The mystery of consciousness: Sam Harris

A place to discuss casual topics amongst spiritual friends.
User avatar
m0rl0ck
Posts: 1193
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 10:51 am

Re: The mystery of consciousness: Sam Harris

Post by m0rl0ck »

Moggalana wrote:
m0rl0ck wrote: Its interesting that westerners start from the objective and their question is "How did consciousness arise from the physical?"
On the contrary! The modern study of consciousness began with Descartes, and Descartes is widely known for his theory of mind-body dualism. Fast forward 350 years and there is (more or less) only one prominent dualist remaning: David Chalmers. All the others think that dualism just doesn't work because how should a non-physical entity interact with a physical brain?
m0rl0ck wrote: Other cultures attribute primary place to subjectivity.
Subjectivity doesn't necessarily imply dualism. Personally, I find Metzinger's and Blackmore's theories of consciousness pretty interesting. They are both (materalistic) monists and they are also long-term meditators, so they don't discard phenomenology like some of the other materialists.

Consciousness studies is still a pretty young science and much remains to be discovered but it doesn't look too good for non-materialist neuroscience.


-----
interesting books:

I was actually talking about subjectivity vs objectivity of experience not mind / body dualism.
I read a little of the metzinger and couldnt make a go of it, it assumed too much prior knowledge of his work. After googling him tho and reading about his theories, he sounds like any other materialist to me, someone who beleives the brain and its function compose the self. I know, he says that he is deconstructing the self, but all he has really done is just pin it to brain function the same way every other materialist does. If he is a long term meditator i would like to know what he has gleaned from his practice. It seems to me that a beleif in the self as brain and brain function would be a major stumbling block. I will investigate the blackmore link later, ty for the links :)

BTW that non materialist neuroscience link is a real hoot, ty for the laugh. I especially found this amusing:
The combination of computational modeling and non-invasive imaging of living brains has allowed researchers to begin describing how complex thought emerges from the firing patterns of neurons.
“The truth knocks on the door and you say, "Go away, I'm looking for the truth," and so it goes away. Puzzling.” ― Robert M. Pirsig
User avatar
Ben
Posts: 18438
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 12:49 am
Location: kanamaluka

Re: The mystery of consciousness: Sam Harris

Post by Ben »

Please return to topic. Off-topic posts will be removed.
“No lists of things to be done. The day providential to itself. The hour. There is no later. This is later. All things of grace and beauty such that one holds them to one's heart have a common provenance in pain. Their birth in grief and ashes.”
- Cormac McCarthy, The Road

Learn this from the waters:
in mountain clefts and chasms,
loud gush the streamlets,
but great rivers flow silently.
- Sutta Nipata 3.725

Compassionate Hands Foundation (Buddhist aid in Myanmar) • Buddhist Global ReliefUNHCR

e: [email protected]..
User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 4035
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: The mystery of consciousness: Sam Harris

Post by Alex123 »

m0rl0ck wrote:What harris is missing is that consciousness didnt emerge from anything. Consciousness is a fundemental property of the universe, like space, matter, energy etc.
Why is it when one affects the brain, the consciousness is affected? If one drinks alcohol or takes drugs, the consciousness and perhaps even behavior will alter.

If one damages one part of the brain, one kind of conscious function alters. If one damages another part of the brain, another kind of conscious function alters.

So there does seem to be requirement of properly functioning physical brain for consciousness.
User avatar
m0rl0ck
Posts: 1193
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 10:51 am

Re: The mystery of consciousness: Sam Harris

Post by m0rl0ck »

Alex123 wrote:
m0rl0ck wrote:What harris is missing is that consciousness didnt emerge from anything. Consciousness is a fundemental property of the universe, like space, matter, energy etc.
Why is it when one affects the brain, the consciousness is affected? If one drinks alcohol or takes drugs, the consciousness and perhaps even behavior will alter.

If one damages one part of the brain, one kind of conscious function alters. If one damages another part of the brain, another kind of conscious function alters.

