I want to believe the mind exists outside of the brain

[michaell]

I would really want to believe that the mind can escape the brain or can exist after brain death. however, i have not seen any evidence that the mind can exist outside the brain, i used to think "since there is no known physical process that can create conciousness, therefore the conciousness can exist outside of a physical body or brain".

however; why is it that patients who have had anesthesia or been deeply comatose almost always say they dont remember anything and they were not aware of the passage of time? how can the mind exist outside of the brain if anesthesia drugs can turn off the mind by only effecting the brain? And how can the mind exist outside of the brain if the mind and personality itself be altered by altering only the brain? Right now, the evidence seems to be pointing towards the idea that the mind,spirit,etc. cease to exist after death and that death is the end. afterall: severe brain damage to specific regions of the brain has been associated with reduced or even complete loss of conciousness, and the severity of the loss of conciousness is associated with the severity of damage in specific regions of the brain; so doesnt that point towards death (total brain death) being a state of no conciousness (afterall; non-lethal brain damage has been associated with complete loss of conciousness).

i was then thinking that maybe the spirit is confined in the brain until the brain is completely dead. however since brain damage effects the personality and thus "the person" , then this poses a new question: if i get shot in the head , and have severe brain damage , including to my frontal lobe (thus my personality would be altered) and then due to this damage to the frontal lobe i kill myself the next day; then who would leave my body: the suicidal/altered person or the person that i was the moment before i got shot?

 

[digital_phreedom]

You raise an interesting point about anesthesia's effects, or being comatose.. Not sure how I'd answer that one yet. But I do believe the 'spirit' exists independently of the brain/body. However I think that 'mind' is more the result of the chemical processes taking place inside the brain.. So I think it's important to think of the difference between 'mind' and 'spirit'. I'm too tired to think more about this right now though, long day yesterday.. But...

How do you really know what your 'mind' is?

You can't see your eyes with your eyes.
How can you perceive your mind with your mind?

Hmmm..

 

[WSaged]

Think of the brain as a radio antenna, receiving your personal frequency.

You can not open up a transistor radio & find the DJ, or the radio studio in there...the radio only receives a signal from a remote location & amplifies it.

Now start messing with the circuits inside that radio (anesthesia, etc...) that receive the signal & you get all kinds of static, broken up information & even muting of the broadcast entirely!!


The brain is made of the same exact carbon matter as rocks & water...just in different configurations. If consciousness comes from the brain, do you believe all matter has consciousness?
Which raises the question of what exactly is consciousness.


Have you ever practiced meditation? Particularly transcendental meditation.
It is the practice of quieting your inner monologue & feeling what is left when you take your mind down to the tiny thread of the true I AM. Without any baggage.
Not getting caught up in being part of the show...but just watching it go by frame by frame...from the inside.
The body is a meat-car for you to get around this physical world, don't let it convince you that you are just the car & not the driver.





There was a video of a scientist talking about non-local consciousness & the scientific proof of it, that I watched just last week.
It was fascinating!!

I'm having trouble finding it, I'll post a link when I do!


WS

 

[bringeroflight]

So their brains didn't register any experience. That's not saying there wasn't one.

 

[WSaged]

Found it!
Watch this documentary!!!!

The Primacy of Consciousness

The fundamental nature of reality is actually consciousness. In his documentary Peter Russell explores the reasons why consciousness may be the...

topdocumentaryfilms.com

Fascinating thoughts on non-local consciousness & the construct of reality based information in the brain, plus the scientific reasoning behind it.


WS

 

[gibran2]

...But I do believe the 'spirit' exists independently of the brain/body. However I think that 'mind' is more the result of the chemical processes taking place inside the brain.. So I think it's important to think of the difference between 'mind' and 'spirit'. I'm too tired to think more about this right now though, long day yesterday.. But...

How do you really know what your 'mind' is?

You can't see your eyes with your eyes.
How can you perceive your mind with your mind?

Hmmm..

Very good points. Everything that we consider to be “self”, including our thoughts and our “mind”, seems to be a product of the physical. The “spirit”, by definition, is not physical.

Here are some of my current thoughts on this subject:

The only thing we know for certain to be real is that “something” has subjective conscious experiences, and we ordinarily call that something “self”.

Science is the study of the content structure, patterns, and relationships of subjective conscious experiences. Subjective conscious experience is all we have and all we are.

Science doesn’t study the physical world. The physical world as we know it is an abstraction used to make sense of the stream of our subjective conscious experiences. We cannot say whether or not the physical world exists outside of consciousness. (Which also means we can’t say whether or not our physical bodies exist.)

So we can be certain that subjective conscious experience exists, yet we can’t be certain that physical reality exists.

