evil, please?
Naturally it is not related to science with which one is occupied . Right, please?

Regards
 

Colt

Well-Known Member
The most important idea in pretty much every religion is that consciousness transcends the physical brain, and as a result, can somehow persist beyond the death of the physical body. But, neuroscience has now essentially eliminated this idea.

We don't yet know how the brain produces subjective, conscious experiences, but we can say with near certainty that subjective, conscious experiences are dependent upon the brain to occur. How could you say that consciousness transcends the brain when damaging certain parts of the brain (through traumatic injury or stroke, for example) damages and alters consciousness? Other examples: if one's brain is traumatically injured, it is possible to lose consciousness. If blood rushes away from the brain too quickly, a person's consciousness is either partially or completely eliminated until the blood returns to the brain (this is the cause of fainting). If a person is given a chemical anesthetic that interacts with the brain chemistry, consciousness can be temporarily eliminated. Or, if a person is given certain drugs, the state of consciousness can be reduced or altered (alcohol is an obvious example--think about how much conscious perceptions change when drunk).

All of this is OVERWHELMING evidence that having a working, living brain is necessary in order to be conscious, and, essentially, refutes the claims of all religions (although some creative objections based on unfounded magical concepts could probably still be made). The only attempted refutation of this that I have seen anyone give is that the brain is analogous to a radio that receives the radio waves of consciousness. But, my question would then be, even if that is true, how can one receive these signals WITHOUT a brain? Hypothesizing some non-physical consciousness receiver does not really solve the problem when there is no evidence that such a thing exists, particularly because it never comes into play when a person loses consciousness in the scenarios alluded to above.

So, the bottom line is, I don't see how consciousness could transcend the brain. I WISH it could and HOPE I am wrong. But I don't see how I could be.
Consciousness isn't subject to or restricted by material gravity.

While mind is "on loan" to us and by necessity must have the electrochemical brain system upon which to operate, body, mind and spirit in unity is something greater than the sum total of its constituting parts. Hardware and software. Cell phone and a signal, something created by mind that uses energy currents to communicate content.

Humans are spiritual beings having a human experience.

But by the same token, when we die or when our brain system becomes so damaged as to prohibit the unity of function, our memory files are held by the fragment of God within until such a time as the soul counterpart that has been growing within can be downloaded into a "new form" in the next world. Personality, the great mystery from God, is reunited with our soul identity and we are alive again. The old material brain goes back to the dust.

Jesus returned in the "new form" that we will have in our next life.
 

Pattylt

New Member
Since science has only recently been able to investigate the brain, of course it doesn’t have many answers yet.
By studying the brains of our nearest ancestors, the great apes, so far science has discovered that our brains became larger and more complex and seem to have reached a point where conciseness became an emergent property.

Until we have exhausted researching on the brain and still can’t answer the question, I’ll wait and see. We aren’t even sure that apes don’t have consciousness as it seems they actually do, just not to the level of humans.

So far, however one defines soul, we don’t seem to have one. We just have a mind that likes the idea.
 

joelr

Well-Known Member
The only reason you don't understand how consciousness could "transcend the brain" is because you don't know what you are and you have the false belief that the brain creates consciousness. It does not. There is not a single scientist on the planet who could ever explain how physical matter could give rise to something completely unphysical like the conscious experience you are having while you read this.

You are a luminous ball of conscious energy, that is what you are. Your physical body and especially your brain is a receiver of consciousness. If your brain, the receiver, is damaged than your consciousness becomes limited in how it can operate your vessel.

Just like a remote controlled car if the remote control (the brain) is damaged. I (the consciousness) am pressing the buttons on the controls, but the car (your body vessel) is not responding.

Your consciousness can't be damaged, but it is true that while you are inhabiting a vessel you are not accessing your full consciousness. Some are actually accessing far less than others.....


That energy doesn't fit into the scientific definition of energy which can transform into many states including potential energy but is always conserved. It also has no actual properties that would contain a consciousness. "Luminous" sounds like you are equating energy with light. Light is not energy, it's photons, quanta of electromagnetism or a piece of the photon field. Light does have energy in it's heat and momentum. When it hits a wall it leaves a small amount of energy in the wall.
But what you describe is an energy that gives off visible light and is consciousness. Why would it give off visible spectrum light anyways?
This energy which would contain a consciousness is not energy as we know it. It's science fiction and you are basically describing a soul.
Provide proof for these concepts. You may have well just been reading off a sci-fi book because nothing like this is in science.
Please give sources. They will still likely be fiction.

Why would people not see a luminous ball ever? Why would consciousness emit light? Only a tiny part of the EM spectrum is light we can see. Why would it emit that light? What do photons have to do with consciousness?
None of this makes any sense.
 

