CHAPTER 1

Mainstream views on consciousness

Intro

In this chapter I will provide you with information on definitionsas well as on the various views on consciousness that exist inmainstream philosophy and science. Also I am including a short overviewof the current issues in mainstream consciousness studies.

Mainstream, in its meaning of the current thought of the majority, inWestern physics and philosophy is based on the assumptions of classicalNewtonian physics. In the East it is based on various larger Chinese andIndian philosophical systems. The Western and Eastern mainstream linesof thought are opposites: separation rules the first, oneness the other.

I will concentrate on the Western views of consciousness, but also Easternviews will be touched upon. My aim is to first show you the classical wayof thinking, in this chapter, and then move on to a modern, 'avant-garde',quantum way of thinking, explained in chapter two. This quantum wayof thinking has several similarities with the Eastern way, and so havetheir views on consciousness.

The Newtonian World

Now first a very short explanation of Newtonian physics, the foundation ofthe Western classical world view. This physics system, which originated inthe 17th century, concerns itself with the set of physical laws describing themotion of bodies under the action of a system of forces, such as gravity.

Newtonian physics state that both space and time are independent fromanything external, and are therefore absolute. Space remains alwayssimilar and immovable. It is occupied by matter, in the form of solidobjects, always larger than zero length, and therefore detectable by one'ssenses, directly or via microscopes. These objects are considered to beimpenetratable and permanent, obeying fixed cause-and-effect laws in apredictable manner.

The materialistic world view flowing from Newtonian physics was rathereasy to foresee. It is a view in which matter comes first and only. Anythingthat cannot be perceived by the senses of sight, taste, hearing, touch andsmell is considered questionable.

Material objects are seen as separated from each other, as well as humansand any other living organism as all of them consist of matter. All actionsby living organisms are based on cause and effect, heavily determinedby the circumstances these organisms live in. Although this view is stillconsciously or unconsciously present in people's minds, it has lost itsextreme deterministic qualities in the 20th and 21st century. However,the notion that only matter exists still prevails and continues to influencethe Western world.

Classical physics states that there is a real world out there, actingindependently of human consciousness, which, in this view, arises fromreal objects, such as neurons and molecules. It is seen as a byproduct of thematerial causes which produce the many physical effects observed. You willfind the materialist view in many present day consciousness studies.

Consciousness definitions and typecasting

In mainstream Western science and philosophy, many definitions andconcepts exist on consciousness. The term refers to a variety of aspectsof the relationship between the mind and the world with which itinteracts (1). It has been defined as: subjectivity; awareness; the abilityto experience feelings; wakefulness; having a sense of selfhood; or theexecutive control system of the mind (2).

Despite the difficulty of definition, many philosophers believe that thereis a broadly shared underlying intuition about what consciousness is. AsMax Velmans and Susan Schneider wrote in The Blackwell Companion toConsciousness: "Anything that we are aware of at a given moment formspart of our consciousness, making conscious experience at once the mostfamiliar and most mysterious aspect of our lives." (3)

In medicine, consciousness is assessed by observing a patient's arousaland responsiveness, and can be seen as a continuum of states ranging fromfull alertness and comprehension, through disorientation, delirium, lossof meaningful communication, and finally loss of movement in responseto painful stimuli. (4)

The reason why it is difficult to define consciousness may be related to itssubjectivity; it may simply mean different things to different people. Thisis one of the reasons that investigators use various models to describethe phenomenon. The model created by Ned Block is used widely inthe scientific community. He views a distinction between two types ofconsciousness that he calls phenomenal (P-consciousness) and access(A-consciousness). P-consciousness, according to Block, is simply rawexperience: it is moving, colored forms, sounds, sensations, emotions andfeelings with our bodies and responses at the center. These experiences,considered independently of any impact on behavior, are called qualia.A-consciousness is the phenomenon whereby information in our mindsis accessible for verbal report, reasoning, and the control of behavior (5).Understanding P-consciousness is considered very challenging; DavidChalmers calls this the hard problem: How can a physical brain, madepurely of material substances and nothing else, give rise to consciousexperiences or ineffable qualia? (6)

Materialist views

Also Susan Blackmore mentions different types of consciousness:phenomenal consciousness, when talking about 'What it is like to be ...'versus access consciousness which refers to thinking, or guiding action andspeech. In her book Consciousness, a Very Short Introduction, she provideseasy accessible information on the topic. She asks herself if consciousnessis an extra ingredient that we humans have in addition to our abilities ofperceiving, thinking and feeling, or if it is an intrinsic and inseparable partof being a creature that can perceive and think and feel. This question shelinks to the connection between the phenomenon and the working of thebrain; the answer is in her view not favorable for the first named: "Perhapsyou think consciousness is needed for making decisions, but we know alot about how the brain makes decisions and it does not seem to needan extra added force to do so. Also, we can make computers that makedecisions without a special consciousness module. The same goes forseeing, hearing, controlling movements, and many other human abilities.Perhaps you think it is needed for aesthetic appreciation, creativity, orfalling in love, but, if so, you would have to show that these things aredone by consciousness itself rather than by the workings of a clever brain[...] All this leads to the awkward notion that perhaps consciousness doesnothing, and other oddities point the same way." (6 p. 12) From a scientificpoint of view there is no need for an owner, Blackmore claims; no need foran inner experiencer to observe what the brain is doing; no need for aninner self. "[...] we can see how one neuron affects another, how groups ofneurons form and dissipate, and how one state leads to another, and thereis no need for any further intervention. The question of self is intimatelybound up with the problem of consciousness because whenever thereare conscious experiences it is easy to assume they must be happening tosomeone." (6 pp. 66-67)