So there does seem to be requirement of properly functioning physical brain for consciousness.
For fear of being off topic, ill respond via pm, check your in box :)
“The truth knocks on the door and you say, "Go away, I'm looking for the truth," and so it goes away. Puzzling.” ― Robert M. Pirsig
User avatar
BubbaBuddhist
Posts: 640
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 5:55 am
Location: Knoxville, Tennessee
Contact:

Re: The mystery of consciousness: Sam Harris

Post by BubbaBuddhist »

I'll take a crack at it. :tongue: Only the expression of consciousness is affected by damage to the machine, ie; the brain. Consciousness itself--the quality of awareness--remains. Until it doesn't and then the person is declared dead.

M4
Author of Redneck Buddhism: or Will You Reincarnate as Your Own Cousin?
User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 4035
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: The mystery of consciousness: Sam Harris

Post by Alex123 »

Metta-4 wrote:I'll take a crack at it. :tongue: Only the expression of consciousness is affected by damage to the machine, ie; the brain.
If brain is destroyed, and consciousness cannot express itself in any way, then how can consciousness really exist other than a property of the neuron activity of the brain? What is the point in consciousness that depends in every way on brain's function? It is like positing a Self that expresses itself through 5 aggregates, where impermanence of the aggregates supposedly doesn't affect that Self.

Why is it that not just expression, but consciousness itself, is affected when the brain is affected (ex: drugs, alcohol, oxygen deprivation, stroke, brain damage, etc). It is not that one wants to say or do something but physically can't get it out, the innermost consciousness is different. Even behavior and emotions can be changed if certain parts of the brain are damaged.


"Ultimately, everything we experience is a product of our cells and their circuitry." - p. 172
My Stroke of Insight: A Brain Scientist's Personal Journey by Jill Bolte Taylor
chownah
Posts: 9336
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: The mystery of consciousness: Sam Harris

Post by chownah »

It seems that this sort of discussion dwells mostly on experiences of other people......we have seen or heard of people with damaged or diseasesed brain tissue and have seen or heard of how their behavior changed and then we have jumped to the conclusion that we know something about their consciousness. I am not trying to exactly negate this sort of concept or procedure but I do want to point out that it seems to be an indulging in a doctrine of self.....which as you probably know the Buddha suggests that we avoid. I think that the Buddha taught that if we want to know about consciousness then the way to do it is to calm the mind and then experience conscousness first hand...........speculating on the consciousness of other "selves" will probably not in and of itself lead to the kind of knowledge which the Buddha urges us to pursue......I guess...........
chownah
User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 4035
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: The mystery of consciousness: Sam Harris

Post by Alex123 »

chownah wrote:It seems that this sort of discussion dwells mostly on experiences of other people.....
Did you ever drink? How did alcohol affect your consciousness? Was you ever under general anasthesia? How can physical intervention stop all consciousness?

Same people have also tried drugs (not me), but I suspect from hearing accounts of others, that it does affect perception, especially drugs like LSD.
chownah wrote: I am not trying to exactly negate this sort of concept or procedure but I do want to point out that it seems to be an indulging in a doctrine of self.....
Only as to negate the idea of Self. BTW, perception of self is tied to certain area of the brain... So according to neuroscience it is an illusion.

Most modern philosophers who know some discoveries of neuroscience deny the existence of Self. Feeling of Self is just a certain function of the brain.
Dennett, C. and Hofstadter, D.R. (1981). The Mind's I. Bantam Books. ISBN 0-553-01412-9.
chownah
Posts: 9336
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: The mystery of consciousness: Sam Harris

Post by chownah »

Alex123,
Good post.
In my previous post the main point I wanted to make was:
" I think that the Buddha taught that if we want to know about consciousness then the way to do it is to calm the mind and then experience conscousness first hand.." Do you think that this is a appropriate description of what the Buddha taught?
chownah
User avatar
Ben
Posts: 18438
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 12:49 am
Location: kanamaluka

Re: The mystery of consciousness: Sam Harris

Post by Ben »

