Deterministic reductive monism and non-reductive substance dualism are two opposite views for consciousness, and both have serious problems. An alternative view is needed. For this, we hypothesize that strings or elementary particles (fermions and bosons) have two aspects: (i) elemental proto-experiences (PEs) as phenomenal aspect, and (ii) mass, charge, and spin as material aspect. Elemental PEs are hypothesized to be the properties of elementary particles and their interactions, which are composed of irreducible fundamental subjective experiences (SEs)/PEs that are in superimposed form in elementary particles and in their interactions. Since SEs/PEs are superimposed, elementary particles are not specific to any SE/PE; they (and all inert matter) are carriers of SEs/PEs, and hence, appear as non-experiential material entities. Furthermore, our hypothesis is that matter and associated elemental PEs co-evolved and co-developed into neural-nets and associated neural-net PEs (neural Darminism), respectively. The signals related to neural PEs interact in a neural-net and neural-net PEs emerges from random process of self-organization. The neural-net PEs are a set of SEs embedded in the neural-net by a non-computational or non-algorithmic process. The non-specificity of elementary particles is transformed into the specificity of neural-nets by neural Darwinism. The specificity of SEs emerges when feedforward and feedback signal interacts in the neuropil and are dependent on wakefulness (i.e., activation) attention, re-entry between neural populations, working memory, stimulus at above threshold, and neural net PE signals. This PE-SE framework integrates reductive and non-reductive views, complements the existing models, bridges the explanatory gaps, and minimizes the problem of causation.

http://www.geocities.ws/rlpvimal/Vimal-2008-classical-quantum-2010-selection-JIN.pdf

Proto-experiences and subjective experiences: classical and quantum concepts

Recently, consciousness research has gained much attention. Indeed, the question at stake is significant: Why is the brain not just a computing device, but generates a perception from within? Ambitious endeavors trying to simulate the entire human brain assume that the algorithm will do the trick: as soon as we assemble the brain in a computer and increase the number of operations per time, consciousness will emerge by itself. I disagree with this simplistic representation. My argument emerges from the “atomism paradox”: the irreducible space of the consciously perceived world, the endospace is incompatible with the reducible and decomposable architecture of the brain or a computer. I will first discuss the fundamental challenges in current consciousness models and then propose a new model based on the fractality principle: “the whole is in each of its parts.” This new model copes with the atomism paradox by implementing an iterative mapping of information from higher-order brain structures to smaller scales on the cellular and molecular level, which I will refer to as “fractalization.” This information fractalization gives rise to a new form of matter that is conscious (“bright matter”). Bright matter is composed of conscious particles or units named “sentyons.” The internal fractality of these sentyons will close a loop (the “psychic loop”) in a recurrent fractal neural network (RFNN) that allows for continuous and complete information transformation and sharing between higher-order brain structures and the endpoint substrate of consciousness at the molecular level.

Introduction to the fractality principle of consciousness and the sentyon postulate

The evidence amassed by parapsychologists suggesting that some portion of the human mind may survive the death of the physical body is briefly reviewed. The findings of modern neuroscience undermine the view that substantial portions of one’s personality could survive the death of the physical brain. However, one’s true self is not the current collection of atoms that comprise one’s body, nor is it the current configuration of one’s personality traits (i.e., emotions, thoughts and memories), but rather a pure center of consciousness through which these qualia flow. One’s body likely holds millions of such centers (or “microsouls”), that may be recycled (reincarnated) frequently during the life of the physical body, with memories of previous incarnations lost in each transition. The philosophical doctrine of panpsychism is endorsed as offering the most viable solution to the mind-body problem.

NeuroQuantology | September 2012 | Volume 10 | Issue 3 | Page 547-560

Saving Souls sans Psi

The Anthropic Principle for the Evolutionary Biology of Consciousness: Beyond Anthropocentrism and Anthropomorphism

Abstract First, I introduce the concept of a “non-agential subject,” where a non-agential subject (1) exists within an organism and (2) has phenomenally conscious experiences in a morally significant way, but (3) is not morally responsible for (some or all of) the organism's voluntary actions. Second, I argue that it's a live possibility that typical adult humans contain non-agential subjects. Finally, I argue that, if there are non-agential subjects, this has important and surprising implications for a variety of ethical issues. Accordingly, ethicists should pay more attention to whether there are non-agential subjects and what their implications for ethics would be.

J Edwards

Papers

How many people are there in my head, and in hers?