Luc Turpin

The question being asked does not come from me, but from the neuroscience field. The field has been trying to answer this question for decades by probing the brain with no clear answer as demonstrated in the Lieff post above. If someone is forcing a single monolithic oversimplified answer to a complex system level question it is not I, as I agree with you that there is no simple answer to this one..

The bias debate is unimportant here; what is important is that there appears to be no center for subjective experience.

1- agree 2- agree, but there was bias towards finding it, and this perspective comes from reading many neuroscience discussion-position papers. However, there was no cherry picking as it was not found and the search continues without abandonment.

I am not assuming this, but the neuroscience community has been trying for decades to locate it because it would greatly bolster the mind from brain hypothesis. On the contrary, I am assuming that there is none, which may be more in line with the mind through brain hypothesis whereby the brain is a transducer, not a creator of mind. I will be posting other parts of my argumentation militating for a different perspective of mind, and then, maybe, I will be on firmer ground to discuss matters further. Note: my purpose in all of this is to demonstrate that there are major flaws with our understanding of the mind-brain connection and that one possible avenue of reconciliation with data is mind through brain. I will also try and demonstrate that mind is not only confined to higher primates.

Why I find that there is something wrong with our understanding of the mind-brain connection! Part I After decades of scientific investigation and ongoing debate, no center has yet been found in the brain for subjective experience. Where the “I” resides in the machine remains elusive. Here is a summary by Jon Lieff based on years of peering through scientific papers: “Current science has no explanation for subjective experience”. “Recent findings show that for most mental events, almost the entire brain is part of wide circuits signaling in milliseconds. No modules have been found, including modules for awareness. In fact, integration of all regions seems to be more relevant than modules. As someone slips into coma and anesthesia, modules appear when people are definitely unconscious. When aware, more widespread integration appears”. “There has been no evidence of a center of the brain. Previous theories of what brain regions are necessary for consciousness did not pan out. An old disproven theory includes the frontal parietal region. Theories of gamma rays correlating with awareness are outmoded. But, the search continues in study of circuits, regions and brain waves. Perhaps brain waves in smaller regions may be relevant. One way to start researching is to find minimum regions or circuits of brain that allow perception of any type or action that appears to have a purpose”. “There are many brain regions that don’t directly contribute to experience of specific content. Damage to the large cerebellum doesn’t affect perception experiences much, if at all”. “Brainstem damage is devastating to all experience. It appears that brainstem and hypothalamus are background regions necessary for subjective experience, but not involved in awareness, the content or experience. Event subcortical regions that modulate content are not really necessary in sleep”. “Many regions determine emotional states, but aren’t the experience of an emotion. Basal ganglia damage decreases motivation and emotion. But even with extensive damage and some cognitive deficits, patients can be aware with subjective experience”. “Another region under the insula cortex has been studied for its relation to subjective experience. Several case reports of damage to this area have conflicting results and one had awareness and subjective experience”. “Thalamus integrates sensory data. Studies show lesions cause decreased motor ability and poor communication. They can cause coma or not and they have conflicting results about awareness. There doesn’t seem to be a direct correlation with the content of awareness”. “Studies of cortex regions are complex. Primary visual regions appear to be related to identification of visual stimuli, not its content. Higher regions co relate to the content not the stimulus”. “Studies show inconsistent results in the primary visual region (V1). Lesions in V1 produce unconscious awareness of vision called blindsight. They perform as if they see it but don’t have the experience of seeing it. Other lesions show that V1 is not sufficient for conscious perception of sights. Other primary sensory regions for touch and hearing have not had extensive research”. “Another theory is that frontal cortex is related to conscious perception and dorsal unconscious and with movements. But, research shows that both are necessary for visual subjective awareness. Findings about the frontal parietal cortex are inconsistent. Consciousness doesn’t need a frontal lobe. Even lobectomies don’t stop subjective experience. Other lesions in the frontal region leave subjective experience, while affecting particular cognitive abilities”. “Studies of loss of consciousness find the posterior medial cortex most correlated with awareness”. “Studies of posterior cortex of several types relate it to subjective experience of content. Some provide stimuli and see relations of expectations and performance. Sleep studies also point to this region. During dreaming, frontal activity is low compared to awake states. fMRI studies show activity in these regions that correlate with visual stimuli as well. Electrical stimulation of brain regions also shows triggering of specific experiences with posterior cortex. These include faces and wanting to move”. “Neuronal responses of scenes and people rapidly travel through many brain regions (in 100 milliseconds). This includes multiple parts of the cortex visual systems. It also includes more top down neurons related to perception. These complex feedback circuits appear to be necessary for subjective experience”. “There have been suggestions that particular large neurons (von Economo neurons) in cortex layer 5 are related to subjective experience. These neurons are also called spindle neurons. But, recent studies show that these may be more related to unconscious