Dreaming....just for interest's sake

[Greg Boyles]

Does anyone else in here believe, as questionposter does, that you are conscious while you are dreaming or that consciousness does not cease when you sleep or pass out?

 

 

Or that individual cells or neurones are conscious and self aware?

[PhDwannabe]

Does anyone else in here believe, as questionposter does, that you are conscious while you are dreaming or that consciousness does not cease when you sleep or pass out?

No serious scientist in the area is going to offer you some kind of bright dividing line of consciousness. They might try to define it, but not dichotomously. There are many levels of consciousness, along the lines of both quantitative and even qualitative difference. I was conscious a few minutes ago, recalling my sessions from Tuesday and writing clinical notes. I was conscious two hours ago, driving to work, but perhaps slightly less so. I was conscious an hour before that, dragging myself into the shower, but somewhat less so. I was conscious fifteen minutes before that, in a half-awake state between my first alarm and second alarm, but substantially less so. To be honest, you could make an argument that I'm more conscious during a dream state--as it is the sleep stage nearest in most senses to wakefulness--than I am when I'm in deep, non-dreaming sleep. Are we conscious while dreaming? It's just a false question that betrays some ignorance of the area. It's like arguing about whether a person is "old when they turn 21."

 

Or that individual cells or neurones are conscious and self aware?

This, on the other hand, needs no nuanced discussion, as it's pretty much just patently insane.

[questionposter]

Does anyone else in here believe, as questionposter does, that you are conscious while you are dreaming or that consciousness does not cease when you sleep or pass out?

 

 

Or that individual cells or neurones are conscious and self aware?

 

As it was also pointed out in that same topic, biologists have no clear line between consciousness and no consciousness and it can't be confirmed or denied right now.

However, I fail to see how that relates to being consciously aware at all while dreaming. In my experience I can chose where a direction of a dream is going if I summon the energy to do so and remember my thoughts in it in the same way I can remember my thoughts in reality, as well as being able to use selective memory of reality while in a dream. The only way I can think for this to happen is if consciousness is always there but not always active, in which case it's not the loose, so called "scientific" definition which someone says the scientific community actually agrees on that consciousness is merely electrical pulses being processed between neurons, something like consciousness has to be more complex than that. But, just as we can refine our model of an atom, perhaps there just needs to be a highly refined model of that.

Edited October 20, 2011 by questionposter

[Greg Boyles]

No serious scientist in the area is going to offer you some kind of bright dividing line of consciousness. They might try to define it, but not dichotomously. There are many levels of consciousness, along the lines of both quantitative and even qualitative difference. I was conscious a few minutes ago, recalling my sessions from Tuesday and writing clinical notes. I was conscious two hours ago, driving to work, but perhaps slightly less so. I was conscious an hour before that, dragging myself into the shower, but somewhat less so. I was conscious fifteen minutes before that, in a half-awake state between my first alarm and second alarm, but substantially less so. To be honest, you could make an argument that I'm more conscious during a dream state--as it is the sleep stage nearest in most senses to wakefulness--than I am when I'm in deep, non-dreaming sleep. Are we conscious while dreaming? It's just a false question that betrays some ignorance of the area. It's like arguing about whether a person is "old when they turn 21."

 

 

This, on the other hand, needs no nuanced discussion, as it's pretty much just patently insane.

 

In you own thread you stated emphatically that you are conscious while you dream because you can remember them and that conscious does not cease when you sleep......remember your response to my tv analogy?????

 

So who is insane here????

 

I have no doubt that any qualified and publishing medical scientist will tell you, despite not having an absolutely precise definition of consciousness, that consciousness is pretty close to being like a light switch - it is either on or it is off.

 

http://www.dream-yoga.org/getting-started/degrees-of-consciousness

 

Oooohhhhhh!

 

I suspect I can see where your non-scientific notions about consciousness are coming from - in this yoga website they talk about degrees of consciousness and dreaming yada yada yada.

 

 

You wouldn't by any chance be practising yoga would you?

 

 

 

If so then I have a little wisdom that you would do well to consider - yoga, like astrology etc, is not science.

 

 

 

If you wish to discuss psuedoscientific disciplines like yoga then you should confine it to the appropriate 'speculations' thread.

 

 

 

This is a science thread only evidence backed science should be discussed in here and degrees of consciousness is not backed by the current dcientific evidence.

[PhDwannabe]

In you own thread you stated emphatically that you are conscious while you dream because you can remember them and that conscious does not cease when you sleep......remember your response to my tv analogy?????