Hi Chownah,

I posted the article from Sam Harris and articles like this by Harris and others because I think that being aware of developments in consciousness research and neuroscience has the potential to offer insights. Insights not just into how the brain works or developments in the field, but also to complement, and at times challenge, our own understanding. If you havent already done so I recommend you click on the links i provided in the opening post and read what he has got to say.
kind regards,

Ben
“No lists of things to be done. The day providential to itself. The hour. There is no later. This is later. All things of grace and beauty such that one holds them to one's heart have a common provenance in pain. Their birth in grief and ashes.”
- Cormac McCarthy, The Road

Learn this from the waters:
in mountain clefts and chasms,
loud gush the streamlets,
but great rivers flow silently.
- Sutta Nipata 3.725

Compassionate Hands Foundation (Buddhist aid in Myanmar) • Buddhist Global ReliefUNHCR

e: [email protected]..
User avatar
manas
Posts: 2678
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2010 3:04 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: The mystery of consciousness: Sam Harris

Post by manas »

Hi all,
a physicist by the name of Peter Russel has this fascinating series of youtube vids about what he calls, "the primacy of consciousness". Despite there being a few words like 'self and 'god' etc that many will object to, it is still quite a ride, as Russel quite convincingly (imo) proves that the current meta-paradigm of Western Culture - that consciousness somehow could arise out of inert matter - is incorrect. I encourage even just a viewing of the first vid, it's an eye-opener).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... pfKuUxa8fM" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

:namaste:
To the Buddha-refuge i go; to the Dhamma-refuge i go; to the Sangha-refuge i go.
chownah
Posts: 9336
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: The mystery of consciousness: Sam Harris

Post by chownah »

Ben wrote:Hi Chownah,

I posted the article from Sam Harris and articles like this by Harris and others because I think that being aware of developments in consciousness research and neuroscience has the potential to offer insights. Insights not just into how the brain works or developments in the field, but also to complement, and at times challenge, our own understanding. If you havent already done so I recommend you click on the links i provided in the opening post and read what he has got to say.
kind regards,

Ben
Ben,
I agree completely with your reasons for offering these articles here. In fact I agree so completely that I used two key ideas from the two articles (one from each) as the basis for my recent chain of posts here....these ideas as taken directly from the articles are:

1. "Behavior and verbal report are fully separable from the fact of consciousness:"

2. "Many truths about ourselves will be discovered in consciousness directly, or not discovered at all."

Quote #1 is the basis for my idea that "It seems that this sort of discussion dwells mostly on experiences of other people......we have seen or heard of people with damaged or diseasesed brain tissue and have seen or heard of how their behavior changed and then we have jumped to the conclusion that we know something about their consciousness."....what I was trying to say was that behavior and verbal report from other people is fully seperable from the fact of their consciousness......this is not exactly the meaning that Harris is developing but it is one that I think is implicit in what he wrote.
Quote #2 is the basis for my idea, "I think that the Buddha taught that if we want to know about consciousness then the way to do it is to calm the mind and then experience conscousness first hand..........."....while Harris does not spell this out explicitly I think that what I said has nearly exactly the same meaning except that I realized his statements explicitly in relation to the Buddha's teachings....

At least I think so........
chownah
User avatar
Ben
Posts: 18438
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 12:49 am
Location: kanamaluka

Re: The mystery of consciousness: Sam Harris

Post by Ben »

Hi Manasikara,
manasikara wrote:Hi all,
a physicist by the name of Peter Russel has this fascinating series of youtube vids about what he calls, "the primacy of consciousness". Despite there being a few words like 'self and 'god' etc that many will object to, it is still quite a ride, as Russel quite convincingly (imo) proves that the current meta-paradigm of Western Culture - that consciousness somehow could arise out of inert matter - is incorrect. I encourage even just a viewing of the first vid, it's an eye-opener).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... pfKuUxa8fM" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

:namaste:
How does it relate to Sam Harris' views as expressed in the two blog posts in the opening post?
kind regards,