With respect to alternative and altered states of consciousness, Blackmoreviews them as also being produced by the brain. About dreams she writesthat "while experiments suggest that dreams go along in real time, manyanecdotes describe dreams that were concocted at the moment of wakingup". One theory allows both to be true, she continues. During REMsleep numerous brain processes go on in parallel, and none is either 'in'or 'out' of consciousness. On waking up, any number of stories can beconcocted backwards by selecting one of many possible threads throughthe multiple scraps of memory that remain. (6 p. 103)

To her, the effects of drugs provide the most convincing evidence thatawareness depends on the brain. "Anesthetics are used to abolishconsciousness altogether ... mostly they affect the entire brain; thereis no sign of a 'consciousness centre' or a particular process that isswitched on and off." The most interesting drugs, from her point ofview, for understanding consciousness, are the hallucinogens. The majorhallucinogens have far more dramatic effects, are usually much longerlasting, and are harder to control (than cannabis). Most of these drugsresemble one of the four major brain neurotransmitters and interact withtheir function, she states. (6 pp. 104-105, 107)

The experiences of near-death (NDEs), that are sometimes reportedby individuals after surviving impending death situations, are a brainproduct in Blackmore's opinion. "NDEs have been reported from manydifferent cultures and ages, and seem to be remarkably similar in outline.The main cultural differences are in the details [...] the consistency is[...] better explained by the fact that people of all ages and cultures havesimilar brains, and those brains react in similar ways to stress, fear,lack of oxygen, or the many other triggers for NDEs. All these triggerscan cause the release of pleasure-inducing endorphins, and can set offrandom neural activity in many parts of the brain". (6 p. 110) ManyNDE researchers have different opinions on the origins of a near-deathexperience; most of them see no role for brain activity in its occurrence,as NDE's often take place in a brain-dead situation. I will go deeper intothese alternative NDE views later on in this chapter.

Susan Blackmore's views belong, with those of many other philosophers,to materialism. Many current and recent philosophers—e.g., DanielDennett, Willard Van Orman Quine, Donald Davidson, John RogersSearle, and Jerry Fodor—operate within a broadly physicalist ormaterialist framework. Consciousness to them is linked solely to matter,more specifically the brain, and is considered to be a local phenomenon.The possibility of consciousness after life does not exist to them; a viewthat largely excludes the possibility of free will after life.

Radical views as from eliminativist materialism hold that some mentalphenomena, such as beliefs and desires, simply do not exist at all, andthat talk of those phenomena reflects illusions. This standpoint doesaway with consciousness almost entirely. (7)

Monism and dualism

Materialist views on consciousness and mind can be considered monist:matter is the cause and base material of the universe, and consciousnessarises out of matter. Monism is any philosophical view which holds thatthere is unity in a given field of inquiry. Dualism sees the relationshipbetween mind and matter differently. Mind-body dualism in particularclaims that neither the mind nor matter can be reduced to each otherin any way, and thus is opposed to materialism in general, and reductivematerialism in particular. (8)

In theology, monists can be Jews, Christians or Muslims, believing ina monotheistic God that is omnipotent and all-pervading, and bothtranscendent and immanent. But also in Hinduism you will find monisticelements, especially in the view of Brahman as eternal and transcendentreality, the divine Ground of everything in and beyond the universe (9).

Within most Eastern belief structures exists the principle of the Cosmosas a joint entity with human awareness. The essence of the Eastern worldview is unity and interrelation. Paradoxically, in this view consciousnessand mind are considered to be different. Consciousness as such isbelieved to be non-intentional while the mind is regarded as intentional.In Eastern studies on the topic the goal is one of developing practicalmethods for transformation of the human condition via realization ofconsciousness as such. In Western studies the goal is to understandconsciousness and mind rationally, while viewing them as identical.

Transcendental views

With increasing awareness of the Eastern monistic systems of thought,Western spiritual and philosophical climate has seen a growingunderstanding of monism. Moreover, the New Thought and New Agemovements embraced many monistic concepts during the twentiethcentury and continue up to the present day. One of these concepts istranscendental monism, which poses that the mind is primary, and insome sense causes matter; the universe is made of consciousness (10).