I might be forgetting something, but I think you might be thinking of someone else. Are you talking about where I rejected your idea that consciousness is defined entirely by the ability to respond? I don't recall "stating emphatically" that you're conscious while you dream because you can remember dreams.

 

I have no doubt that any qualified and publishing medical scientist will tell you, despite not having an absolutely precise definition of consciousness, that consciousness is pretty close to being like a light switch - it is either on or it is off.

Then why do medical professionals show constant interest in rigorously and reliably assessing level of consciousness, with the understanding that it lies on a continuum? Do you realize how massively self-evident this thing you're denying is?

 

http://www.dream-yog...f-consciousness

 

Oooohhhhhh!

 

I suspect I can see where your non-scientific notions about consciousness are coming from - in this yoga website they talk about degrees of consciousness and dreaming yada yada yada.

 

 

You wouldn't by any chance be practising yoga would you?

Have you actually just found a random yoga/weird new-agey website and convinced yourself that I must've gotten my ideas from there? Does that actually strike you as somewhat plausible?

 

No, actually, I don't practice yoga. I don't generally have a problem with those who do, since it seems to me to be largely harmless glorified stretching. I do have a problem with pseudoscientific medical/"spiritual" beliefs that often seem to accompany it, which have essentially nothing to do with what I'm talking about in terms of the measurement of degrees of a conscious state, which is a concept that most practitioners of scientific medicine would find more or less self-evident. I'm a committed apologist for Western science and Western medicine. If what I'm saying looks any different to you, all I can say is that you appear to be confused about the positions that I'm actually advocating, or perhaps I've failed in making them adequately clear. To the extent that it may be the latter, I offer my regrets.

 

If so then I have a little wisdom that you would do well to consider - yoga, like astrology etc, is not science.

Again, I'm a little confused by your suddenly bringing up yoga and astrology, two things I don't do--indeed make fun of on a regular basis--and have no relation to anything I've said so far about levels of consciousness.

 

This is a science thread only evidence backed science should be discussed in here and degrees of consciousness is not backed by the current dcientific evidence.

It would appear, rather, that it is.

Edited October 20, 2011 by PhDwannabe

[Greg Boyles]

I might be forgetting something, but I think you might be thinking of someone else. Are you talking about where I rejected your idea that consciousness is defined entirely by the ability to respond? I don't recall "stating emphatically" that you're conscious while you dream because you can remember dreams.

 

No, I am not referring to that. I noted your valid point and modified my approach.

 

I am not to sure what the rest of your post is about, but I am specifically responding to questionposter and his/her notions of degrees of consciousness and conscious dreaming.

 

 

 

The degrees of consciousness that the scientific community might discuss is related to the level of complexity of the CNS among various species. But short of brain damage or disease a single individual of any given species cannot vary the level of consciousness its experiences.

 

 

http://www.grandin.c...sciousness.html

 

Conclusions

As brains become more complex the complexity of consciousness increases. Maybe in some animals only one sense is fully conscious. It may be easier to define consciousness by saying what it is not. It is not a reflex, it is not simple conditioning, and it is not a hard wired instinct which works like a computer program. Conscious behavior is flexible. Conscious behavior allows animals to make choices between different options. It is difficult for some people to imagine a consciousness that is different from themselves. Language based thinkers often have difficulty imagining that animals can think. They can not imagine thinking without words. Collin Allen in the philosophy department at Texas A & M University states that many scientists can accept the idea that animals have internal representations of memories and events. Some people think animals are not conscious because they do not have beliefs and desires like humans. I do not have some of the higher abstract consciousness most people have, so I have to define "belief" and "desire." If I say I desire chocolate cake I immediately see a slice of cake. In fact I see it at a particular cafe'. Desire has no abstract meaning. I just see pictures of things I would want such as an ice cream cone. I use the word belief to describe things where there is a high probability that something may be true, but I am not 100% sure.

 

There are four basic levels of consciousness:

1. Consciousness within one sense
2. Consciousness where all the sensory systems are integrated.
3. Consciousness where all the sensory systems are integrated with emotions.
4. Consciousness where sensory systems and emotions are integrated and thoughts are in symbolic language.

The second level of consciousness is where I am at. My thoughts are not linked with emotions. I think a hierarchy of consciousness is reasonable because damage to the nervous system will damage consciousness. The different brain subsystems no longer work together when the brain is damaged.