behavior. Thin tufted pyramidal cells in layer 5A and 6 are connected heavily to many cortical regions. Even more connected are supra granular pyramidal neurons, with many feedback connections. These neurons also have a unique spontaneous activity (called neuronal avalanches) that could relate to integration of experience content. In animals, this region is correlated with sensory awareness”. “For some time, gamma waves in visual cortex have been thought to be related to subjective awareness in vision. Waves were thought to bind details to an experience with synchronous oscillations in the gamma range. More recent studies show high frequency gamma waves more related to attention and middle range to whether the stimulus is seen or not. Gamma waves occur in NREM sleep, anesthesia, seizures and unconscious experience. This new data shows gamma waves are not necessary for visual experience and are not correlated with awareness”. “Evoked potentials are another way to study brain responses. Another possible marker of consciousness was thought to be a particular evoked potential. P3b occurs 300 milliseconds after a stimulus of sight or hearing. More recent data show some subjective content do not trigger it and sometimes it is triggered without content. Conscious patients with damaged brains don’t have it. 40% of coma patients have it. Findings are not at all consistent. Recently, another evoked potential has emerged as possibly related. This is 100 milliseconds after a stimulus and is in the same posterior cortex region as the other possible candidates. Another finding on EEG is also being studied. This is called activated or desynchronized EEG and occurs during attention. It consists of low voltage fast activity and deep sleep’s high voltage slow activity. Loss of consciousness occurs at the same time as thalamic switching from tonic to bursts of firing. Slow waves are related to cortex switching on and off up and down states. Those subcortical brain regions changes occur with decrease of activating systems. High amplitude slow waves are related to loss of consciousness. Changes in the waves occur in transition from coma to barely conscious and then awake causing delta to theta to alpha. But, it is not clear this reflects awareness. Slow waves can occur in conscious people in epilepsy. Previous studies have tried to correlate whole brain recordings to consciousness. But, local patterns may be more relevant. Sleep cortex can be activated while whole brain EEGs have only slow waves. Local activation in the parietal occipital region is related to visual dreams and then awakening. Recent EEG studies show that there are many possible local events in conscious people. There are fewer variations when unconscious. Also consciousness might involve more integrated states rather than different modules with various activities. “Most current approaches to finding places in the brain related to consciousness or awareness do not corroborate old theories of networks in the frontal parietal regions. Recent research is focused on activity in a much more narrow region near the overlap of the temporal-parietal-occipital regions. Some of these appear to be triggered by content of awareness—such as faces. The older larger circuits appear related to attention focused on particular areas, not simple awareness. In fact, most regions of the brain have something to do with awareness and consciousness, but this doesn’t qualify them as a location of consciousness”. “There is still no understanding of how subjective experience binds together all that is part of our daily experience of awareness. Most events in the brain involve large brain wide circuits traversed in milliseconds. A recent study implied meaning of words is not in a language center, but distributed throughout the entire brain. The same is true for memory, which appears to be very distributed. Some pre frontal regions are related to experiences of various types. Default mode circuits appear to be related to day dreaming and identity, not simple awareness. Other similar frontal regions have nothing directly to do with consciousness. With so much top-down effects in perception, it is not clear how much sensory regions contribute to simple awareness. Brainstem reticular formation and parts of the thalamus help create the necessary activation of circuits for awareness but are not awareness per se.No brain region simply reflects consciousness. Some regions are correlated with content of awareness. For now, this search will continue with no definition of consciousness or subjective experience. We are left with our every day experience”. Cerebral cortex & Deep Grey Matter https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3115284/#:~:text='%20The%20mind%20cannot%20be%20localised,grey%20matter%20form%20important%20components. Motor cortex - somato-cognitive action network, https://www.reuters.com/lifestyle/science/scientists-identify-mind-body-nexus-human-brain-2023-04-19/ White Matter https://medicalxpress.com/news/2023-10-scientists-powerful-brain-white.html Right and left parietal junction; posterior cingulate https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01768.x Cortical midline, mirror neuron system https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1878929314000048 Dorsomedial subsystem (at least for part of it) https://academic.oup.com/scan/article/15/1/63/5733878 Medial prefrontal cortex, posterior cingulate, bilateral temporoparietal junction, posterior superior temporal sulcus https://books.google.ca/books?hl=en&lr=&id=tCgTDgAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PA83&dq=location+of+mind+in+brain&ots=QvqpCYGDjs&sig=XVLpTURu2jikwB9Gs5HIN9au9ys#v=onepage&q=location%20of%20mind%20in%20brain&f=false Anatomical regions far apart from one another https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6871093/ Its in multiple areas of the brain https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-94-011-4996-9_26 Specialized and domain general structure working in tandem https://researchoutreach.org/articles/explaining-mind-works-new-theory/ No brain boundaries between thinking, feeling, deciding, etc. https://www.quantamagazine.org/mental-phenomena-dont-map-into-the-brain-as-expected-20210824/ Its not even in the brain https://qz.com/866352/scientists-say-your-mind-isnt-confined-to-your-brain-or-even-your-body