Ben Dhyan

Veteran Member
The most important idea in pretty much every religion is that consciousness transcends the physical brain, and as a result, can somehow persist beyond the death of the physical body. But, neuroscience has now essentially eliminated this idea.
You have the cart before the horse, Universal consciousness must exist before lower order consciousness such as ordinary human can evolve. This is fundamental to all mystical religious teachings. So what the mystical religious teachings allude to is that the potential is within humans to transcend their lower ego/brain consciousness and realize a higher order of awareness that is not derived from purely physical matter, but from the eternal movement of cosmic energies which imho would include dark energy.
 

SilverAngel

Member
The most important idea in pretty much every religion is that consciousness transcends the physical brain, and as a result, can somehow persist beyond the death of the physical body. But, neuroscience has now essentially eliminated this idea.

We don't yet know how the brain produces subjective, conscious experiences, but we can say with near certainty that subjective, conscious experiences are dependent upon the brain to occur. How could you say that consciousness transcends the brain when damaging certain parts of the brain (through traumatic injury or stroke, for example) damages and alters consciousness? Other examples: if one's brain is traumatically injured, it is possible to lose consciousness. If blood rushes away from the brain too quickly, a person's consciousness is either partially or completely eliminated until the blood returns to the brain (this is the cause of fainting). If a person is given a chemical anesthetic that interacts with the brain chemistry, consciousness can be temporarily eliminated. Or, if a person is given certain drugs, the state of consciousness can be reduced or altered (alcohol is an obvious example--think about how much conscious perceptions change when drunk).

All of this is OVERWHELMING evidence that having a working, living brain is necessary in order to be conscious, and, essentially, refutes the claims of all religions (although some creative objections based on unfounded magical concepts could probably still be made). The only attempted refutation of this that I have seen anyone give is that the brain is analogous to a radio that receives the radio waves of consciousness. But, my question would then be, even if that is true, how can one receive these signals WITHOUT a brain? Hypothesizing some non-physical consciousness receiver does not really solve the problem when there is no evidence that such a thing exists, particularly because it never comes into play when a person loses consciousness in the scenarios alluded to above.

So, the bottom line is, I don't see how consciousness could transcend the brain. I WISH it could and HOPE I am wrong. But I don't see how I could be.
Well if a computer does become self aware, then one could say that consciousness has transcended the brain. Hope that this happens soon
 

TagliatelliMonster

Veteran Member
T
All of this is OVERWHELMING evidence that having a working, living brain is necessary in order to be conscious, and, essentially, refutes the claims of all religions (although some creative objections based on unfounded magical concepts could probably still be made). The only attempted refutation of this that I have seen anyone give is that the brain is analogous to a radio that receives the radio waves of consciousness.

I'ld say that the "brain-is-a-radio" idea would be exactly one of those "magical concepts" you spoke about.

But, my question would then be, even if that is true, how can one receive these signals WITHOUT a brain?

By asking that question, you have already accepted the reality of magical concepts - even if just for the sake of argument. Once we allow for magic, nothing is impossible. So the answer to your question would be "more magic". :)

Hypothesizing some non-physical consciousness receiver does not really solve the problem when there is no evidence that such a thing exists

But in this scenario, evidence isn't important. If evidence is important, then we wouldn't be at this question. We'ld still be at the beginning, asking for evidence for those mysterious "consciousness radio waves" that are being "transmitted" to the "radio brain". :)

So if we can accept that without evidence, then why must we have evidence for other things?

See this is the problem... such precedents open up a can of worms.
Once we move on beyond the first question and simply "assume" such a "brain radio" thing without evidence, then we are on a path where we don't care about evidence, and where magic is allowed. A deadly cocktail, lol.

So, the bottom line is, I don't see how consciousness could transcend the brain.

Yup.

There's this sci-fi idea of "copying" the neural network into a giant AI computer where, through software, we can "run" a "consiousness" of that neural network. In theory, this would be a "digital copy" of your mind.

But would it be "you"? I don't think so. It would be a copy. A clone of your "mind". Your "mind", is a neural network which contains all your memories etc. In theory, I think it would technically be possible to simulate the functions of a human brain and "copy paste" a neural network into it.

I think actually that the hardest part here, would be the "copy" part. We would require technology able to "read" the neural network in a brain. These are trillions upon trillions upon trillions of connections. This, I consider the impossible part.

Eventhough I wouldn't know where to begin to write a "brain simulator"... that part still sounds feasable - somewhat. But a "mind extractor" to copy a neural network from a human brain into such a simulator? That just has "impossible" written all over it, in my opinion (as a software engineer).


