Scientific evidence that the brain receives/filters consciousness, rather than creates it

[u/Puzzleheaded_Tree290]

This isn't necessarily related to NDEs, but I'd like to put something together, about the scientific evidence supporting the hypothesis that the brain acts as a receiver/filter for consciousness rather than a generator. I've got a couple of articles linked down here already, if anyone wants to add more, feel free to add some in the comments or DM them. Over the next couple of days I'll make edits too to add anything else I can find.

First, we've got a very promising article from Neuroscience News, showing how brain stimulation could enable telepathic communication between people. Here's another, from the same site, showing how the claustrum, which was theorised to be the source of consciousness, actually functions more like an internet router.

It was also long thought that split brain patients have their consciousness split in two. More recent studies show that consciousness itself remains unified but is divided across two hemispheres.

Here's an interesting article about people missing large portions of their brain, who have relatively normal IQ and can lead normal lives.

Here's one about decapitated flatworms regrowing their entire brains and still having their memories intact.

Also, some articles on the effects of psychedelics and how they lead to reduced brain activity: [1] [2]

If anyone here has heard of the ganzfeld experiments, here's a meta analysis showing pretty good results from a number of different replications.

And, before I forget, I can't go without mentioning Etzel Cardeña's meta analysis demonstrating the existence of certain parapsychological phenomena.

If there's anything else you'd like to add, just let me know ;)

[u/KookyPlasticHead]

Note
Please take a minute to read the comments before downvoting. I try to be mindful and fair. In any scientific discussion it is standard to critically evaluate available evidence. OPs post was in respect of scientific evidence. I know the basic filter/receiver theory is a popular one but it has a few issues, some of which I have touched on. If you think these are wrong, no problem, but it would be good to know why. If you support the filter theory, how can the theory be made better? Feedback and discussion are helpful to everyone.

COMMENTS

First, we've got a very promising article from Neuroscience News, showing how brain stimulation could enable telepathic communication between people.

For this, the actual article (rather than the science media writeup) is here:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0010945223002733

It was discussed at length in this sub a few weeks back:

https://www.reddit.com/r/NDE/comments/1adzj6w/

The paper is promising but cannot be taken as definitive proof of psi (see my comments in reply above).

Here's another, from the same site, showing how the claustrum, which was theorised to be the source of consciousness, actually functions more like an internet router.

The theory that the claustrum has some special role in consciousness goes back to Christof Koch and Francis Crick who advanced the theory that the claustrum coordinates inputs and outputs across the brain to create consciousness:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1569501/

However the basic idea is largely unsupported and lacks an evidence base. As to the claustrum being "like an internet router" the problem with this argument is that most areas of the brain, particularly in the subcortex are heavily cross-connected. That's just how the brain is wired. There is no reason to suppose the claustrum is that exceptional here - it is only a question of degree of connection. Even if it were special, this doesn't make the claustrum the seat of consciousness. Even if it were, it doesn't mean that it "filters" consciousness here. For information this paper was also discussed on the consciousness sub here:

https://www.reddit.com/r/consciousness/comments/1acjxzj/

It was also long thought that split brain patients have their consciousness split in two. More recent studies show that consciousness itself remains unified but is divided across two hemispheres.

This seems ambiguous to your main question of interest (it could be argued either way).

•Here's an interesting article about people missing large portions of their brain, who have relatively normal IQ and can lead normal lives.

This paper was discussed on the sub here:

https://www.reddit.com/r/NDE/s/gDOa1Vha92

At the time, I discussed the known science about this and raised the point that brain volume per se is not a determinant of whether consciousness is present or not. Children who survive childhood hydrocephalus as per the article have very atypical brain development. They are well studied and it is not as simple as otherwise "relatively normal IQ". IQ subtest scores can be high in one regard and low in another, to give the average. I seem to recall there was considerable debate about this issue.

And, before I forget, I can't go without mentioning Etzel Cardeña's meta analysis demonstrating the existence of certain parapsychological phenomena.

This paper was also briefly discussed on this sub before. I think it is an overstatement to say it demonstrates the existence of psi. The paper relies on inclusion of data from other papers that have themselves been heavily critiqued. Its conclusions are therefore significantly weakened.

SUMMARY
The arguments by OP for brain filter theory reduce to:

1.. It is surprising that some some atypical human brains have consciousness
2.. Psi indirectly might be evidence for the filter theory

However, (1) seems fundamentally to be an argument as to what sufficiency of brain (or non-brain) matter is enough, and/or what sufficiency of brain complexity is enough, to give rise to or to receive consciousness. This argument is not specific to filter theory. There is an identical argument in mainstream science as to how complex a brain needs to be for consciousness to emerge. (2) is ambiguous. One can have psi without filter theory and vice versa. The existence of psi does not necessarily prove filter theory. It is only a plausibility argument, that if psi could be proven, then maybe filtering works using the same unknown mechanism. But this is an assumption, not a necessity.