premonitions may be possible under mind through brain, but not mind from brain. LSD experiments seem to show mind through brain processes. I will try and find evidence for premonitions when I get back home, but agree that it is scarce. As for LSD experiments and the world war II studies, they are not on the net, but I will try and get into contact with the authors.

Not saying premonitions are real, but just adding information to ensure that we have, well, an informed discussion about it. I is your prerogative to ignore me. Sorry you feel that way, but understand because I am bringing up controversial themes that science has dismissed to readily out of hand. Premonitions is one of them, not disproved, and certainly not proven. Personally, I do not think that it exists, but I will have to accept it if there is an over abundance of proof. I was trying to make a point by mentioning names only. LSD experimentation seems to open the brain to a broader perspective of reality, which seems to favour mind through brain rather than mind from brain. We are all learning from one another.

I do not need Sheldrake’s morphic resonance; just mind through, which has not yet been completely investigated So you had heard about the world war II study that I mentioned? How about Pietsch and the hologramic mind and Penfield’s work, and Persinger’s? Or how about Stanislov Groof’s thirty years of work analyzing LSD experiments. May I be offered a bit of healthy scepticism. I do think that saying that it’s “garbage” is not discussion conducive Life and death circumstances seem to be expressed differently by the brain than other life circumstances. That they are real or not, NDE’s have peculiarities that are different from everyday experiences

You jump to conclusion too fast and put everything in the same junkpile. I am not playing a “ Heads I. win tail you lose” game. I am only trying to present things that might not be covered here in this forum. I did claim, but also stated that it did not prove anything. You claim that these phenomena have been studied and I claim they have not. Finally, this was not an attack on you, but a mere mention of something that might have been missed in the premonition discussion The study that I looked at a while ago had hundreds if not thousands of cases all with same outcome. What it did not include were those having a premonition without outcome and no premonition with outcome, which makes the study rather inconclusive. I would have liked for this line of investigation to be pursued, but have no knowledge if it occurred or not Agree, may be conformation bias at play

There are multiple documented cases during world war II of mothers having premonitions over the death of their son or daughter. The pattern is usually the following: a strong emotional bond between mother and child, mother not necessarily thinking about their son or daughter, but suddenly feeling a pit in the stomach then knowing with certainty that he/she had passed away. Some say they heard in their heads their sons daughter cry out for help. The death was usually confirmed later with actual time of death coinciding with the moment of the premonition moment. This is not proof of anything, but, once again, should not be dispelled without investigation.

Good one 😊😊

Having success is not my intention; presenting information that is overlooked is what I am here for What were Steve Jobs last words before he died?…….oh wow, oh wow, oh wow!