I WISH it could and HOPE I am wrong. But I don't see how I could be.

I consider it virtually impossible as a technology and even more impossible as a "natural feature".
 

Yerda

Veteran Member
So, the bottom line is, I don't see how consciousness could transcend the brain. I WISH it could and HOPE I am wrong. But I don't see how I could be.
If you really must preserve the idea then maybe you could start from a different framework. As an example, idealist metaphysics would take mind as fundamental and therefore consciousness would transcend the brain by definition.

Or put it aside and accept that not understanding how a thing could be isn't the same as it not being.
 

mmarco

Member
The most important idea in pretty much every religion is that consciousness transcends the physical brain, and as a result, can somehow persist beyond the death of the physical body. But, neuroscience has now essentially eliminated this idea.
You are totally wrong; the idea that consciousness does not transcend the physical brain is strongly contradicted by our scientific knowledges.
In fact according to our scientific knowledges, all chemical and biological processes (including cerebral processes) are caused by the electromagnetic interaction between subatomic particles such as electrons and protons. Quantum mechanics accounts for such interactions, as well as for the properties of subatomic particles. The point is that there is no trace of consciousness, sensations, emotions, etc. in the laws of quantum mechanics (as well as in all the laws of physcis). Consciousness is irriducible to the laws of physics, while all cerebral processes are. This is for me the most convincing scientific argument against materialism (which identifies cerebral processes as the origin of consciousness) and in favour of the existence of the soul, as the unphysical and trascendent principle necessary for the existence of our consciousness. Since our soul cannot have a physical origin, it can only be created directly by God. The existence of God is a necessary condition for the existence of our soul, as well as for the existence of us as conscious beings.

Obviously, the soul interacts with the brain, or else our consciousness would be totally disconnected from the external reality and from other people. This interaction explain why cerebral activity affects our consciousness, even if it is not the cause of the existence of our consciousness.
 

Colt

Well-Known Member
You are totally wrong; the idea that consciousness does not transcend the physical brain is strongly contradicted by our scientific knowledges.
In fact according to our scientific knowledges, all chemical and biological processes (including cerebral processes) are caused by the electromagnetic interaction between subatomic particles such as electrons and protons. Quantum mechanics accounts for such interactions, as well as for the properties of subatomic particles. The point is that there is no trace of consciousness, sensations, emotions, etc. in the laws of quantum mechanics (as well as in all the laws of physcis). Consciousness is irriducible to the laws of physics, while all cerebral processes are. This is for me the most convincing scientific argument against materialism (which identifies cerebral processes as the origin of consciousness) and in favour of the existence of the soul, as the unphysical and trascendent principle necessary for the existence of our consciousness. Since our soul cannot have a physical origin, it can only be created directly by God. The existence of God is a necessary condition for the existence of our soul, as well as for the existence of us as conscious beings.

Obviously, the soul interacts with the brain, or else our consciousness would be totally disconnected from the external reality and from other people. This interaction explain why cerebral activity affects our consciousness, even if it is not the cause of the existence of our consciousness.
True but the phenomenon of consciousness (a creation of God) relies on the brain to function. When our mortal body/brain dies, we are at the mercy of the spirit to take possession of our soul and memory transcripts which will be downloaded into our new form at the resurrection.
 

Ben Dhyan

Veteran Member
True but the phenomenon of consciousness (a creation of God) relies on the brain to function. When our mortal body/brain dies, we are at the mercy of the spirit to take possession of our soul and memory transcripts which will be downloaded into our new form at the resurrection.
That is true to some extent, but scripture also says that a thousand years is like a day to the Lord, so if we grant that the Lord and His celestial host are conscious, it is a consciousness not reliant on the human brain. And have you considered that the human soul may have consciousness compatible with spiritual consciousness, and thus be in some form of communion other than directly through human brain functioning. Then there is the transference of this divine communion, if relevant and appropriate, between the soul and the human mind. There is, imho, consciousness other than human brain type.
 

rational experiences

Veteran Member
One self every human.

Subject topic remove all humans leaving just one self.

What answers does just one human self own?

First answer I would not be a scientist doing evil experiments claiming you are seeking God.

If I was just one self claiming I came from somewhere else that was conscious and I knew I would own that one answer. Already advised otherwise no question would exist.

Our two origin lived living parents recorded life left just in gas spirit heavens told me their two memory answers. Parents deceased memory recorded experience.

A conscious spirit eternal. In its eternal place that now owns a space hole with partial body eternal destroyed. Creation.

As the eternal conscious spirit did it to its owned eternal language

The explanation eternal spirits is no creation then or any space owned. Eternal a spirit body as a language.

