How does consciousness interact with the brain?

[George-ananda]

I'm with Polymath on this.

Science can only explain phenomena down to a certain level. If one continues, like an 8yr old child, asking why, why, why questions at each level of explanation, sooner or later you get to the bottom at which the only possible reply is "It is just is, according to the model we have, which is based on what observations tell us". The goal of science is to make predictive models of the physical world, not to answer metaphysical questions about ultimate meaning or understanding.

This is no more of an issue with QM than with General Relativity, which is equally counterintuitive and which, like QM, dissolves eventually into mathematics rather than nice 3D pictorial concepts.

It seems to me there is a danger of getting sucked into quantum woo. Some rather suspect people have latched onto obscurantist descriptions of QM to provide a specious underpinning for all sorts of un-evidenced ideas. I have yet to read a convincing account of how quantum processes really do anything special in the brain.

But then I am a bit of a refusenik on all this "consciousness" mystique in the first place. It seems to me that treating consciousness as an entity, a "thing", is making a category error. I regard it as an activity of the brain - the functioning of the brain's operating system, if you like. I suspect we shall come to regard Cartesian dualism as a philosophical wrong turning, driven at the time by lack of understanding of what we now call computing.

Well I start from the macro world of paranormal phenomena and psychic insights. The ‘down to the particle’ explanation I hold to be beyond me and science at this time. I think it has something to do with quantum physics eventually, but it’s beyond my grasp.

I am not the type to start with quantum physics and predict ‘woo’. I start from the macro phenomena first and accept there must be a down to the particle detailed explanation to be found.

 

[exchemist]

Well I start from the macro world of paranormal phenomena and psychic insights. The ‘down to the particle’ explanation I hold to be beyond me and science at this time. I think it has something to do with quantum physics eventually, but it’s beyond my grasp.

I am not the type to start with quantum physics and predict ‘woo’. I start from the macro phenomena first and accept there must be a down to the particle detailed explanation to be found.

Starting from macro seems impeccably sound, I agree. But it seems to me you are invoking quantum theory without justification at this point. You are saying in effect the following:
i) Here are some phenomena I don't understand,
ii) I don't understand quantum physics,
iii) ergo, I suspect these phenomena are something to do with quantum physics.

From the science viewpoint there is as yet no accepted reproducible evidence for paranormal and psychic insights, so there is a step (0) before even the point you are starting from. This is to generate some decent reproducible evidence that there is anything physical to research.

 

[George-ananda]

Starting from macro seems impeccably sound, I agree. But it seems to me you are invoking quantum theory without justification at this point. You are saying in effect the following:
i) Here are some phenomena I don't understand,
ii) I don't understand quantum physics,
iii) ergo, I suspect these phenomena are something to do with quantum physics.

From the science viewpoint there is as yet no accepted reproducible evidence for paranormal and psychic insights, so there is a step (0) before even the point you are starting from. This is to generate some decent reproducible evidence that there is anything physical to research.

Actually on the first part my comment would be on iii) in pointing out that ‘suspect’ is a key word there. An ultimate scientific understanding of the phenomena must exist but is just an interest to me (not my main interest in all of this) as a non-scientist.

As to the second part of your reply, I believe there is enough scientific evidence through controlled experiments to produce belief in the paranormal as well as enough anecdotal evidence for me to personally accept the existence of paranormal phenomena beyond reasonable doubt.

 

[exchemist]

Actually on the first part my comment would be on iii) in pointing out that ‘suspect’ is a key word there. An ultimate scientific understanding of the phenomena must exist but is just an interest to me (not my main interest in all of this) as a non-scientist.

As to the second part of your reply, I believe there is enough scientific evidence through controlled experiments to produce belief in the paranormal as well as enough anecdotal evidence for me to personally accept the existence of paranormal phenomena beyond reasonable doubt.

Well that's a problem. You personally may accept it, but anecdotes notoriously do not lend themselves easily to scientific investigation.

 

[Thermos aquaticus]

As to the second part of your reply, I believe there is enough scientific evidence through controlled experiments to produce belief in the paranormal as well as enough anecdotal evidence for me to personally accept the existence of paranormal phenomena beyond reasonable doubt.

People believe in a lot of stuff. There are believers in almost every conspiracy theory out there. I think we are looking for something a little more concrete.