@WSaged – “The Primacy of Consciousness” is an excellent video, and I would highly recommend it to anyone interested in consciousness, the nature of reality, etc.

 

[unansweredquestions]

Im a firm believer in what digital phreedom aluded too. personaly, iv always felt that our 'mind' is just the collection of experience, thoughts, memories, feelings, senses and such. all of which i do feel are chemical process's. as such, the mind that we know ourselves to have, i truley believe, is interdependent with our body. However our minds can only percieve a strict collection of matter to determine our reality. in terms of spirits and entities; i am totaly open to them. my thoughts being that these entitites are either in different 'dimensions', that which we cant see, or as a possible alternative in the dmt world being figmants of our deep concious. both options are hugley compelling and interesting to myself!
as was mentioned in the idea of a radio turner, my belief is again one of two possibiliies, i think dmt either changes the frequency or allows us to delve deeper into our concious than the average person is able.
i must say, i firmly disagree with WSaged argument with regards to conciousness. conciousness is just a tool of the ego, a product of the brains complexity, allowing us to question more and more and inrease awareness as our intelligence increases; intelligence being judged in the sense of the brains ability to digest, understand and formulate intricate ideas. Point being, a rock doesnt have conciousness despite it being fundementally made of the same matter (atoms and such) because it doesnt have the same structure as say, the brain. because of this, the atoms dont interact with one another in the same way, the same chemicals are not produced. and so conciousness is not a product of a rock, wheras it is of an intelligent brain.

 

[WSaged]

^^you should watch the talk in the link above, it can explain why that doesn't make sense.

there is nothing in science that can explain why consciousness even possibly exists, yet consciousness is the one thing that you or I know actually exists at all for a fact.
Not memories, or patterns, or feelings...just consciousness...the I AM that is experiencing all of it & is still there when you let all that collected stuff go!

Your brain creates the reality around you through sense organs that transduce electrical impulses...that the brain constitutes into what you perceive as external reality.
But what is it that is in there to experience all that...the I am...no way to measure it...but the only thing you can actually ever know exists for real, once you understand how we perceive our reality electro-chemically.



(time for the mod-rod):roll:
BTW, please try to break up your posts into paragraphs, or ideas.
The big block of letters is hard on the eyes & fatiguing to read.
People tend to skip over block-of-text posts because of this.
Thanks!!


WS

 

[digital_phreedom]

"I exist"

-- "Oh yeah? Prove it..."

Haha.. I love this conversation. I start thinking about these things often during LSD experiences and my friends think I'm nuts for laughing hysterically and saying things like.. "I'm not real." or "Wait, now I understand.. I'm not me!"

 

[gibran2]

...i must say, i firmly disagree with WSaged argument with regards to conciousness. conciousness is just a tool of the ego, a product of the brains complexity, allowing us to question more and more and inrease awareness as our intelligence increases; intelligence being judged in the sense of the brains ability to digest, understand and formulate intricate ideas. Point being, a rock doesnt have conciousness despite it being fundementally made of the same matter (atoms and such) because it doesnt have the same structure as say, the brain. because of this, the atoms dont interact with one another in the same way, the same chemicals are not produced. and so conciousness is not a product of a rock, wheras it is of an intelligent brain.

As I said in this post –

If consciousness is nothing but a complex series of chemical reactions, and if a hypothetical computer can accurately simulate any complex series of chemical reactions, then one must conclude that computers can in theory be conscious.

Furthermore, keep in mind that the logic gates and other primitive circuit elements of a computer need not be implemented in silicon. It is conceivable to make logic gates out of water pipes and valves. So in theory, it would be possible to construct a computer from plumbing parts that could simulate any complex series of chemical reactions. So one must conclude that plumbing parts – copper pipes, pumps, and various valves when arranged properly are conscious.

 

[WSaged]

If consciousness is nothing but a complex series of chemical reactions, and if a hypothetical computer can accurately simulate any complex series of chemical reactions, then one must conclude that computers can in theory be conscious.

And that said computer's could experience things like love, fear & even a psychedelic experience!!


digital_phreedom, start thinking of this stuff while sober & apply it to your psychedelic experiences!!!


WS

 

[digital_phreedom]

Gibran2: I love your logic on that.. And while it does seem like a crazy idea, I'm not entirely convinced yet that it's NOT possible to create a conscious computer. As technology evolves, who knows.. But until then, I do think it shows us more of the lovely perspective we have as humans.

WSaged: Absolutely! I spent much of my sober time thinking of these things, and trying to integrate. One thing I always realize during a psychedelic experience is that it's not showing me anything that isn't already there. I always think "I already know this! I must remember! It's been here all along. I LIVE in this ecstasy I'm feeling right now."