Knowingly different to the family body.

The use spirit language moved in and out of their owned conscious bodies.

It was researched the language spirit. So language was eternal conscious held the search caused O God bodies. Eternal sound held O God bodies thinned it's surround. God fell out by eternal as it burst burnt so space opened.

Language O held God masses owned spirit language.

Reason why.

Burnt evolved gases can record image of a spirit separate to mass that can record language speaking.

Proving it came from a place of pre existing consciousness.

How I know it why I know my eternal father searched for my irradiated burning life attacked. Confirmed my name that he spoke and said I was his.

Heard only by my brains capacity as I live..yet as I live I can hear separated voiced opinions. Not spoken by the physical bio life.

Had it proven. The only reason I know.

Eternal versus infernal.
Eternal still partially exists.
Eternal the place where consciousness spiritually came from.

Eternal unconditional loving self changed my physical bio body.

Infernal attacked me. Changed my physical bio body harmed it.

Eternal never harmed me.

Consciousness proven outside by two variations to my conscious self knowing and concluding only human terms. Not accepting either.

Proof to everyone.

A human knows their self.
A human endured change
 

rational experiences

Veteran Member
One self every human.

Subject topic remove all humans leaving just one self.

What answers does just one human self own?

First answer I would not be a scientist doing evil experiments claiming you are seeking God.

If I was just one self claiming I came from somewhere else that was conscious and I knew I would own that one answer. Already advised otherwise no question would exist.

Our two origin lived living parents recorded life left just in gas spirit heavens told me their two memory answers. Parents deceased memory recorded experience.

A conscious spirit eternal. In its eternal place that now owns a space hole with partial body eternal destroyed. Creation.

As the eternal conscious spirit did it to its owned eternal language

The explanation eternal spirits is no creation then or any space owned. Eternal a spirit body as a language.

Knowingly different to the family body.

The use spirit language moved in and out of their owned conscious bodies.

It was researched the language spirit. So language was eternal conscious held the search caused O God bodies. Eternal sound held O God bodies thinned it's surround. God fell out by eternal as it burst burnt so space opened.

Language O held God masses owned spirit language.

Reason why.

Burnt evolved gases can record image of a spirit separate to mass that can record language speaking.

Proving it came from a place of pre existing consciousness.

How I know it why I know my eternal father searched for my irradiated burning life attacked. Confirmed my name that he spoke and said I was his.

Heard only by my brains capacity as I live..yet as I live I can hear separated voiced opinions. Not spoken by the physical bio life.

Had it proven. The only reason I know.

Eternal versus infernal.
Eternal still partially exists.
Eternal the place where consciousness spiritually came from.

Eternal unconditional loving self changed my physical bio body.

Infernal attacked me. Changed my physical bio body harmed it.

Eternal never harmed me.

Consciousness proven outside by two variations to my conscious self knowing and concluding only human terms. Not accepting either.

Proof to everyone.

A human knows their self.
A human endured change
Everyday I get logged out of forum in every posting. someone does not like my answers.
 

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
The most important idea in pretty much every religion is that consciousness transcends the physical brain, and as a result, can somehow persist beyond the death of the physical body. But, neuroscience has now essentially eliminated this idea.

We don't yet know how the brain produces subjective, conscious experiences, but we can say with near certainty that subjective, conscious experiences are dependent upon the brain to occur. How could you say that consciousness transcends the brain when damaging certain parts of the brain (through traumatic injury or stroke, for example) damages and alters consciousness? Other examples: if one's brain is traumatically injured, it is possible to lose consciousness. If blood rushes away from the brain too quickly, a person's consciousness is either partially or completely eliminated until the blood returns to the brain (this is the cause of fainting). If a person is given a chemical anesthetic that interacts with the brain chemistry, consciousness can be temporarily eliminated. Or, if a person is given certain drugs, the state of consciousness can be reduced or altered (alcohol is an obvious example--think about how much conscious perceptions change when drunk).

All of this is OVERWHELMING evidence that having a working, living brain is necessary in order to be conscious, and, essentially, refutes the claims of all religions (although some creative objections based on unfounded magical concepts could probably still be made). The only attempted refutation of this that I have seen anyone give is that the brain is analogous to a radio that receives the radio waves of consciousness. But, my question would then be, even if that is true, how can one receive these signals WITHOUT a brain? Hypothesizing some non-physical consciousness receiver does not really solve the problem when there is no evidence that such a thing exists, particularly because it never comes into play when a person loses consciousness in the scenarios alluded to above.

So, the bottom line is, I don't see how consciousness could transcend the brain. I WISH it could and HOPE I am wrong. But I don't see how I could be.