 

 

 

This is a science thread only evidence backed science should be discussed in here and degrees of consciousness is not backed by the current scientific evidence. => me

It would appear, rather, that it is. => phwannabe

 

We are taling about levels of consciousness within one individual here, not comparing levels of consciousness between brain damaged individuals and normal individuals or between other species and humans.

Edited October 20, 2011 by Greg Boyles

[PhDwannabe]

We are taling about levels of consciousness within one individual here, not comparing levels of consciousness between brain damaged individuals and normal individuals or between other species and humans.

That sentence isn't even consistent. A within-subjects comparison can be made for a brain damaged individual, since their level of consciousness would be expected to change over time. But I'm not talking about brain damaged individuals exclusively, and I'm not talking about comparative psychology (e.g., animals). Greg, I'm going to repeat this, one more time: no one... no one in cognitive science, brain science, medicine, physiology... no one who does serious research or has serious understanding of any of those areas would deny, unqualified, the concept of "levels of consciousness." Seriously, the fact that conscious awareness lies on a continuum has to be one of the most obvious, self-evident things I can think of. To say that it's some perfectly dichotomous light switch is like saying that a bladder is either completely full or completely empty. It's patently not. You don't even need any kind of scientific understanding to get this; it's perfectly accessible to ordinary phenomenological introspection. I'm having trouble believing that this isn't some kind of joke.

[Greg Boyles]

That sentence isn't even consistent. A within-subjects comparison can be made for a brain damaged individual, since their level of consciousness would be expected to change over time. But I'm not talking about brain damaged individuals exclusively, and I'm not talking about comparative psychology (e.g., animals). Greg, I'm going to repeat this, one more time: no one... no one in cognitive science, brain science, medicine, physiology... no one who does serious research or has serious understanding of any of those areas would deny, unqualified, the concept of "levels of consciousness." Seriously, the fact that conscious awareness lies on a continuum has to be one of the most obvious, self-evident things I can think of. To say that it's some perfectly dichotomous light switch is like saying that a bladder is either completely full or completely empty. It's patently not. You don't even need any kind of scientific understanding to get this; it's perfectly accessible to ordinary phenomenological introspection. I'm having trouble believing that this isn't some kind of joke.

My sentence is entirely consistent but obviously you have misunderstood it.

 

You will receive no opposition from me about this idea that different animal species experience different levels of consciousness commensurate with the complexity of their CNS. And I have no doubt that there is an abundance of scientific evidence to back it.

 

But I am quite specifically criticising questionposter's yoga/mystic like notions of consciousness. That consciousness does not switch off when you sleep or pass out and that you are conscious when you dream. This is just psuedoscientific nonsense.

Edited October 20, 2011 by Greg Boyles

[PhDwannabe]

You will receive no opposition from me about this idea that different animal species experience different levels of consciousness commensurate with the complexity of their CNS.

Saying that you'll not oppose me in that suggests that you think I was claiming that. That has nothing to do with what I was claiming. Incidentally (although this is a completely separate issue), I don't believe nonhuman animals are consciously aware at all. But again, that's irrelevant, because--broken record here--that's not what I was saying at all. Please tell me where I said that. You are inventing claims. But I'm pleased that you'll not oppose me on the things which I have not said and do not believe. It saves time.

 

But I am quite specifically criticising questionposter's yoga/mystic like notions of consciousness.

Greg, not more than a few posts ago, you were criticizing what you imagined to be my yoga/mystic like notions of consciousness. Your goal of bashing pseudoscience is noble. Gods know, I do it for a damned living. But I have to tell you, you're not doing a tremendously careful job of it.

[StringJunky]

 

But I am quite specifically criticising questionposter's yoga/mystic like notions of consciousness. That consciousness does not switch off when you sleep or pass out and that you are conscious when you dream. This is just psuedoscientific nonsense.

 

There is a state called lucid dreaming where there is a self-conscious awareness of dreaming and the dreamer can control events within it in the full knowledge that they are in a dream. This is not the norm when dreaming but it can happen to some at times, including myself.

[Greg Boyles]

Saying that you'll not oppose me in that suggests that you think I was claiming that. That has nothing to do with what I was claiming. Incidentally (although this is a completely separate issue), I don't believe nonhuman animals are consciously aware at all. But again, that's irrelevant, because--broken record here--that's not what I was saying at all. Please tell me where I said that. You are inventing claims. But I'm pleased that you'll not oppose me on the things which I have not said and do not believe. It saves time.

