Who’s in charge Consciousness or brain?

hello.

Consciousness produces brain function or brain function produce consciousness?

Despite recent profound discoveries that we are such stuff as dreams are made on, most of us today still think we live in a naive materialistic world. People still clutch into naive materialistic ways of thinking, their concept of reality was still just as firm.

The fact that that atoms are not even “things” or hard stuff, they are made of “potentiality” that is complete at the state of manifestation. Every object in the environment is not even there when nobody is looking.

What’s your take?

Well, the so called “ignorant” ancients, have always known the consciousness is the stuff the world is made from, and also the mystics, and anybody (including myself) who has had mystical “self knowing” experiences.

I am glad people are actually starting to wake up to it now, thanks to Quantum physics giving all the “stuck in their newtonian ways” scientists a big kick up their butts!

There is a very new film made about this very thing. It’s called “what the bleep do we know?”

whatthebleep.com/nav_html/ab … nopsis.php

So yes, (if you didn’t realise) I say “Consciousness produces brain function” 100% defo! It’s obvious!!! hahaah

Cheers
DALE

Yes, also it is the ancient Greek philosopher Democritus, who reckons that the fundamental substance of the universe is composed of indestructible and indivisible atoms.

And indeed that false belief dominated our world thanks to quantum mechanics for opening our eyes to reality, the reality prior to Newtonians space, time, causality and common sense.

http://psyche.cs.monash.edu.au/v2/psyche-2-05-stapp.html

quantum mechanics is pure conjecture and until someone sticks their hand through a physical object it won’t be proven.

My point is that the physical world is a lot more stable than quantum mechanics chaotic theories. Meaning that if the chaos in the micro is happening, the “relative calm” of the macro is quite astounding.

well to badly quote madonna. We are living in a material world.

And thank god I’m not living in my dream world, I’d either be taking finals in high school, be stuck in church, or fighting aliens off. Now that would be quite astounding.

Thankfully though the “real” world is quite “calm” and “boring”

I’d be curious who made these discoveries that reality is nothing but a dream. probably watched the matrix one too many times :slight_smile:

scythekain, interesting that you quote Jung. Here is another from him:

Who looks outside, dreams; who looks inside, awakes.
~ Carl Gustav Jung

DALE

that is such bull. How could it ever be possible to prove such a thing to be true? Also why would it even need to be? Also what exacally would the trigger be for a “thing” to be manifested? The object emitting a photon cant be it, because it hasnt yet reached our eyes this means that the object must have been manifsested before we can have observed it.

Would the world not be simpler and make more sence if the world ALREADY existed around us? This does not cause any contradictions as far as i know of.

well because I like one thing someone says doesn’t mean I am going to agree with everything they say.

:laughing:

I’ve already explained my take on dreams I’ll explain more based on my own dreams.

They are a window to the past.

They are a window to yourself (the present).

They are a window to the future.

The brain rides consciousness. The brain moves muscles, receives sensory input, holds memories and releases bio-chemicals. That is all.

the way i see it the brain is just a clump of fats,nerves and cholesterol that just happens to control our bodies wheather or not the your consiness(my spellings bad sue me)is in control is irrelevent eventualy it all comes down to what you put in your body(personality changing drugs anybody)
both work hand in hand if you eat 3400 mgs of cocaine your seriously alter
your brain thus altering its consiness(bah headache)

ps-why bother argueing these things why not just leave it alone so you guys can tackle bigger problems that just making theses.

The thing is, if consciousness creates the material world, and not the otherway around as we have been led to believe, the implications are enormous. Those who can see this realise that this is the biggest leap in evolution since fire!! There simply is no bigger problem to tackle! This one is the Daddy!

DALE

scythekain wrote:

Your notion is as bold as in religion forums fellow, but I disagree.

Your statements are reminiscent of those land-locked sailors during Columbus era that considers a round earth concept as nonsense principle. We must be careful not to drag classical illusions of an actual world into reality. Reality is not as firm as you claim.

This is the 21st century and yet there are still remnants of this people.

Here are some few thoughts of Newtonian mechanism to shatter materialism.

the discovery of radioactivity in 1896 = which means that atoms sometimes transmute into other atoms, just as the alchemists had dreamed

the electron was discovery in 1897 = particle much smaller than any of the supposedly fundamental atoms. Thus, the atoms forming the substantial basis for all existence in the material world view were not the firm foundation they were taken to be.

the proposal in 1911 = Rutherford in England proposed a planetary model of the atom, in which a host of negatively charged electrons orbited a positively charged nucleus just as planets orbit the sun. But the known laws predicted that any electronic charge moving in an orbit must radiate energy. Thus the orbiting electron-planets would spiral into the nucleus, in much the same way that a satellite falls out of orbit, losing energy due to its drag in the earth’s atmosphere. In the case of the electrons, however, they would fall out of orbit very quickly, destroying the whole atomic structure almost immediately–catastrophe. But the plain fact was that the atomic orbits were stable, and classical physics simply could not explain this fact.

1900 that atoms exchanged energy only in specific quantities.= the Planck constant of Max Planck, there is no classical explanation for this strange quantization.

1926 = the deteriorate classical mechanism.

Gentlemen Check this out from NASA.

http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2002/20mar_newmatter.htm?list154187

“Bose-Einstein condensates (“BECs” for short) aren’t like the solids, liquids and gases that we learned about in school. They are not vaporous, not hard, not fluid. Indeed, there are no ordinary words to describe them because they come from another world – the world of quantum mechanics.”

“Materialism rested upon the illusion that the kind of existence, the direct “actuality” of the world around us, can be extrapolated into the atomic range. The naive materialistic way of thinking is an obstacle to understanding the quantum concept of reality.”