Explanation much appreciated!

1- I took note of this 2- eager to learn, but hardheaded as you might have noticed. In my field of work I am known as the guy that never let’s go of the bone 3- enjoy our exchanges also, but cannot promise you anything.😇

I found your post even more interesting than mine This is what caught my attention: This finding challenges existing models," he said, "suggesting there exist either vastly extended dark matter halos or that we need to fundamentally reevaluate our understanding of gravitational theory." Anything interesting revolving around this?

MOND vs. dark matter: Research suggests that rotation curves of galaxies stay flat indefinitely June 17 2024 The primary technique Mistele used in his research, gravitational lensing, is a phenomenon predicted by Einstein’s theory of general relativity. As part of the research, Mistele plotted out what’s called Tully–Fisher relation on a chart to highlight the empirical relationship between the visible mass of a galaxy and its rotation speed. In a discovery that challenges the conventional understanding of cosmology, scientists at Case Western Reserve University have unearthed new evidence that could reshape our perception of the cosmos. Tobias Mistele, a post-doctoral scholar in the Department of Astronomy at Case Western Reserve's College of Arts and Sciences, pioneered a revolutionary technique using "gravitational lensing" to delve into the enigmatic realm of dark matter. He found that the rotation curves of galaxies remain flat for millions of light years with no end in sight. The work has been published on the pre-print server arXiv. Scientists have previously believed that the rotation curves of galaxies must decline the farther out you peer into space. Traditionally, the behavior of stars within galaxies has puzzled astronomers. According to Newtonian gravity, stars on the outer edges should be slower due to diminished gravitational pull. This was not observed, leading to the inference of dark matter. But even dark matter halos should come to an end, so rotation curves should not remain flat indefinitely. Mistele's analysis defies this expectation, providing a startling revelation: the influence of what we call dark matter extends far beyond previous estimates, stretching at least a million light-years from the galactic center. Such a long range effect may indicate that dark matter—as we understand it—might not exist at all. "This finding challenges existing models," he said, "suggesting there exist either vastly extended dark matter halos or that we need to fundamentally reevaluate our understanding of gravitational theory." Stacy McGaugh, professor and director of the Department of Astronomy in the College of Arts and Sciences, said Mistele's findings, slated for publication in the Astrophysical Journal Letters, push traditional boundaries. "The implications of this discovery are profound," McGaugh said. "It not only could redefine our understanding of dark matter, but also beckons us to explore alternative theories of gravity, challenging the very fabric of modern astrophysics." Turning Einstein's theory on its head The primary technique Mistele used in his research, gravitational lensing, is a phenomenon predicted by Einstein's theory of general relativity. Essentially, it occurs when a massive object, like a galaxy cluster or even a single massive star, bends the path of light coming from a distant source. This bending of light happens because the mass of the object warps the fabric of spacetime around it. This bending of light by galaxies persists over much larger scales than expected. As part of the research, Mistele plotted out what's called Tully–Fisher relation on a chart to highlight the empirical relationship between the visible mass of a galaxy and its rotation speed. "We knew this relationship existed," Mistele said. "But it wasn't obvious that the relationship would hold the farther you go out. How far does this behavior persist? That's the question, because it can't persist forever." Mistele said his discovery underscores the necessity for further exploration and collaboration within the scientific community—and the possible analysis of other data. McGaugh noted the Herculean—yet, so far, unsuccessful—efforts in the international particle physics community to detect and identify dark matter particles. "Either dark matter halos are much bigger than we expected, or the whole paradigm is wrong," McGaugh said. "The theory that predicted this behavior in advance is the modified gravity theory MOND hypothesized by Moti Milgrom as an alternative to dark matter in 1983. So, the obvious and inevitably controversial interpretation of this result is that dark matter is a chimera; perhaps the evidence for it is pointing to some new theory of gravity beyond what Einstein taught us." More information: Tobias Mistele et al, Indefinitely Flat Circular Velocities and the Baryonic Tully-Fisher Relation from Weak Lensing. arXiv (2024). arxiv.org/abs/2406.09685 Provided by Case Western Reserve University Citation: MOND vs. dark matter: Research suggests that rotation curves of galaxies stay flat indefinitely (2024, June 17) retrieved 18 June 2024 from https://phys.org/news/2024-06-mond- dark-rotation-galaxies-stay.html https://phys.org/news/2024-06-mond-dark-rotation-galaxies-stay.pdf