Ben
“No lists of things to be done. The day providential to itself. The hour. There is no later. This is later. All things of grace and beauty such that one holds them to one's heart have a common provenance in pain. Their birth in grief and ashes.”
- Cormac McCarthy, The Road

Learn this from the waters:
in mountain clefts and chasms,
loud gush the streamlets,
but great rivers flow silently.
- Sutta Nipata 3.725

Compassionate Hands Foundation (Buddhist aid in Myanmar) • Buddhist Global ReliefUNHCR

e: [email protected]..
User avatar
manas
Posts: 2678
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2010 3:04 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: The mystery of consciousness: Sam Harris

Post by manas »

Ben wrote:Hi Manasikara,
manasikara wrote:Hi all,
a physicist by the name of Peter Russel has this fascinating series of youtube vids about what he calls, "the primacy of consciousness"...
How does it relate to Sam Harris' views as expressed in the two blog posts in the opening post?
kind regards,

Ben
It discusses the same issue of 'the hard problem of consciousness', in that there is as yet no convincing scientific theory that explains why we should be having any conscious experience at all. Electrons, waves and particles are still just inert matter; the mind is something apart from this (I'm not suggesting that conciousness is 'self-existent' in any way, however! - just that Russel is correct in overturning the notion that it could arise from matter.) I'm sorry that I'm unable to give a more detailed analysis at present. I just put that link out there because i thought it added weight to, or expanded upon (?), the article you had posted (which I did read, and which is very informative).

:namaste:
To the Buddha-refuge i go; to the Dhamma-refuge i go; to the Sangha-refuge i go.
User avatar
BubbaBuddhist
Posts: 640
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 5:55 am
Location: Knoxville, Tennessee
Contact:

Re: The mystery of consciousness: Sam Harris

Post by BubbaBuddhist »

Alex123 wrote:
Metta-4 wrote:I'll take a crack at it. :tongue: Only the expression of consciousness is affected by damage to the machine, ie; the brain.
If brain is destroyed, and consciousness cannot express itself in any way, then how can consciousness really exist other than a property of the neuron activity of the brain? What is the point in consciousness that depends in every way on brain's function? It is like positing a Self that expresses itself through 5 aggregates, where impermanence of the aggregates supposedly doesn't affect that Self.

Why is it that not just expression, but consciousness itself, is affected when the brain is affected (ex: drugs, alcohol, oxygen deprivation, stroke, brain damage, etc). It is not that one wants to say or do something but physically can't get it out, the innermost consciousness is different. Even behavior and emotions can be changed if certain parts of the brain are damaged.


"Ultimately, everything we experience is a product of our cells and their circuitry." - p. 172
My Stroke of Insight: A Brain Scientist's Personal Journey by Jill Bolte Taylor
According to the reasoning, radio waves cannot exist without radios to express them. And if the radio is damaged so the signal is distorted, this must mean the broadcast itself is distorted. I don't agree with the conclusion that drugs affect consciousness itself; I still hold to my original assertion only the expression or experience is affected, the quality of awareness remains intact regardless of the object of that awareness. Nor have I ever posited a consciousness that depends in any way of brain functioning, Where the quality of awareness itself comes from I cannot say except that Buddhism teaches it's passed on from a previous sentient being, but concerning consciousness itself the teachings of Buddhism are clear: for experience to exist three things must exist: the sense object, the sense gate and the sense consciousness. In the case of sight, if the sense-gate (the eye) is damaged, then the experience of vision is affected. For example, I cannot read without glasses. Since Buddhism considers mind (mano) the sixth sense, if the sense-gate (the brain) is damaged, the sense-consciousness will be affected.

Buddhism and neuroscience are two different models of experiential reality with two different definitions of consciousness. If you want to debate neuroscience vs, Buddadhamma, I am not the person to do it. You'll have to find a neuroscientist.

M4
Author of Redneck Buddhism: or Will You Reincarnate as Your Own Cousin?
Post Reply