 

[George-ananda]

Well that's a problem. You personally may accept it, but anecdotes notoriously do not lend themselves easily to scientific investigation.

I understand that,

My interest in all this is not doing 'science' but in forming my best understanding of reality. I think 'science' is great but limited in its reach at this time.

 

[George-ananda]

People believe in a lot of stuff. There are believers in almost every conspiracy theory out there. I think we are looking for something a little more concrete.

I would like to give you concrete but science is not there yet at this time. Observation often precedes understanding.

My interest in all this is not doing 'science' but in forming my best understanding of reality. I think 'science' is great but limited in its reach at this time.

 

[Thermos aquaticus]

I would like to give you concrete but science is not there yet at this time. Observation often precedes understanding.

My interest in all this is not doing 'science' but in forming my best understanding of reality. I think 'science' is great but limited in its reach at this time.

For the record, I am willing to go along with the opening post. Let's assume dualism is true. Now what? What do we look for with respect to the interface between the brain and the mind?

We can also look at this from the other direction. While science may not be able to tell us how this works, it may be able to tell us how it doesn't work. If you think there is something worth pursuing on this front then we could at least see if it is plausible and if it isn't contradicted by what science does know. One of the first steps in any scientific research project is figuring out where not to go with the research.

 

[George-ananda]

For the record, I am willing to go along with the opening post. Let's assume dualism is true. Now what? What do we look for with respect to the interface between the brain and the mind?

We can also look at this from the other direction. While science may not be able to tell us how this works, it may be able to tell us how it doesn't work. If you think there is something worth pursuing on this front then we could at least see if it is plausible and if it isn't contradicted by what science does know. One of the first steps in any scientific research project is figuring out where not to go with the research.

Well, the answers to those requests will come from scientists (which I am not). This paper you may find as a good starting point:

A Neurophysical Model of Mind/Brain Interaction

 

[tayla]

Where does consciousness go when you sleep?

I don't know that you are wrong but, consciousness seems to disappear when you are in deep sleep. If it wasn't dependent on the function of the brain I'd suspect consciousness to be something continual. Instead when you sleep consciousness, the conscious self no longer exists.

Thank you for your reply.

Yes, it seems that part of "us" functions without our even being aware of it. For example, you are trying to figure out something then, days later, the answer just comes to you. In my view, both consciousness and mental activity reside in the spiritual realm.

 

[exchemist]

I understand that,

My interest in all this is not doing 'science' but in forming my best understanding of reality. I think 'science' is great but limited in its reach at this time.

OK understood. Just don't bet the farm on quantum theory, and beware of quantum woo!

 

[Thermos aquaticus]

OK understood. Just don't bet the farm on quantum theory, and beware of quantum woo!

I'll second that motion.

One of our human failings is that we tend to project our wishes and hopes onto things that we don't understand. A good example is how humans once thought that intelligent life on Mars and Venus were possible even though there was no real reason to suspect it was true. Most people don't understand quantum mechanics and it makes them susceptible to people who weave an attractive fantasy around quantum mechanics (e.g. Chopra). As ever, be skeptical and be curious.

 

[atanu]

How does consciousness interact with the brain?

Assuming dualism; that consciousness is not merely an illusion created by brain complexity, nor an emergent property caused by the neural network.

Seems there is two way communication:

1. From brain to consciousness: after receiving sensory information and preprocessing it.
2. From consciousness to brain: to command the brain to trigger bodily activity, or thought, or whatever.

I'm hoping to locate a specific mechanism for the communication, perhaps something involving quantum mechanics.

Also, should we consider not merely conscious activity but also unconscious mental activity since this occurs without being conscious?

Yoga Vasistha says that all that can be grasped is ungraspable consciousness only.

 

[exchemist]

I'll second that motion.

One of our human failings is that we tend to project our wishes and hopes onto things that we don't understand. A good example is how humans once thought that intelligent life on Mars and Venus were possible even though there was no real reason to suspect it was true. Most people don't understand quantum mechanics and it makes them susceptible to people who weave an attractive fantasy around quantum mechanics (e.g. Chopra). As ever, be skeptical and be curious.

Ah yes, Chopra. The High Priest, nay, Pope, of quantum woo!
Some time it would be amusing to have a go at Chopra. But not here.

