The problem of consciousness is related to some of the oldest questions of philosophy: what does the world consist of? Who am I? It relates to the mind-body problem: what is the relationship between the physical and the mental?Despite the fact that we are learning more and more about the functioning of the brain, consciousness remains a mystery. In the past, they used the term 'élan vital' to explain how non-living things could be made alive. Nowadays this concept is no longer used, since we know that biological processes are responsible for this. Some scientists believe that the same will also happen with the term consciousness. Once we understand how brain processes create a sense of consciousness, then we might not need to use this term anymore.Consciousness requires some sort of dualism: objectivity vs. subjectivity, inner vs. outer, mind vs. body...For example: Take a pencil in your hand and look at it. You see the pencil from your own unique perspective, which you cannot share with others. The pencil is part of the outside world, your experience with the pencil is part of your inner world. The way philosophers view the consciousness problem can generally be divided into monist theories, which suggest that there are one kind of things in the world, and dualist theories, which suggest that there are two kinds of things. Some theories state that the mental world is fundamental and some theories state that the physical world is fundamental. Monistic theories assume that the world consists of only one kind of matter (body or mind). Some monistic theories state that everything consists of the mind, according to these theories we only have ideas and perceptions of a pencil. We do not know if a pencil really exists. People who assume this are called mentalists or idealists. Berkeley supported this...

For many centuries there have been variants of the idea that the mind consists of different parts. Already with the ancient Egyptians and in ancient Hindu texts we find the assumption that the mind is subdivided into parts. Plato stated that the soul consists of three parts: reason, the 'spirit' and appetite. Above all, it occupied a central position in psychoanalytic theories of the early twentieth century. However, the more we discover about the functioning of the brain, the more unlikely the idea of ​​the divided mind becomes.Another subdivision is the occurrence of two types of processing. This is what the 'dual-process' theories are about. Many of these theories state that one process is automatic, effortless and non-flexible, while the other is much slower, more controlled and flexible. You can effortlessly shift this subdivision over the distinction between unconscious and conscious. In daily life we ​​feel that we do many things unconsciously. When we do things consciously, we feel that our consciousness really has control over it. If that is indeed the case, how does the mind do that? Imagine someone throws a ball at you. Before the ball arrives you start to grab it. So you seem to be aware of the ball that comes to you, but also of what you have to do to catch the ball. So the sequence seems to be:you perceive something consciously andyou perform an action on the basis of the conscious experience.This is actually very strange, since physical information about the outside world (the ball) enters your brain and as a result you get a conscious experience. This conscious experience then ensures that you perform an action in one way or another.Descartes assumed a dualistic approach, but this is not a solution to the problem. Philosopher Kim argued that unconscious thoughts and actions may arise from a conscious thought, but that...

A few centuries ago, James asked the following question: does consciousness cause attention to be directed or is consciousness the effect of paying attention? We feel that our consciousness causes some parts of the world to light up, while leaving some other parts in darkness. This is also called 'spotlight of attention'. So it feels like we can focus our attention on something consciously.Numerous theories about attention have been carried out. For example, around 1950, researchers conducted experiments with the dichotic listening task. In such an experiment, someone gets to hear different messages in both ears. It is the intention that someone only pays attention to the messages that come into one ear. The result of this experiment was that what comes into the other ear is perceived unconsciously, even though no attention is paid to it. These kinds of findings led to the ongoing debate about the moment of attention selection: early, close to the sensory level, or only after much processing has taken place.Other theories saw attention as a bottleneck, where pre-conscious sensory filters were needed to decide what should be passed to deeper stages of processing. This perception fits well with the idea that the brain has a limited capacity for detailed processing. There is then parallel processing. There are various ideas today about the relationship between attention and consciousness. Mack states on the basis of 'inattentional blindness' (see section 6) that no conscious perception can exist without attention. Crick, on the other hand, states that consciousness is closely linked to attention.So there are basically two opposing ideas about consciousness and attention. The first idea is that if attention is paid to something, it will end up in consciousness. The other idea is that consciousness leads the attention...