I try to carry those thoughts and feelings with me in my waking life, and though it's not always easy, I'm definitely making progress.

 

[gibran2]

Gibran2: I love your logic on that.. And while it does seem like a crazy idea, I'm not entirely convinced yet that it's NOT possible to create a conscious computer. As technology evolves, who knows.. But until then, I do think it shows us more of the lovely perspective we have as humans.

WSaged: Absolutely! I spent much of my sober time thinking of these things, and trying to integrate. One thing I always realize during a psychedelic experience is that it's not showing me anything that isn't already there. I always think "I already know this! I must remember! It's been here all along. I LIVE in this ecstasy I'm feeling right now."

I try to carry those thoughts and feelings with me in my waking life, and though it's not always easy, I'm definitely making progress.

The fact is, we don’t know the answers to such things. But what seems more plausible:

Consciousness creating the illusion of a material world, or objects in a material world – a properly configured collection of copper pipes, pumps, and various valves – producing consciousness?

 

[Apoc]

The fact is, we don’t know the answers to such things. But what seems more plausible: Consciousness creating the illusion of a material world, or objects in a material world – a properly configured collection of copper pipes, pumps, and various valves – producing consciousness?

Both seem equally unknowable.

michaell, we can deduce that mind doesn't create consciousness. Sperms don't have minds or think about what they're doing when they fertilize an egg because sperms and eggs don't have a brain. The brain develops out of billions of cells, and cells take in inanimate matter, convert the matter to chemical energy which powers the cell, then split to make more cells. My point is, mind isn't responsible for the construction of your personal existence, mind developed from another form of intelligence, the natural intelligence of the universe. A form of intelligence that doesn't need mind. Personal consciousness is a tiny slice of the whole, and it seems to be done that way on purpose. I'm just not personally aware of your experience, but you're the same thing I am... a point in consciousness. I'm just talking to myself and getting responses from self, and only personally conscious of a little bit of it. Everyone is out there talking to themselves and not aware it's one being. It seems to be set up that way on purpose. Set up like a game. This natural intelligence seems to find our lives quircky and funny. And it knows nothing is really ultimately at stake because the universe is eternal. That's what's so funny. I don't mean to say that as if nothing matters. An individual life totally matters to the individual. I'm just sayin.... your personal consciousness wasn't built from personal consciousness, your personal consciousness was constructed by eternal natural phenomenon that has always been, and always will be after you die. You aren't really you. You are a product, a mold, a projection. And it's all temporary. You have just become attached to things like memory and the stability of the phsyical world. But the universe doesn't need mind.... it created mind, and is mind. There is nothing you can do to change the way things are. If there is nothing after death for the mind, that's just the way it is. But the universe is eternal, nontheless.

 

[CosmicFool]

"What is mind? -No matter. What is matter? -Never mind"

 

[unansweredquestions]

^paraphrasing the quote.
i think the argument here mostly revolves around what it is that we define as a conciousness. each of us, more than likley, having our own unique idea and concept related to the word. what is a conciousness to you?
id argue science can explain why conciousness exists. in terms of a tool of the brain; a way in which our brain can interprete and store our experiences and other brain functions. id suggest its an evolutionary tool, in order to survive and thrive, we as people have devolped a uniquely intelligent brain which stores and utilises its componants and information in an incredibly intricate manner. as seen through mri's and other scientific methods, for example, memory utilising a parcticular part of the brain in order to function efficiently and so on. point being, in order to mesh all our componants together, a 'conciousness' is inevitably the result, a mainframe which acts to hold everything together and allow us to interact and survive in the wider world. with a sense of self being the result of this, as everyone experiences different things in one and others lives, the culmination leading to a unique perspective. abit like a pyschologist of the pyschodynamic approach, the id, the ego and the superego, each has a purpose, some we are more aware of than others. the conciousness to me, taking the form of the ego.

i feel, its not that our conciousness is in our brain to experience the surrounding world itself, rather, the experiences are had, absorbed by our senses and then processed in a way which allows our brain to digest it.
as complex as our brains are, they would be totaly overloaded by all the data around them without this feature.

 

[WSaged]

Seriously, if this topic interests you, you got to watch this talk!!

The Primacy of Consciousness

The fundamental nature of reality is actually consciousness. In his documentary Peter Russell explores the reasons why consciousness may be the...

topdocumentaryfilms.com

It's a bit long, but if you make it through the first 10-15 minutes where he is setting the foundation for his talk, I'll bet you can't shut it off!

i think the argument here mostly revolves around what it is that we define as a conciousness. each of us, more than likley, having our own unique idea and concept related to the word.