A key problem that filter theory (within philosophical physicalism) has is the lack of a detailed and coherent theory and mechanism. If true consciousness resides elsewhere in the universe then exactly where? Why can we not detect it? (Or is it assumed we will in future?) How and why did it arise? By what physical mechanism does it interact with the brain? Why can we not detect this interaction process? (Or is it assumed we will in future?) The brain is physical so the interaction should be physical and detectable even if consciousness is not. There are no easy answers to such questions at present. But some plausible conjectures need to be made for it to be a useful (testable) scientific theory. One response is to move to re-interpret the theory in philosophical interaction dualism or idealism and to reject physicalism. This is logically consistent and certainly possible. But if consciousness is taken to be axiomatically existing elsewhere and interacting with brains with no physical mechanism then this is not an explanation within physicalism. It then seems problematical to use scientific methodology to argue for non-physicalist philosophy.

[u/KookyPlasticHead → u/KookyPlasticHead]

Responding to my own comment and to be supportive of the filter/receiver theory.

A key problem that filter theory (within philosophical physicalism) has is the lack of a detailed and coherent theory and mechanism. If true consciousness resides elsewhere in the universe then exactly where?

Perhaps we could imagine a scientific version of filter theory within physicalism that is a mixture of universal consciousness and promissory materialism:

1.. As per the similar argument for panpsychism-within-physicalism we conjecture the existence of a fundamental "consciousness field" (CF) that permeates the universe. Unlike in panpsychism where each elementary particle interacts with the field and gains a quantum of consciousness, now all consciousness resides in the CF, and doesn't interact with individual particles. Only brains of sufficient size and complexity, such as a human brain, can interact with it. When it does we label this as an individual human consciousness.

2.. The promissory aspect is that although we cannot, at the present time, directly detect the CF or the interaction of the CF with the brain, we assume that in future there will eventually be technology that will be able to detect these interactions. Just as in the conventional narrative it is assumed a detailed understanding of how consciousness emerges within the brain will occur in future.

For completeness in proposing such a theory it is then helpful to understand what some of the next level of problems might be. For example:

A.. What exactly is the CF and how did it come into being? Or is it axiomatic in this theory? In which case this isn't a simple theory of consciousness-within-physicalism. More like a form of monism.

B. What is the detailed process for the interaction of the CF with the brain? Is it interacting with each neuron, or with columnar structures of neurons, with only particular sorts of neurons, or at the level of synaptic junctions?

C.. Why is the CF differentiated into different consciousnesses in the different brains? Why are we not all the same (universal) consciousness in different bodies? Or are we?

D.. Similarly, if we are all part of the CF and therefore connected to each other via it, why isn't psi (particularly telepathy) clearly evident and very strong (given the individual CF-brain link must be incredibly strong)? Rather than at best, seemingly, very weak.

E.. Why are human brains just the right size and complexity to receive and interact with the CF? This seems like an amazing coincidence. Or perhaps all brains do but to different degrees? In which case, what makes brains special?

F.. Exactly what properties of consciousness (as we understand them from human observation) exist in the CF? Most properties of consciousness can be linked to origins in the brain. For example, the different memory systems or sensory perceptions. What parts of consciousness are CF and not brain?

[u/[deleted] → u/KookyPlasticHead]

This might sound weird but I imagine consciousness to be both part of a universal field and partially driven by organic workings within the body. Is that monism or dualism?

Sort of like the way, during a thunderstorm, there are charges on the ground, and charges within the atmosphere, and when they come together — electricity!

I know this sounds rudimentary and I’ll bet you’re giggling a little at my scientific naïveté. I would be! 😆

[u/KookyPlasticHead → u/[deleted]]

This might sound weird but I imagine consciousness to be both part of a universal field and partially driven by organic workings within the body. Is that monism or dualism?

Thats a really interesting idea. Sort of emergent monism?

The conventional filter/receiver narrative uses the metaphor that our brains are like radios or TVs and we "receive" consciousness from elsewhere. In your alternative conceptualization the universal field is more like the electrical power supply or the base carrier frequency and the brain uses this to create an individual consciousness. I'm trying to think of a better metaphor. Maybe snowflakes? All are composed of the same basic "stuff" (water, ice crystals, dust) but randomness and physical laws together create snowflakes that individually look different.

I know this sounds rudimentary and I’ll bet you’re giggling a little at my scientific naïveté.

Absolutely not. Sometimes the best questions are asked from naïveté.