Questions about the nature of consciousness are closely tied to questions about the nature of the self. The 'self' we experience seems to be central to everything we are aware of at every moment. As a result, the self has both uniqueness and continuity. The problems start when you ask what kind of thing that experience might be.How is it that we feel that there is a 'self' that has all kinds of experiences? There are two ideas about the self in psychology:there is such a thing as a self that has all kinds of experiences and makes decisions, and it seems as if there is a self, but this in reality, this is not the caseFrom the first vision the egotheories arise and from the second vision the bundling theories originated. In many religions the first vision is assumed. Only in Buddhism is it denied that the self exists. Many forms of substance dualism are egotheories, because they state that the mind equals the self. An example is the theory of 'dualist interactionism' by Popper and Eccles. According to this theory, the self-conscious mind has control over the brain. The distinction between monists and dualists is not the same as the distinction between egotheories and bundle theories. There are materialists (monists) who believe that there is a self.Bundle theories are based on the work of Hume that states that the self does not exist, but that there is a bundle of sensations. The life of a person would consist of a succession of sensations, impressions and ideas, which follow each other in a continuous flow at lightning speed, for a lifetime. Hume and Buddha share the idea that there is no self. Hume, however, admitted that bundle theories go against something that we perceive as normal. We all have the feeling that there is a self. In people with multiple personalities, it seems that several selves live in them. For example,...

The problem of free will goes back to the Greek philosophers, 2000 years ago. The basic question that was always asked was whether we are free to make our actions and decisions. There are two major problems here. The first problem is determinism: if this universe runs through deterministic laws, then everything that happens should be inevitable. If this were true, there could be no free will. The second problem is moral responsibility: if I am not free to choose my actions, how can I feel morally responsible for these actions?Compatibilists believe that some things can be certain, but free will can still exist. There is a connection between the self and consciousness. We act as if there is an 'I' that makes conscious choices. It seems that our conscious thoughts are the cause of our actions. James rejected the idea of ​​a permanent self, but believed in a spiritual power. In his view, the feeling of effort is no illusion, but the cause of consciousness and of personal will. We know that thoughts and emotions play a role in decision-making. We weigh things up and compare them with each other. The question is where consciousness plays a role in this process. When we perform a voluntary action, the frontal lobes are activated. The prefrontal lobes activate motor actions. These send signals again to the premotoric areas that program the actions. This is again forwarded to the primary motor cortex to achieve motor output. The supplementary motor area is involved in the ordering and programming of motor actions according to a motor plan. The anterior cingulate selects the information needed for actions, pain and emotion.Damage to the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) can lead to a lack of spontaneous activity and to stereotypic actions. Damage to the prefrontal area and the corpus callosum can result in an 'alien hand'. Patients who have an 'alien hand...

It seems like we only have one consciousness. If you look at the brain, then you see that there is complexity and diversity. Often there are multiple processes that take place simultaneously through different brain routes. Yet we feel that everything forms a unity. We feel that only one exists and that we experience things not as isolated but as a whole. How come?Dualists believe that everyone has a consciousness that is something other than their brains. Eccles believed as dualist that the mind plays an active role in selecting and integrating neural activity. This would result in a unified whole. But how should this happen? Where does the interaction between the mind and the brain take place? This problem recurs in all dualistic theories. The dualist Libet has the answer that the feeling of unity is achieved through a mental field of consciousness. That is why split brain patients still behave as one person. When you pick up a coin and throw it in the air, there are immense things happening in your brain. For example, various brain areas are active for observing color, movement and shape. There are also auditory processes under way. There is no specific place or a specific moment in which all this information comes together so that the falling coin can be seen as a unified whole. Yet we do have the feeling that everything is processed as a whole and that the coin falls, as it were, in one go. How can you see the coin as one moving object?This problem is described as the visual binding problem and more generally as the 'binding problem'. This problem can be described at different levels, for example at the neural level and at the phenomenological level. Some people think that the binding problem is the same as understanding how attention works. So if you focus your attention on a cast coin long enough, the characteristics...

The theory of evolutionIn the past it was believed that everything in the world was designed by a designer, namely God. The biologist Darwin, however, proposed the theory of evolution. Evolution literally means gradual change. According to Darwin, there were slow changes on the earth and variation among organisms. Different organisms compete for food, water or other resources, this lead to a competition n which the weaker organisms were slowly dying and the organisms that would survive would pass on the information helped them survive to future generations. Their descendance would then have the characteristics that made survival easier. The organisms that are best adapted to the environment are therefore most likely to survive if, for example, food shortages exist. "evolutionary algorithm" refers to the idea that if there is the three-part algorithm variation, inheritance and selection, then there must be evolution. Design out of chaos without help from spirit.LamarckismLamarck agreed with Darwin that species gradually change into other species, but he stated that there must first be an internal force that directs progress in one direction and that, in addition, the inheritance of acquired characteristics is required. This theory is now called Lamarckism. Lamarck believed that if an animal wants to change itself, then the effect of this is passed on to the next generation. For example, if a giraffe always stretches its neck to get to the highest branches, then the next generation of giraffes would have a longer necks.Although there are many similarities between the visions of Darwin and Lamarck, there are also differences. Lamarck believed that evolution always means progress, while Darwin does not assume this. Darwin also does not believe that there is an internal force that causes this progress. Lamarck's theory was more popular in the beginning than...

There are two extreme visions about whether animals also have a consciousness.The vision that only people have an awareness. Descartes believed that only people have a consciousness, because only we have language skills. According to him, animals act like automatic machines.Because so many species are physically similar, they must all be conscious. Perch states, for example, that consciousness is a fundamental biological one adaptation is and it already occurred in the first mammals. He argues that we can not say that other species have no subjectivity to experience.In addition, there are also theories where it is assumed that different animals have different forms of consciousness. We can not assume that there is only one kind of consciousness. Every animal species has developed sensory systems that fit their way of life.Can we say that some animal species have a more developed consciousness than other animals? Is a frog, for example, more aware of itself than a fly? Greenfield states that consciousness becomes more complex as the brain grows larger. If this is true, then elephants should have a better developed consciousness than humans. This seems to be unlikely. We can try to categorize animals on the basis of their intelligence, but we have to know that our idea of ​​intelligence is connected with our own, human ideas about which skills belong to intelligent organisms.Another question is whether one animal experiences more pain than the other animal. Stamp Dawkins states that we can determine on the basis of three things whether an animal suffers pain:the general state of health of the animal, the physiology of the animal and the behavior of the animal.Dawkins states that we can best know if an animal is suffering if the animal tries to avoid the reason for the pain. We must therefore not rely on...

Could a machine be aware of something? This question is more difficult than the question of whether machines can think. If you ask the latter question, you can go two ways. You can say that it depends on how the word 'think' is defined. You can also say that you want to design an experiment that shows that a machine can think. This is what Turing has done. It is more difficult to know whether a machine has consciousness.First of all, there is no clear definition for the word 'consciousness'. In addition, there is no experiment (such as the Turing test), with which it can be investigated whether machines have an awareness. If we assume that consciousness has to do with subjective experiences, then only the machine itself can know whether it has a consciousness.Some people believe that if you ask a robot if he has a consciousness and he says that this is so, it is likely that he pretends to have a consciousness, because he has been programmed in this way. A functionalist will say that robots have a consciousness because they can perform certain tasks as robots. According to functionalists, the consciousness depends on being able to act. Consciousness is not a cause according to this view of task performance. An inessentialist does not believe that machines or robots can have a consciousness because there is no inner experience with machines. If both visions (both those of the functionalist and the inessentialist) were legitimate then there would still be no simple test to examine the consciousness of a machine. There are several arguments to indicate that machines could never have a consciousness. First, it feels unnatural to think that a machine can have a consciousness. You can also assume a dualistic perspective. For example, based on your religion, you can say that God has only given a consciousness to...

Scientists had a very early interest in unconscious processing (also called implicit or subliminal perception ). We know that there can be perception without consciousness. People can think for themselves that they have not perceived anything consciously, while their behavior shows that they have observed something.We do not assume that we have two selves: one for conscious processing and one for unconscious processing. In earlier experiments, conscious experiences were defined in terms of what people themselves said they had observed. This sounds logical, but this method has a disadvantage. Whether someone says that he or she has perceived something consciously depends on how careful someone is with his or her judgment. There is no clear limit to indicate between when someone has observed something or not. Behaviorists did not want to be dependent on whether people said they had observed something. They wanted to make objective measuring instruments so that there was no need for them. This is a strange idea, since saying whether you have observed something,is as reliable (or unreliable) as pressing a button to make it clear that you have observed something. Marcel showed that people react faster to a target if the prime matches this. Marcel made the primes unrecognizable to participants by placing a visual distractor on the image immediately after the prime appeared. People could not consciously perceive the prime. Even so, the target was reacted even faster. This phenomenon is also called ' semantic priming' .Cheesman and Merikle distinguished between:objective threshold value, andsubjective threshold value.The objective threshold value represents the level of detection in which a distinction is made between perceptual information on the basis of random phenomena. The subjective threshold value is about the...

There are at least two good reasons for studying the paranormal phenomenon:paranormal experiences are common and many people believe in it; when paranormal experiences occur they have many implications for science as a result. The popular view of the paranormal is that physical phenomena are the proof of the 'power of consciousness'. Consciousness is independent of time and space. Within parapsychology, terms such as 'awareness', 'abnormal effects of conscious intention', 'awareness interactions' and 'awareness-related anomalies' are common.In the event that paranormal claims are wrong, the extended beliefs and frequent reports of physical experiences must be explained in a different way. When paranormal claims are correct, it is important to further investigate the implications for the science of consciousness. Often, ideas about the paranormal are used to undermine materialistic visions about consciousness. Accepting that something supernatural exists means that not everything can be explained by means of brain processes. Between 1800 and 1900 there was a lot of attention for spirits and people who could communicate with them. Spiritualism was very popular during that period. People who say they can communicate with spirits are also called mediums. It has often happened that mediums used all sorts of tricks and thus pretended they were clairvoyant. Cheating is not the only alternative to a paranormal interpretation. People can also misinterpret things they see for many other reasons, such as hallucinations and delusions. J. B and L. Rhine tried to find evidence against materialism and behaviorism.Behaviorism used to be very popular and emphasized observable and measurable outcomes. Rhine and Rhine wanted to show that an independent mind exists. J.B. Rhine wrote a book and used the term ' extrasensory...