 

[George-ananda]

OK understood. Just don't bet the farm on quantum theory, and beware of quantum woo!

I would bet a decent sum on post-materialism but it won't get paid off probably in my lifetime.

My strong hunch though is that this quantum stuff and post-materialist science is in the path of future science. I think physicists like Amit Goswami are the ones on the right path with downward causation; everything starts with conscious intent and the lower realms events occur. Materialists think of consciousness in terms of upward causation; simple elements in complex arraignment produce consciousness.

Materialist: Matter is primary and consciousness is a derivative of matter

Post-Materialist: Consciousness is primary and matter is a derivative of Consciousness

I'll add that I even believe your villain Deepak Chopra is also on the right track. I take Vedic Advaita philosophy as the best starting point to understanding the nature of reality.

 

[exchemist]

I would bet a decent sum on post-materialism but it won't get paid off probably in my lifetime.

My strong hunch though is that this quantum stuff and post-materialist science is in the path of future science. I think physicists like Amit Goswami are the ones on the right path with downward causation; everything starts with conscious intent and the lower realms events occur. Materialists think of consciousness in terms of upward causation; simple elements in complex arraignment produce consciousness.

Materialist: Matter is primary and consciousness is a derivative of matter

Post-Materialist: Consciousness is primary and matter is a derivative of Consciousness

I'll add that I even believe your villain Deepak Chopra is also on the right track. I take Vedic Advaita philosophy as the best starting point to understanding the nature of reality.

Haha we part company now. I'm with the materialist camp on consciousness, as you probably realise.

By the way, very important to realise that quantum theory has nothing to do with consciousness, contrary to woo presentations of it. The role of the so-called "observer" is often misrepresented. It is measurement, through physical interaction with a detector of some kind, that "collapses" the wave function in the Copenhagen interpretation. Nobody suggests the behaviour of the system changes when the experimenter goes out to get a cup of coffee.

Chopra is an utter charlatan, in my opinion, who has made a fortune out of people's ignorance. Maybe we get to put the boot into Chopra after all? (Only kidding - let's not go there.)

 

[Thermos aquaticus]

I think physicists like Amit Goswami are the ones on the right path with downward causation; everything starts with conscious intent and the lower realms events occur.

Has Goswami demonstrated that conscious intent comes from another realm?

Materialist: Matter is primary and consciousness is a derivative of matter

If consciousness is a product of quantum mechanics then this would still be true. QM is part of the material world.

I'll add that I even believe your villain Deepak Chopra is also on the right track. I take Vedic Advaita philosophy as the best starting point to understanding the nature of reality.

If there is any science behind the reasons you think Chopra is right, then I think we would be most interested in that.

 

[George-ananda]

It is measurement, through physical interaction with a detector of some kind, that "collapses" the wave function in the Copenhagen interpretation.

But....Passive observation or measurement should have no effect in a materialist understanding of reality.

You don't think me looking at the moon interacts with and effects the moon do you?

 

[exchemist]

But....Passive observation or measurement should have no effect in a materialist understanding of reality.

You don't think me looking at the moon interacts with and effects the moon do you?

Exactly so. What I mean is that in the double slit experiment it is the electron wave function interacting with an atom in the detector screen that causes detection at one spot rather than another. It is not because a conscious observer is watching it.

 

[George-ananda]

Has Goswami demonstrated that conscious intent comes from another realm?

No such things can be demonstrated at the physical-only level at this time. Quantum mechanics does though suggest and allow for this possibility

If consciousness is a product of quantum mechanics then this would still be true. QM is part of the material world.

This is a misunderstanding. Consciousness in this theory is not held to be a product of quantum mechanics. Consciousness is something fundamental and mysterious. Its interaction with the material will just look to us as quantum mechanical behavior.

I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness. We cannot get behind consciousness. Everything that we talk about, everything that we regard as existing, postulates consciousness.
Max Planck

If there is any science behind the reasons you think Chopra is right, then I think we would be most interested in that.

The works and thoughts of many post-materialist physicists too numerous to mention here (like Max Planck).

And their thinking dovetails with the teachings of what I independently have come to believe are the teachings of those who have delved deepest into the ultimate nature of reality (Advaita Vedanta philosophy; and this predates quantum mechanics by a thousand years).