Sheldrake et all postulate a theory in which they assume that consciousnessexisted always and that the unconscious was created by a recent bifurcation,a prehistoric consequence of a natural law of evolution. One virtue ofthis theory, they say, is that it allows us to see our individual consciousminds evolve from a universal conscious mind. We may then speak of theconsciousness of animals, plants, of Mother Earth, and Father Sky, and ofthe whole nuclear family of all and everything (11).

In the Nature of the Psyche, one of the many books by Jane Roberts thatcontain channeled material from the discarnate entity Seth, a similardevelopment is mentioned. In the early times of mankind living incaves, consciousness was more mobile and less individual. "A person,then, looking out into the world of trees, waters and rock, wildlifeand vegetation, literally felt that he or she was looking at the larger,materialized, subjective areas of personal selfhood. To explore thatexterior world was to explore the inner one. A man might merge hisown consciousness with a running stream, travelling in such a way formiles to explore the layout of the land" (12); a consciousness view thatwas and still is to be found in shamanism.

From Seth's point of view, individual consciousness not only emergesfrom the universe, it affects the universe as well. "By its very natureeach consciousness is a particular, peculiar, and unique focus ofawareness which will experience any possible realities through its owncharacteristics. It also "stamps" or "impresses" the universe with its ownimprint." To Seth, mankind forms part of a trans-species consciousness,to which also plants and animals belong, and influences it, although itsfocus is on day-to-day human consciousness (12 pp. 146, 164). This isparalleled in Donald's evolutionary approach to consciousness, in whichall organisms are assigned consciousness, in varying degrees (13).

The brain, the source of consciousness for many materialists, is seen bySeth as "primarily an event-forming psycho-mechanism through whichconsciousness operates." (12 p. 174)

Challenges in mainstream westernConsciousness studies

With these transcendental views of consciousness I'll end the overviewand turn to some unanswered topics in mainstream, mostly materialistic,consciousness studies.

The million dollar question in science of how consciousness originatesfrom matter seems to be answered by the non-materialists with: it doesn't.And by the materialists by: we don't know.

Several other unresolved mysteries and disagreements exist, accordingto consciousness investigator Tim Bayne. Subjectivity is one of them.Theorists disagree over what subjectivity itself involves and abouthow consciousness and subjectivity are related. (14 p. 478). Unity ofconsciousness might be one of the biggest thought- and discussion-provokingconcepts in consciousness studies. Basically speaking, subjectswill always relate their experiences to themselves and not to the personnext to them, thanks to this unity. Opinions differ widely on the questionif consciousness is necessarily unified, or if it can break down in particularcircumstances (14 p. 483).

On how the apparent unity of consciousness can be conceptualized alsoexists differences of opinion. Two main views exist, that of buildingblocks of experiences, or in terms of a unified phenomenal field (14 p.485). The phenomenal field, a concept from psychology, is all that we areaware of: objects, people, behavior, thoughts, emotions, ideas, etc (15).Bayne states that there is "some reason to prefer the unified-field modelover the building block model. If consciousness had a building-blockstructure, then we would expect there to be pathologies of consciousnessin which consciousness would fragment into its constituent elements.However, there appear to be no such pathologies." (14 p. 485)

CHAPTER 2

A dive into quantum consciousness

Intro

The theories of classical physics have led to materialisticviews in philosophy and in consciousness studies. These views areseverely limiting the possibilities of consciousness existing outside thehuman body, both in and after life. The experience of consciousness, orawareness, after life can very well be considered a prerequisite for freewill after life.

My intention for this chapter is to show that in modern physics,observations and discoveries have been made that have opened the doorto alternative and wider views on consciousness that could possibly beapplied to situations after life.

First I will provide you with a section containing an introduction tomodern physics theories, especially quantum mechanics and the stringtheory. These theories have many features and discoveries attached tothem, of which the most important are mentioned in a short summaryin the following section.

Then a section follows containing some philosophical implications ofmodern physics.

In later sections of this chapter I will explore consciousness views thatare based on the outcome of modern physics. Where applicable, Easternand transcendental views will be taken into account as well.

Modern physics theories

Before going into modern theories of physics, I'll provide a shortrecapitulation of classical physics. The classical set of theories explainsmatter and energy at the macroscopic level of the scale familiar to humanexperience, including the behavior of astronomical bodies. Matter inthis line of physics exists in three-dimensional space and is obeying fixedlaws of motion. The classical universe is both objective (independent ofan observer) and determined (predictable). In classical physics particlesare considered a point in space, larger than zero length. When theytravel from place to place, they do so with a definite, linear path. Thechange from a classical to a modern point of view on physics started in1900 when Max Planck discovered that energy did not move smoothlyand continuously as previously believed but instead moved in packetsof quanta in discrete, unpredictable bursts which he called jumps. Thisdiscovery led to the development of the theory of quantum mechanics:the body of scientific principles that explains the behavior of matter andits interactions with energy on the scale of atoms and atomic particles.Its universe is observer-dependent and probable (not determined).

(Continues...)