1- but most often, science pays little attention to philosophy 2- my foolish mindset seems to still be of interest to some

1 to 3- the author’s point is that it was a “secular” not unsuccessful 4- he introduces mind as promoting a need to move towards subjectivity as I now do (see charonY post above); I reiterate, mind will not change the fundamental aspect of natural sciences, but the purpose of it all. Success would be in understanding mind, and possibly our role in the universe if such is the case 5- it does illuminate as it is more precise and detailed than what I had provided before; it helps’ explain my position.

1- your observation is correct. While stating that I wanted to reduce bias, especially materialist bias, I indicated that removing all forms of subjectivity was the way forward in dealing with the bias issue. This was an incorrect statement on my part. I should have said “controlling” this form of subjective thinking instead of “eliminating” all forms of subjective thinking. I also incorrectly stated that philosophy should play a limited role In science, but I am also backing away from this statement as this may very well be the discipline that helps us navigate through subjective thinking with rigour and rationality 2-agree also that it is mostly generalities, but nonetheless, it actually reflects my mindset on the subject matter. 3- If we find it important to study the subjective nature of reality, then science through philosophy will have to find a way of doing, and an improved way of doing so than the tools in use in other sciences

Fron “Science of the Subjective” by R.G. Jahn, B.J. Dunne, which captures more eloquently than I cloud, the need to amalgamate, once again, the subjective and objective parts of science. Over the greater portion of its long scholarly history, the particular form of human observation, reasoning, and technical deployment we properly term “science” has relied at least as much on subjective experience and inspiration as it has on objective experiments and theories. Only over the past few centuries has subjectivity been progressively excluded from the practice of science, leaving an essentially secular analytical paradigm. Quite recently, however, a compounding constellation of newly inexplicable physical evidence, coupled with a growing scholarly interest in the nature and capability of human consciousness, are beginning to suggest that this sterilization of science may have been excessive and could ultimately limit its epistemological reach and cultural relevance. In particular, an array of demonstrable consciousness-related anomalous physical phenomena, a persistent pattern of biological and medical anomalies, systematic studies of mind/brain relationships and the mechanics of human creativity, and a burgeoning catalogue of human factors effects within contemporary information processing technologies, all display empirical correlations with subjective aspects that greatly complicate, and in many cases preclude, their comprehension on strictly objective grounds. However, any disciplined re-admission of subjective elements into rigorous scientific methodology will hinge on the precision with which they can be defined, measured, and represented, and on the resilience of established scientific techniques to their inclusion. For example, any neo-subjective science, while retaining the logical rigor, empirical/theoretical dialogue, and cultural purpose of its rigidly objective predecessor, would have the following requirements: acknowledgment of a proactive role for human consciousness; more explicit and profound use of interdisciplinary metaphors; more generous interpretations of measurability, replicability, and resonance; a reduction of ontological aspirations; and an overarching teleological causality. Most importantly, the subjective and objective aspects of this holistic science would have to stand in mutually respectful and constructive complementarity to one another if the composite discipline were to fulfill itself and its role in society.