 

 

Greg, not more than a few posts ago, you were criticizing what you imagined to be my yoga/mystic like notions of consciousness. Your goal of bashing pseudoscience is noble. Gods know, I do it for a damned living. But I have to tell you, you're not doing a tremendously careful job of it.

 

"the fact that conscious awareness lies on a continuum has to be one of the most obvious, self-evident things I can think of. "

 

Where does that continuem of consciousness lie. I interpret this statement as meaning that the continuem lies across different species.

 

"I don't believe nonhuman animals are consciously aware at all."

And the great apes for starters? Or dolphins and whales? This seems more like a sweeping theological type statement rather than one based in science.

Edited October 21, 2011 by Greg Boyles

[PhDwannabe]

"the fact that conscious awareness lies on a continuum has to be one of the most obvious, self-evident things I can think of. "

 

Where does that continuem of consciousness lie. I interpret this statement as meaning that the continuem lies across different species.

It says nothing about different species. How could you possibly arrive at this interpretation? I've been talking about h. sapiens the entire time and everything I linked you was about humans. All this is saying--one of the most difficult-to-disagree-with things that I can think of--is that human consciousness does not exist in a state of "on or off," but on a spectrum. Sixty seconds after I wake up, I'm more conscious than I was when I was asleep, but somewhat less conscious than I am right now. That's it. That's all it's saying. No scientific or medical authority really disagrees.

 

"I don't believe nonhuman animals are consciously aware at all."

And the great apes for starters? Or dolphins and whales? This seems more like a sweeping theological type statement rather than one based in science.

You continue to fail miserably at trying to find peoples' philosophical or rhetorical motivations. I'm an atheist. I'm begging you--please stop trying to pin down the belief systems which inform peoples' posts. For one, nobody can really do that accurately off of just a few words in most circumstances, two, you are showing yourself to be particularly unskilled at it, three, it typically adds nothing to the discussion.

 

This is not a sweeping statement based in theology, this is a sweeping statement based in cognitive science. It's not a terribly mainstream one at this point in history, but that doesn't mean it isn't based in science. It is not science that I am going to spend time attempting to explain to you, because it is complicated and subtle and--again, Greg, I'm sorry--you continue to absolutely mangle the simplest and clearest of points. It furthermore also doesn't have anything to do with the extremely simple point that I've being going around and around with you on about six times, which I've explained here yet again, and which I'm done explaining or posting on in any fashion. You're going to have to exhaust someone else.

Edited October 21, 2011 by PhDwannabe

[Greg Boyles]

There is a state called lucid dreaming where there is a self-conscious awareness of dreaming and the dreamer can control events within it in the full knowledge that they are in a dream. This is not the norm when dreaming but it can happen to some at times, including myself.

 

 

Mmmmmm, interesting. Hadn't considered that.

 

But this from Wikipedia:

 

A lucid dream can begin in one of two ways. A dream-initiated lucid dream (DILD) starts as a normal dream, and the dreamer eventually concludes it is a dream, while a wake-initiated lucid dream (WILD) occurs when the dreamer goes from a normal waking state directly into a dream state, with no apparent lapse in consciousness.

 

suggests that lucid dreaming is a seperate and distinct state from sleeping and coma etc and that consciousness is still switched on and off much like a light switch. It may be an alternate form of consciousness but it apparently is not a case of 50% consciousness.

 

Even in locked in syndrome you are entirely conscious and aware of your surroundings without being able to respond in any physical way. Apparently they can still respond by initiating various thought patterns that can be detected with an MRI scan.

 

Presumably lucid dreaming is a variation on this theme.

 

But the fact remains you are still 100% conscious and aware and not 50% conscious and aware.

 

If I am able to concentrate hard enough I could similarly conduct a dream inside my head. But usually inputs from the outside world distract you from maintaining such a day dream for long.

 

Perhaps lucid dreaming is simply a case of all sensory inputs being turned off while in a waking state.

 

I wonder how a electroencephalogram in a lucid dream state would compare to an electroencephalogram in a waking state.

Edited October 21, 2011 by Greg Boyles

[StringJunky]

Mmmmmm, interesting. Hadn't considered that.

 

But this from Wikipedia:

 

 

 

suggests that lucid dreaming is a seperate and distinct state from sleeping and coma etc and that consciousness is still switched on and off much like a light switch. It may be an alternate form of consciousness but it apparently is not a case of 50% consciousness.

 

Even in locked in syndrome you are entirely conscious and aware of your surroundings without being able to respond in any physical way. Apparently they can still respond by initiating various thought patterns that can be detected with an MRI scan.