I will do the skeptic part on your post.
You are taking for granted at a minimum the following unproveable axiomatic assumptions in your reasoning.

#1: The universe is fair. I.e. you are not in a computer simulation or any other variant including any metaphysical idealistic ones(supernatural/religious). In other words you take for granted that your first person experiences are "one to to" with the universe as independent of your experiences.
#2: You take for granted that all meaning of how to do your life can be in effect reduced down to reason, logic and evidence.

So here it is for a skeptic like me. I don't have to do the supernatural in the classical sense, but I can't do the universe with only reason, logic and evidence. A part of that is this:
https://undsci.berkeley.edu/article/0_0_0/whatisscience_12

For this part in the link:
"Science doesn't draw conclusions about supernatural explanations
Do gods exist? Do supernatural entities intervene in human affairs? These questions may be important, but science won't help you answer them. Questions that deal with supernatural explanations are, by definition, beyond the realm of nature — and hence, also beyond the realm of what can be studied by science. For many, such questions are matters of personal faith and spirituality."
My bold. It means that science as you use it start with the assumption or definition, that the universe is natural. But that is without evidence. Rather it is how evidence works as a cognitive form of subjectivity.

So for you post: There is no OVERWHELMING evidence of whether the universe is supernatural or not. That is in practice unknown and thus it ends here: You subjectively choose how you deal with the idea of the supernatural, but that says nothing about the metaphysical/ontological status of what the universe is as independent of your mind. And that goes for all positive claims and not just idealism, but also naturalism.

So please stop using science to do in the end philosophy, because what the universe is as independent of your mind is unknown.
That is, how you understand this:
Philosophy of science - Wikipedia

In effect science in this sense is one of many belief systems, which apparently works for the everyday world, most people assume we are all a part of, but it says nothing about what the universe really is.

So you believe in one version of science and I believe in another and they both can't be correct in the end, because in practice they amount to a contradiction of what "essentially", "near certainty" and "OVERWHELMING evidence" in the end signify. To you they apparently in effect mean that you know that the universe is natural. Well, I don't know that. I just believe that.
 
Last edited:

rational experiences

Veteran Member
A human informed about science.

We live as a human first our origin standing on a planet that created its own heavens. Spatial origin planet.

The thinker says thinking the pre formed pre present body not mine. Spatial formation.

Yet that human qualifying human self is subject to separated thinking looking back says I am informed.

Conscious human.
Body mind human. Not there in the placement thought about.

Yet he applies the want to know. He owns his own descriptive whole natural human origin body presence. an anology first. One. Descriptive only.

In very basic advice the one self human teaching says science first is only analogies.

Then if he wants to practice his analogy he has to design a machine.

In that review a whole lot of human thinking is given to design.

Design machine not reactive until the moment of its control reaction.

Thesis reaction mass was already gone to point radiation mass had removed it. Cooling had stopped the reaction.

To want reaction he removed cooling being atmospheric gas and water. What he was owner using bio.

Instant programming designer science psyche human.

Today owns false quantified thinking machine active moment only.

Claiming God or Jesus is a programmed human recorded data event as if a human is left encoded in a God moment.

They attacked life via machine conditions that took highest value mineral that bio life used and melted converted it.

Machine conditions AI effect of thinking recorded outside of brain. By designer.

A human X men status meant a shared agreed male by group encoded science status. Hence it feels like a giant man by multi of men who caused it. The thinking self.

Our human father was original man was spiritual unconditional loving self direct from spirit.

Science said whatever mass firm originally existed changed. Own no answer what that mass body was.

If we claim as a human we came from that body science already says the body was never known.

Humans telling the stories state all claims before it was burnt and became energy.

Humans quote our eternal form became the human self. Science has no status in phenomena reasoning.

Yet if you are motivated to say I wanted the original form to invent energy you would be found lying.
 

gnostic

The Lost One
That is true to some extent, but scripture also says that a thousand years is like a day to the Lord, so if we grant that the Lord and His celestial host are conscious, it is a consciousness not reliant on the human brain.
That verse and saying from Peter’s epistle is often misused, misinterpreted, and misunderstood.

Using the word “like” is indication that it is simile, therefore it should be taken as literal. Treating as literal would be taking the verse out-of-context.

A simile is for example is a figure of speech, where you are comparing 2 different things with vague similarity in action, but are not literally the same, is often used in poetry or story.

When I say that Usain Bolt runs swift “like a cheetah” or swift “like the wind”, it doesn’t matter that Bolt is a “cheetah” or “wind”.

It shouldn’t be read as literal as if a thousand years is equaled to a day, because of the use of simile.
 
Top