1- science is piercing the mysteries of ndes (see below) 2- the article does not help my cause, but the author shares my opinion that it will change things in natural sciences. My contention is that it will not change the fundamental, but the the purpose behind these science disciplines The Lancet, Dissociation in people who have near death experience: out of their bodies or out of their minds? By Bruce Greyson Dr Bruce Greyson, MD Background Some people who come close to death report having experiences in which they transcend the boundaries of the ego and the confines of time and space. Such neardeath experiences (NDEs) share some features with the phenomenon of dissociation, in which a person's self identity becomes detached from bodily sensation. This study explored the frequency of dissociative symptoms in people who had come close to death. Methods 96 individuals who had had self-reported NDEs, and 38 individuals who had come close to death but who had not had NDEs completed a mailed questionnaire that included a measure of “depth” of near-death experience (the NDE scale) and a measure of dissociative symptoms (the Dissociative Experiences Scale). Median scores in the two groups were compared with Mann-Whitney U tests. The association between depth of NDE and dissociative symptoms was tested by Spearman's rank-order correlation between scores on the NDE scale and the dissociative experiences scale. Findings People who reported NDEs also reported significantly more dissociative symptoms than did the comparison group. Among those who reported NDEs, the depth of the experience was positively correlated with dissociative symptoms, although the level of symptoms was substantially lower than that of patients with pathological dissociative disorders. Interpretation The pattern of dissociative symptoms reported by people who have had NDEs is consistent with a non-pathological dissociative response to stress, and not with a psychiatric disorder. A greater understanding of the mechanism of dissociation may shed further light on near-death and other mystical or transcendental experiences. AWARE—AWAreness during REsuscitation—A prospective study☆ Author links open overlay panelSam Parnia a, Ken Spearpoint b, Gabriele de Vos c, Peter Fenwick d, Diana Goldberg a, Jie Yang a, Jiawen Zhu a, Katie Baker d, Hayley Killingback e, Paula McLean f, Melanie Wood f, A. Maziar Zafari g, Neal Dickert g, Roland Beisteiner h, Fritz Sterz h, Michael Berger h, Celia Warlow i, Siobhan Bullock i, Salli Lovett j, Russell Metcalfe Smith McPara k…Elinor R. Schoenfeld a Show more Add to Mendeley Share Cite https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2014.09.004Get rights and content Abstract Background Cardiac arrest (CA) survivors experience cognitive deficitsincluding post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). It is unclear whether these are related to cognitive/mental experiences and awareness during CPR. Despite anecdotal reports the broad range of cognitive/mental experiences and awareness associated with CPR has not been systematically studied. Methods The incidence and validity of awareness together with the range, characteristics and themes relating to memories/cognitive processes during CA was investigated through a 4 year multi-center observational study using a three stage quantitative and qualitative interview system. The feasibility of objectively testing the accuracy of claims of visual and auditory awareness was examined using specific tests. The outcome measures were (1) awareness/memories during CA and (2) objective verification of claims of awareness using specific tests. Results Among 2060 CA events, 140 survivors completed stage 1 interviews, while 101 of 140 patients completed stage 2 interviews. 46% had memories with 7 major cognitive themes: fear; animals/plants; bright light; violence/persecution; deja-vu; family; recalling events post-CA and 9% had NDEs, while 2% described awareness with explicit recall of ‘seeing’ and ‘hearing’ actual events related to their resuscitation. One had a verifiable period of conscious awareness during which time cerebral function was not expected. Conclusions CA survivors commonly experience a broad range of cognitive themes, with 2% exhibiting full awareness. This supports other recent studies that have indicated consciousness may be present despite clinically undetectable consciousness. This together with fearful experiences may contribute to PTSD and other cognitive deficits post CA.

Difficult, but necessary. Natural sciences are more objective than social sciences. Psychology-psychiatry, medical sciences and some aspects of neurosciences have been improving and integrating more successfully the subjective nature of their disciplines. Answers obtained are less definitive than in the natural sciences, but getting more precise. Again, difficult, but necessary. In an article titled Materialism matters: The role of philosophy in science, Kieran Schlegel-O’Brien agrees wth me that”Without materialism, physics, chemistry, and biology as we know it wouldn’t exist.”

We do not know, at this time, the subjective explanation. We need to find that out. When looking at all of the hard and circumstantial evidence, most of the scientific community agree that a satisfactory explanation has been found

1- A valid explanation of how mind works and how life comes from matter 2- I do not indict science on the objective and the measurable, I indict science for establishing a worldview without mention of the subjective. We cannot leave mind and life without a satisfactory explanation. Dualism whereby the objective can be investigated in accordance with the scientific process and find another process for the subjective side and then establish a worldview that really fit reality. We will have to have to reconsile both at one point

Supernaturalism may or may not be required to explain mind and the living. One thing is certain though, science has not satisfactorily explained these two things through mechanistic-materialism lenses. That mind emerges from matter is not a satisfying answer. It’s almost like saying “because I say so”.