 

Presumably lucid dreaming is a variation on this theme.

 

But the fact remains you are still 100% conscious and aware and not 50% conscious and aware.

 

If I am able to concentrate hard enough I could similarly conduct a dream inside my head. But usually inputs from the outside world distract you from maintaining such a day dream for long.

 

Perhaps lucid dreaming is simply a case of all sensory inputs being turned off while in a waking state.

 

I wonder how a electroencephalogram in a lucid dream state would compare to an electroencephalogram in a waking state.

 

This is quite interesting and has some EEG traces for lucid dreaming:

 

http://magic-su.net/books/phys1.pdf

[Greg Boyles]

This is quite interesting and has some EEG traces for lucid dreaming:

 

http://magic-su.net/books/phys1.pdf

 

 

It might be objected that lucid dreamers might simply not be attending to the environment;

 

rather than being asleep, perhaps they are merely absorbed in their private fantasy worlds

 

as, for example, when deeply immersed in a novel or daydream. However, according to the

 

reports of lucid dreamers (LaBerge, 1980a, 1985), if they deliberately attempt to feel the

 

bedcovers they know they are sleeping in or try to hear the ticking of the clock they know is

 

beside their bed, they fail to feel or hear anything except what they find in their dream

 

worlds. Lucid dreamers are conscious of the absence of sensory input from the external

 

world; therefore, on empirical grounds, they conclude that they are asleep.

 

 

So my description of lucid dreamers possibly being in a waking state but with all sensory input from the external world inactivated has been considered by scientists.

A similar situation to when dreamers awake and remain paralysed because their motor cortex remain deactivated as a protective mechanism during dreaming.

[DrmDoc]

So my description of lucid dreamers possibly being in a waking state but with all sensory input from the external world inactivated has been considered by scientists.

A similar situation to when dreamers awake and remain paralysed because their motor cortex remain deactivated as a protective mechanism during dreaming.

The dreaming brain, whether lucid or not, is as electrically active as a waking-state brain. In some brain areas (e.g., temporal and occipital lobes) , the dreaming brain has been shown to be more active. Also, the brain in dream sleep is not completely sensory deprive. Sensory studies have shown increased brain activity amid the dream state in response to light, tactile, and aural stimuli. In some cases, such stimuli is integrated as part of the dream experience as reported by sleep subjects. However, sensory information does not reach the dreaming brain with the same intensity as it does when the brain is in its waking-state.

[questionposter]

It says nothing about different species. How could you possibly arrive at this interpretation? I've been talking about h. sapiens the entire time and everything I linked you was about humans. All this is saying--one of the most difficult-to-disagree-with things that I can think of--is that human consciousness does not exist in a state of "on or off," but on a spectrum. Sixty seconds after I wake up, I'm more conscious than I was when I was asleep, but somewhat less conscious than I am right now. That's it. That's all it's saying. No scientific or medical authority really disagrees.

 

 

That actually seems to fit events pretty well. But, I think it has to be somewhat more complex than that, because just the other day I was able to objectively view the objective viewing of my own consciousness, and if I can take a step back from that objectivity to view it, my consciousness can't be that. It's just the same as "you can't be in the location you are looking at from across the room", so based on that, I think that consciousness is definitely a lot more complex than it is being made out to be, and with a tweak to the continuum thing, is sort of like time, almost as if it flows, but is always there and different for different perspectives. Sort of like, there's always a fabric of space, but how it acts varies according to different things. If I can step back from a part of a painting and see even more painting, then the painting must be bigger than the part I was previously looking at.

Edited October 27, 2011 by questionposter

[PhDwannabe]

just the other day I was able to objectively view the objective viewing of my own consciousness, and if I can take a step back from that objectivity to view it, my consciousness can't be that

What? You were viewing yourself. You were viewing yourself. That is literally what subjectivity is. There is honestly not anything I can think of that is less objective than that.

[questionposter]

What? You were viewing yourself. You were viewing yourself. That is literally what subjectivity is. There is honestly not anything I can think of that is less objective than that.

 

No, I was viewing my mind viewing itself not just directly viewing my own consciousness, I don't know how else to put it into words, but if I can step back and see that from the point of view from my consciousness, then my consciousness can't be that, so consciousness is even more complex than I previously thought. I guess you could say its similar to viewing yourself looking in a mirror from a 3rd person perspective.

Edited October 27, 2011 by questionposter