Guest guest Posted September 29, 1998 Report Share Posted September 29, 1998 I bumped into an article: "Can Science Explain Consciousness? - by John Horgan, senior writer of Scientific American, July 1994, pp- 88-94. "Emboldened by these achievements ( referring to neurons etc.) a growing number of scientists have dared to address what is simultaneously the most elusive and inescapable of all phenomena: consciousness, our immediate, subjective awareness of the world and of ourselves. Francis Crick should receive much credit - or blame - for the trend. Crick, who shared Noble Prize for the discovery of DNA' structure in 1953 ........1n 1990 Crick and Christof Koch, .... rejected the belief of many of their colleagues that consciousness cannot be defined, let alone studied. Consciousness, they argued, is really synonymous with awareness and all forms of awareness-whether involving objects in the external world or highly abstract, internal concepts - seems to involve the same underlying mechanism, one that combines attention with short memory. (I did not understand the sentence! -how attention operates? ) Contrary to the assumption of cognitive scientists, philosophers, and others, Crick and Koch asserted, one cannot hope to achieve true understanding of consciousness or any other mental phenomenon by treating the brain as a black box - that is, an object whose internal structure is unknown an even irrelevant. Only by examining neurons and the interactions between them could scientists accumulate the kind of empirical, unambiguous knowledge that is required to create truly analogous to those that explain transmission of genetic information by means of DNA" "Crick elaborates on these ideas in the THE ASTONISHING HYPOTHESIS" a book published this year(1994) and dedicated to Koch." The article elaborates the activities in Neuroscience - the new journals that are propping up - "psyche - an e-mail journal from Australia, Journal of Consciousness - a British quarterly journal scheduled for launching (1994) ------------------------- The arguments sound like the one presented by Allen Curry. Are they mixing up the mechanisms that make the brain to be conscious of objects - the structural models for the mechanism of the cognition and recognition process with the stored memory similar to how a computer recognizes the patterns and models - matching, contrast and comparisons etc. - with the consciousness - because of which one is conscious of these cognitions and recognitions as well. An interesting article - does not say much - all about consciousness but does not say what that is being referred to as consciousness. It is like Allen's description of some complex interactions of brain cells and nervous system with the universal fields - leading to birth of consciousness? But the beauty is there is a scientific inquiry to find out the truth by objectifying the subject - I am not sure when they will come to the conclusion it is the residue after neti - neti etc. Any description of consciousness is not consciousness but an object of consciousness! Hari Om! Sadananda K. Sadananda Code 6323 Naval Research Laboratory Washington D.C. 20375 Voice (202)767-2117 Fax:(202)767-2623 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 1, 1998 Report Share Posted October 1, 1998 And how will we explain the intelligence that makes neurons what they are and causes them to interact according to certain laws? Is that intelligence other than consciousness? Aikya Param Berkeley, CA http://members.xoom.com/aikya/aikya sadananda <sada advaitin <advaitin > Tuesday, September 29, 1998 11:59 AM "Can Science Explain Consciousness?" >sadananda <sada > >I bumped into an article: >"Can Science Explain Consciousness? - by John Horgan, senior writer of >Scientific American, July 1994, pp- 88-94. >"Emboldened by these achievements ( referring to neurons etc.) a growing >number of scientists have dared to address what is simultaneously the most >elusive and inescapable of all phenomena: consciousness, our immediate, >subjective awareness of the world and of ourselves. Francis Crick should >receive much credit - or blame - for the trend. Crick, who shared Noble >Prize for the discovery of DNA' structure in 1953 ........1n 1990 Crick >and Christof Koch, .... rejected the belief of many of their colleagues >that consciousness cannot be defined, let alone studied. Consciousness, >they argued, is really synonymous with awareness and all forms of >awareness-whether involving objects in the external world or highly >abstract, internal concepts - seems to involve the same underlying >mechanism, one that combines attention with short memory. (I did not >understand the sentence! -how attention operates? ) >Contrary to the assumption of cognitive scientists, philosophers, and >others, Crick and Koch asserted, one cannot hope to achieve true >understanding of consciousness or any other mental phenomenon by treating >the brain as a black box - that is, an object whose internal structure is >unknown an even irrelevant. Only by examining neurons and the interactions >between them could scientists accumulate the kind of empirical, unambiguous >knowledge that is required to create truly analogous to those that explain >transmission of genetic information by means of DNA" > >"Crick elaborates on these ideas in the THE ASTONISHING HYPOTHESIS" a book >published this year(1994) and dedicated to Koch." > > >The article elaborates the activities in Neuroscience - the new journals >that are propping up - "psyche - an e-mail journal from Australia, > Journal of Consciousness - a British quarterly journal scheduled for >launching (1994) >------------------------- >The arguments sound like the one presented by Allen Curry. > >Are they mixing up the mechanisms that make the brain to be conscious of >objects - the structural models for the mechanism of the cognition and >recognition process with the stored memory similar to how a computer >recognizes the patterns and models - matching, contrast and comparisons >etc. - with the consciousness - because of which one is conscious of these >cognitions and recognitions as well. > >An interesting article - does not say much - all about consciousness but >does not say what that is being referred to as consciousness. It is like >Allen's description of some complex interactions of brain cells and nervous >system with the universal fields - leading to birth of consciousness? > >But the beauty is there is a scientific inquiry to find out the truth by >objectifying the subject - I am not sure when they will come to the >conclusion it is the residue after neti - neti etc. > >Any description of consciousness is not consciousness but an object of >consciousness! > >Hari Om! >Sadananda > >K. Sadananda >Code 6323 >Naval Research Laboratory >Washington D.C. 20375 >Voice (202)767-2117 >Fax:(202)767-2623 > > > > >------ >To from this mailing list, or to change your subscription >to digest, go to the ONElist web site, at and >select the User Center link from the menu bar on the left. >------ >Discussion of Sankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy, its true meaning, profundity, richness and beauty with the focus on the non-duality between mind and matter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 2, 1998 Report Share Posted October 2, 1998 >"Aikya_Param" <aikya > >And how will we explain the intelligence that makes neurons what they are >and causes them to interact according to certain laws? Is that intelligence >other than consciousness? > >Aikya Param >Berkeley, CA Perhaps ultimately arriving at the conclusion of Krishna B.G.-Ch. 7 ...... buddhiH buddhimataam asmi tejas tejaswinaam aham|| "I am the intelligence in the intellect, I am the brilliance in the brilliant" The ultimate conclusion will be the first part of this sloka - biijam maam sarva bhuutaanam viddhi paartha! sanaatanam| ..... I am the seed for all beings Please know Arjuna, I am the very ancient (beginning less)| When the conscious entity tries to inquire into "what is consciousness?" - among the unconscious entities - he can not find it, unless he turns inwards and inquires who is this conscious inquirer inquiring into the consciousness - ANALYZE THE ANALYST - the very inquiry disappears leaving the inquirer in his full glory. Hari Om! Sadananda K. Sadananda Code 6323 Naval Research Laboratory Washington D.C. 20375 Voice (202)767-2117 Fax:(202)767-2623 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.