  • Werner Heisenberg

steal?

I may not be perfect …… So remarks are very much welcome dude.

http://www.wc3net.com

Xanderman wrote:

Comrade, The brain can not level consciousness.

As it is much convenient for us to indicate somebody else’s work intermittently check here.

Why Classical Mechanics Cannot Naturally Accommodate Consciousness but Quantum Mechanics Can

psyche.cs.monash.edu.au/v2/psych … stapp.html

Personally I believe in the near future due to recent advancement of science, just like the electronic human heart the human brain can be prosthetic ally replaced as well, while retaining personality

But what stops us from inventing artificial brain? besides brains are made up of atoms too right?

Well matrix is derived from Werner Heisenberg’s Matrix Mechanics…

Well! I think that consciousness descends upon a baby JUST BEFORE it’s born. However, it gets full consciousness when it’s out of the womb and independent. Before it gets any consciousness its mind is the same as the mother’s although the brain is different of course. Before any consciousness, the baby just follows programming instituted by the mother’s mind. I’m just brainstorming you know, don’t take it seriously because I could be making a blunder here.

As to your query, “Consciousness produces brain function or brain function produce consciousness?” I think it’s neither.

ok let me restate.

Some of quantum theory is highly delectable

but the part about the phase shift of particles happening at just the right moment and you’ll stick your hand through said object? um pure conjecture. and seriously unlikely to ever happen.

The physicists on one side, the hardcore thinkers on the other. Both groups fighting to describe the same underlying reality. That is, the limit to which the human understanding of the physical world can recover its secrets.

Scythekain:

Preposterous!!! The wavefunction penetrates everything.

Now you tell me you are wondering how come you can still touch an object without visualization. Is it because some part of you hand is inside the object (rock, leaves etch). Objects appear solid to us. At micro scales they are less so, and Quantum Mechanic’s tunneling totally abolishes the concept of matter.

Okay Correct me.

And for BeenaJain:

Okay I know you believe in God…. I’m a hardcore Christian Orthodox(but I don’t believe in Roman Catholic only in the bible). But correct me okay but I do not consider agnostism relevant in this topic.

It is said we are conscious when we can perceive our environment. We have our levels and features of sensation and perception that process sensory information that we use to learn and think with, as we get it from the outside world into our mind.

In case you forgot, there are five human senses but here are some other types of sensitivity to experience different exclusive actual states in Quantum Mechanics:

Visual = light waves
Eyes: rods and cones in retina

Auditory = sound waves
Ears: hair cells in organ of corti

Olfactory = gaseous substance
Nose: hair cells in olfactory epipethelium

Gustatory = soluble substance
Tongue: taste cells in taste buds

Cutaneous = mechanical or thermal stimulation
Skin: free nerve endings

Kinesthetic = change in position of body parts
Muscles, tendons & joints; nerve endings

Equilibrium = change in rotary motion change in rectilinear motion; body position
Ear: semi circular canals; ear: vestibule

Okey, don’t you think a newborn child got none of those above?

I’m gonna find a child, give it ya and you feed it with burning hot feeding bottle and came back and tell me its not conscious enough.

okay Hatsu let me know when you walk through a wall.

The baby is fully conscious and only aware of it’s self. A baby is the ultimate solipsist. The world revolves around him/her. Sometimes this continues into adult hood and thats how you get adults who tell you that nothing in the world outside their mind is immediately proveable.

Consciousness is self-awareness. Consciousness comes from the mind.

Awareness of others I believe comes from something else, the drive to be aware of others is not something that is important to our animal minds. In a limited capabilities we realize that there are other “minds” in the world and the world around us is real, but very few people become “outside the self-aware”. These people generally are people who sacrifice themselves for others and put themselves below others.

Scythekain:
We are conscious when we can sense the external stimuli in the environment and internal thought processes.

Again here are some aspects of sensory experience, Visual, Auditory, Olfactory, Cutaneous, Gustatory, Kinesthetic, Equilibrium.

Surely a baby will smile when it is given a colorful toy = Visual perception
If someone carry it upside down it will manifest discomfort = Equilibrium perception
Obviously it will detest yogurt = Olfactory perception
Will cry and ask for milk = Kinesthetic perception

The baby is not conscious enough?
babies are unconscious?
You hold a criterion for consciousness?
The baby is too mentally incompetent?
it has limited mind???

If we keep on going this way we will end up assuming grasshoppers and bugs is not conscious. Monkeys are not conscious, hedgehogs as well and so on.

And about walking trough walls, I know my limitation; this is a very broad topic indeed, but maybe you be can more specific so I can explain?

No more superseded “mind over matter” stuff’s

“Mind is matter” yes but depends on your definition of matter……

yet again my question fellows.

Consciousness produces brain function or brain function produce consciousness?

hatsu,

The mind perceives the presence of a feeling but it’s the heart that feels it. If we remove the heart, the feeling is there but will not be felt until we bring the heart back.

Moreover, I’m saying that the baby gets consciousness or spirit partially (hours/seconds) just before it’s out of the womb and fully when it’s out and then it can feel first that it exists and then experience all the senses. If this wasn’t true then why suddenly after 9 and a half months later, the baby decides to come out? Isn’t it because it gets a partial mind of its own and a full one when its out, whereas before its mind was the same as the mother’s? So I don’t understand your point in elaborating upon the various senses. Like what exactly is the point you are making because nowhere did I say that the newborn cannot feel. Is there a reading or perhaps an understanding problem here?

And to make a long story short,
The brain is the wire that connects the heart to the mind! Ok? Do you still need to ask that question of yours above? :smiley: