Scientific Evidence for the Soul and Why We Will Never Have Artificial Self-Awareness

[apexalpha]

I have broken down this take into two parts one is the more advance explanation other is simplified. (4th pragraph)

Lets get defenitions out of the way

Consciousness is our personal interior awareness ( the innermost you) not thoughts they come and go and not feelings similar they come and go as well. It combines various subjective, signifying phenomena such as perception and cognition( how we think) which seem to recapitulate lower levels of sense awareness. The top level is really a meta-awareness (or transcendent conciousness think meditation) of psychological meaning. It is directly (consciously) available to the subject herself in a teleological dialectic ( intrinsic purpose why am I alive what is the purpose of life??), which consists of voluntarily controlled activity and involuntarily interpreted sense which is received and projected (does not apply for non-dualistic).

Deeper look into consciousness

The word conscious, from conscire* reflects the experience of consciousness as an awareness of awareness. It takes a whole brain, all lobes and both hemispheres to experience this fully convincing immersive presentation. It's what was known philosophically as the Cartesian Theater. This theater, with its phenomena of tangible qualiai ndividual instances of subjective, conscious experience) , I think is neither a fictional solipsistic simulation, nor a directly analogous representation of literal fact.

( front row Cartesian theater)

Rather, it seems to be a multivalent fusion of fictive and translative elements - elaborations of metaphorically compressed sensorimotor understandings. I think that these interior sensorimotor gestalts may correspond to various shared electromagnetic connections among parts of the brain and nervous system I see them as skip jumping . ( yes quantum coherence can occur at room temperature).

Simplified explanation

Using train analogy for simplicity sake. The classic model suggest consciousness is like a metro train journey through a complex metro system like that of Tokyo. Without this complex network (stations and lines) consciousness can not occur.

( tokyo metro map)

Similar to more simple modes of transportation like that of trams which don`t need much of rails and even stops. Consciousness can exist in single celled organisims with no other cells to even connect to. Yet have self awareness.

(Simple tram)

How materialistic atheists or previous old model explained awareness

Human consciousness or self awareness according to classic materialists pop into existence because of how complex the brain (neuronal complex) of animals is which contain billions of networking cells connected to each other in a web. This is also what the race for “artificial intelligence” is aiming at.

Two main arguments against this grandiosity of creating “life” are:

1) The internet should be selfaware by this stage

2) Single celled organisims like the paramoecium have selfawerness

( paramoecium)

Is there an after life?

There are new research (gaining ground as concensus) which has proven that the quantum consciousness and Orch OR model (link) suggests that there is a connection between what goes on inside the human brain at the plancks constant (smallest unit of measurement in the universe) and the basic structure of the universe. So in plain English the human consciousness is not trapped in the body take all of those with near death experiences and floating around their bodies describing perfectly how their operation was done even though they appeared to be heavily under anesthesia.

[Anonymous]

Nice take! I'm atheist but i believe in this concept (i don't know why)

[Whatthefluff]

Nice

[Deathraider]

Simple cell organism have mechanism in the cells to respond, but in multicellular organisms, cells have to communicate to each other. Single cell organism could do the task all themselves, but in multicellular organisms cells have to communicate to each other. The Internet isn't self aware as humans are because we haven't cracked the code yet, but we can simulate bacteria, other single felled organisms, and store brain information about some small multicellular organisms. Self awareness is the ability to react to outside stimuli. Both computer and organisms can do that. Computer can have sensors. And the Internet can react to what people are searching. It learns what you go onto and companies could use that info to help with advertising. Finally quantum consciousness is a pseudoscience. This is the basic argument of quantum consciousness: I don't understand consciousness.
I don't understand quantum physics.
Therefore, consciousness must be a function of quantum physics!
There is an obvious flaw. I hope in you future endeavors, that you apply logic, rationality, and follow the scientific method.

[apexalpha]

my definition for self awerness is qualia so its not some knee jerk reaction to external stimuli.
" The Internet isn't self aware as humans are because we haven't cracked the code yet" its a dead end I don`t see why miney is burnt on that.
"Finally quantum consciousness is a pseudoscience" replicable microtuble experiments are hardly pseudoscience.

[Deathraider]

I would seriously like you to cite your sources. If I have no sources or repeatable experiment, I must conclude that your hypothesis is false. And I said Sources, don't only give me one. Give me multiple credible sources done by scientist, which the experiment is repeatable. Then if you convince me, send it into the scientific community and we'll see how successful it is.

[apexalpha]

1. https://www. ncbi. nlm. nih. gov/pubmed/24259348 (explains how quantum pathways collapse to compute one path)
2. https://www. ncbi. nlm. nih. gov/pubmed/19669425 (difference between concious and nonconcious nuerocomputations EGG in synchronication of dendrites)

[John_Doesnt]

NDE's were debunked a long time ago by a neurologist who proved that it's just the brain's method for handling trauma. All of the "scientific evidence" you presented was falsified or flat out lies about what science actually says about the consciousness.
There was also the pointless attack on atheists, when it fact most religions don't believe in the concept of a soul.

[apexalpha]

" All of the "scientific evidence" you presented was falsified or flat out lies" which papers and where exactly you have to back up your statements!
"There was also the pointless attack on atheists, when it fact most religions don't believe in the concept of a soul." I specefied a type of atheist and most religons believe in a trancedent conciousness (soul)

[John_Doesnt]

"Human consciousness or self awareness according to classic materialists pop into existence because of how complex the brain (neuronal complex) of animals is which contain billions of networking cells connected to each other in a web."
False because science never says that anything just pops into existence. Science would also never claim that something comes into existence because of complexity. Appeal to complexity is a logical fallacy.

[apexalpha]

In that case those "scientists" would need to acknowledge an originator for the big bang or they look like hypocrites

[John_Doesnt]

I knew this was just some creationist troll attempt and not actual science. If you don't accept evolution or the Big Bang than you can't call yourself scientific.

[apexalpha]

more like an ontological explanation of the big bang attempt I do believe in the big bang and the expansion of the universe, dualistic thinking would have you think they are mutually exclusive

[John_Doesnt]

This site doesn't need anymore creationist trolls. We have enough already.

[apexalpha]

I equate trolls with adhominem derailing the discusion

[John_Doesnt]

The discussion is on your scientific credibility because you lied about what science states. I furthered that by saying that you're lying on purpose because you're just trolling as a creationist.

[Anonymous]

Actually, there are some spiritual atheists who consider soul as a possibility.
Atheists don't believe only in god, but they can believe in some other stuff.
Only rigid skeptics don't believe in anything that they haven't seen with their own eyes.

[Anonymous]

Wow - so much bullshit, so little time.

There is NO, zero, nada, scientific evidence for the soul.

Just... wow, so much bullshit. I couldn't begin to unpack it in a mere 2500 characters.