You can speak of a lucid dream if, during the dream, you realize that you are dreaming. So you are aware of the fact that you are dreaming during your dream . Every day we take cycles with three states: (1) being vigilant, (2) REM ( Rapid Eye Movement ) sleep and (3) non-REM sleep . A cycle repeats itself four to five times a day. These sleep phases are classified based on physical measurements and behavior measurements.For example, during REM sleep, the brain is very active and the EEG pattern resembles that of someone who is awake. Yet it is more difficult to wake someone up in REM sleep than during non-REM sleep. During the non-REM sleep there are mainly long, but slow waves to be seen on the EEG. Adenosine is the most important neuromodulator that induces sleep.The REM cycle is guided by the reticular formation in the pons of the brainstem. Here are nuclei that constantly brake and activate REM sleep. Sensory input is blocked by the thalamus and the cortex during the non-REM sleep. During REM sleep, the brain blocks motor skills. Someone seems to be paralyzed during sleep. When people wake from a non-REM sleep, people often say that nothing has gone through their heads or that they have not thought of anything during their sleep. Reports of non-REM dreams are often short and have few details. When people wake up during the REM sleep, they often say that they have had a bizarre and complex dream.Research shows that there are similarities between the dreams that people have. Even the dreams in different cultures appear to be comparable. Men dream more often about men than women do. They also dream more often about aggressive interactions with other men. Children often dream about animals and are often the victim of aggression in dreams.There are several problems to generalize the above to all dreams, because of the effects of the...

The research into consciousness is sometimes divided into two categories:the objective third person approach, and the subjective first person approach.Sometimes a third approach is added: the second person approach (also called intersubjective approach). A distinction is made between first versus third person science and first versus third person methods .It is difficult to call the first person approach scientific, because this approach looks at how people perceive things subjectively. This can not be measured objectively and it is also not reproducible. In addition, objectivity is important in science, so that personal bias can not influence results. Finally, it can be said that there is no such thing as a first person approach, because at the moment you say something, your description will already be data for the third person's science. So there can not actually be any first-person data.All these reasons show that the first person approach to consciousness is not a good way of science . First person methods can be used. Subjective experiences can thus be published. They do not count as scientific evidence. Dennett thinks he is the leader of the A team and that Chalmers is the leader of the B team. Chalmers sees science about consciousness as something different from all other forms of science. This is because there must be a connection between data from the third person and data from the first person. Third person data is about brain processes, behaviors and what people say, while the first person has data about the conscious experience itself. Chalmers starts from the assumption that the first person exists. He believes there are good methods for collecting third person data, but we should have better methods for collecting first person data.Science should try to connect the first person data to the third person...

Buddhism differs from other religions in various ways. Thus Buddhism, unlike other religions, knows no god, creator or soul. Buddhism is mainly about the individual who has to come to enlightenment. In addition, Buddhism has no truths that must be believed in particular.Buddha taught his followers that all things that exist are relative and dependent on each other and that these things arise from what came before these things. This vision can be seen as an early statement of the scientific principle of cause and effect. Buddha denied the possibility of being aware without involved perceptions, actions and sensations.Some scientists are very interested in Buddhism because Buddhism assumes that there is no self and that dualism does not exist. These scientists focus mainly on Zen Buddhism , because in this form of Buddhism little attention is paid to prayer houses or altars. Zen Buddhism is not very outward-looking in this respect. Zen Buddhism speaks of enlightenment, but what exactly is this?This concept can be used in two ways. First of all, the process of enlighting can be discussed . This process can take place quickly or slowly. In this connection, it is possible to believe in a kind of route that can lead to enlightenment. Enlighting experiences ('kensho') can be experienced. A second form of enlighting is the ultimate enlightenment. This is not a state of consciousness that resembles a religious experience, because it is temporary (like a kensho). Ultimate enlightment can not be explained in terms of a state. There is no route that leads to ultimate enlightenment, because enlightenment is not something that can be obtained. Enightment can not be expressed in words in this connection. In Buddhism, ' samsara' stands for a continuous circle of birth and death. This has to do with the origins of suffering. We...