Agreed!!
Drop all the memories & memes & identifications with all of them & there is still the I that was experiencing all of that.
Once again, this is what people practicing meditation have be doing for 1000'S of years!!
With a bit of dedication & practice, you can prove it to yourself!
You are way down in there, buried below all that stuff you collect in your brain.
It's all that stuff that doesn't allow you to see it.

id argue science can explain why conciousness exists. in terms of a tool of the brain;

But they can't...with the current scientific paradigm, they try to fit it into current ideas & laws, but it doesn't actually fit.
Check this out for yourself!
There is no current understanding of why each of us experiences any of those brain functions! Not the electrical impulses, the inner core of experiencing those electrical impulses.
Vision is created in visual cortex of the brain by electro-chemical impulses...but who is it that sees it? And does the brains construct of it truely represent what the eyes filters actually captured? Remember that we only see (or hear) a tiny sliver of the full color & sound spectrum's.
We can hear about 4 octaves of frequency in sound waves, there is one whole octave below what we can hear...and infinite octaves above our perception.
More amazing is that without air to ripple into waves there is no sound, equaling no electrical impulses creating sound! Or if you were in another atmosphere, looser, or denser, or more solid that oxygen, everything would sound very different too!
The spectrum of colors that we are able to see is even more tiny a sliver of the full spectrum of light!
What do you think your image of the world would be like if you had scales instead if flesh, or fur...or in an octopus's body? Very different sensation of touch & visual & sound!!! Same reality from that perspective?
So is outer reality anything like what we perceive it to be at all?


It can not be proven that you or I are anything more that biological computers.
Except that I know I am in here experiencing the resulting data.
I don't know & no one can prove however, that you are!
And you can't prove that I am.


WS

 

[gibran2]

The fact is, we don’t know the answers to such things. But what seems more plausible: Consciousness creating the illusion of a material world, or objects in a material world – a properly configured collection of copper pipes, pumps, and various valves – producing consciousness?

Both seem equally unknowable.

...

Both are equally unknowable – that’s correct. But that isn’t the question I asked: Which is more plausible?

An old illustration of this goes as follows: Imagine that someone claims a teacup is currently in high Earth orbit. Let’s assume that current technology can’t detect such small things in orbit. We can’t know if the claim is true or not. We cannot prove nor disprove the claim.

But we can say something about the plausibility of the claim. We can think about what is more plausible – a teacup being launched into high Earth orbit, or not? Answering this question doesn’t say anything about factual reality, but it does say something about our understanding of probability, natural laws, etc.

So just for fun, if you had to pick one, which seems more plausible: Consciousness creating the illusion of a material world, or objects in a material world – a properly configured collection of copper pipes, pumps, and various valves – producing consciousness?

 

[gibran2]

id argue science can explain why conciousness exists. in terms of a tool of the brain;

But they can't...with the current scientific paradigm, they try to fit it into current ideas & laws, but it doesn't actually fit.
Check this out for yourself!
There is no current understanding of why each of us experiences any of those brain functions! Not the electrical impulses, the inner core of experiencing those electrical impulses.
Vision is created in visual cortex of the brain by electro-chemical impulses...but who is it that sees it? And does the brains construct of it truely represent what the eyes filters actually captured?

It can not be proven that you or I are anything more that biological computers.
Except that I know I am in here experiencing the result.
I don't know & no one can prove however, that you are!
And you can't prove that I am.


WS

Good points. Here’s another:

If we accept the new paradigm that consciousness has primacy, then there is nothing in current science that need change. Scientific laws and theories would be no less true. However, there is much that science currently dismisses, minimizes, or ignores that could be (maybe/eventually) explained. Accepting the primacy of consciousness has the potential to increase the explanatory capacity of science.

For example, science can’t explain the phenomenon of near death experiences. People who are unconscious, sometimes without brain activity, are able to see from an out of body viewpoint and hear what is going on as their body is being treated. Oftentimes the person having the NDE is able to later report seeing things (medical instruments, etc.) that they couldn’t have possibly known about. If we accept the primacy of consciousness, this is easily explained. (Well, maybe not easily, but it is explainable.) If we accept the primacy of matter, this is completely unexplainable.

 

[MffnMn]

I know that I'll be disagreeing with majority here, but I don't believe that any spirits inhibit us. If we had an eternal spirit, what does it do for the rest of eternity? Does it have a specific personality, and if so why? I personally find the idea that our brain is able to create such a complex and wonderful construct infinitely more awe-inspiring than having to rely on the supernatural for the explanation. Imagine for a minute all the events and influences of your life and how they all combined to create who you are...

Also imagine all the trillions of reactions and interactions that are occurring within your brain to maintain your thought process. I think this is much more satisfying than some arbitrary magic.