Neuroscientists discover 'engine of consciousness' hiding in monkeys' brains

originally posted by: BrianFlanders

originally posted by: blueman12

originally posted by: BrianFlanders
Ummmm....an engine is something that has to be started. Not something that does the starting.

The qoute says they found pathways for consciousness and a region that gets those pathways started : an engine.

Very interesting.

An engine gets started by a starter. The engine can't start itself.

Wtf does that mean?

Maybe it is a start to waking people out of a coma.
There could be a lot of uses down the road.

originally posted by: blueman12

originally posted by: BrianFlanders

originally posted by: blueman12

originally posted by: BrianFlanders
Ummmm....an engine is something that has to be started. Not something that does the starting.

The qoute says they found pathways for consciousness and a region that gets those pathways started : an engine.

Very interesting.

An engine gets started by a starter. The engine can't start itself.

Wtf does that mean?

It means that apparently, neuroscientists don't know what an engine is.

a reply to: BrianFlanders

That's retarded and provides no comment on this new discovery.

so basically they found a way to zap monkeys into a conscious state.... fascinating!

I wonder if they could use this technique to 'zap' people out of a long lasting comatose state

originally posted by: Darkblade71
Maybe it is a start to waking people out of a coma.
There could be a lot of uses down the road.

Did they try using smelling salts? That is also a neurotriggering agent used to rouse people into consciousness.

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: Barcs

So prior to this amazing discovery
What did those scientists think?
That monkeys didn’t have something to wake them into consciousness from sleep, anethesia or unconsciousness
Did scientists originally think That no engine existed and it was magic they woke?
Or is the fascinating find that they found the “engine”

Seems underwhelming to me

Am I missing something?

I'm not posting articles like this to be overwhelming or convince people of things, I'm doing it to show the latest developments in evolutionary science and understanding things that weren't fully known before.

originally posted by: BrianFlanders
Ummmm....an engine is something that has to be started. Not something that does the starting.

Please be satire.

originally posted by: BrianFlanders

originally posted by: blueman12

originally posted by: BrianFlanders
Ummmm....an engine is something that has to be started. Not something that does the starting.

The qoute says they found pathways for consciousness and a region that gets those pathways started : an engine.

Very interesting.

An engine gets started by a starter. The engine can't start itself.

You really think that by engine, they are referring to a literal combustion engine? Please educate yourself.

www.merriam-webster.com...

a reply to: Barcs

I don’t mind why you are posting your information
Just seems underwhelming and wanted to know why I should be interested in scientists finding the power lines to consciousness

No doubt a piece of a jigsaw but it’s not earth shattering or anything as I understand and to be clear, not even sure that the scientists are sure

Being awake = conciousness?

Conciousness is obviously not fundamental to the universe then, as God's been dreaming far too long

originally posted by: Barcs

I'm not posting articles like this to be overwhelming or convince people of things, I'm doing it to show the latest developments in evolutionary science

How is this evolutionary science? Random mutation could never have created the intricate neural circuitry required to generate consciousness. They found a neural circuit involved with consciousness, so therefore evolution? Doesn't make any sense.

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: Barcs

I'm not posting articles like this to be overwhelming or convince people of things, I'm doing it to show the latest developments in evolutionary science

How is this evolutionary science? Random mutation could never have created the intricate neural circuitry required to generate consciousness. Just because they found a neural circuit that seems to be involved with it, does not somehow mean that evolution created it.

And likewise, just because you dismiss something completely out of hand ( and absolutely devoid of evidence to support your position as usual), doesn’t make your stance correct. Logical fallacies aren’t evidence and you sure as hell haven’t demonstrated anything that falsifies the OP. Just a standard day for the guy who keeps claiming I’m destroying an entire generation of young thinkers by “pushing” the MES on them despite never having seen me give a lecture so you have yes basis upon which to continue your reign of self validation and confirmation bias.

a reply to: peter vlar

I wasn't arguing the discovery in the OP. I was arguing that its not proof of evolution. It has nothing whatsoever to do with the validation of evolutionary theory.

Unless you can show that the random mutation of a protein-coding gene could somehow add a totally new functional neural circuit that seamlessly interconnects with the rest of the nervous system. But you can't, because the theory is not based in reality.

originally posted by: cooperton
a reply to: peter vlar

I wasn't arguing the discovery in the OP. I was arguing that its not proof of evolution. It has nothing whatsoever to do with the validation of evolutionary theory.

Unless you can show that the random mutation of a protein-coding gene could somehow add a totally new functional neural circuit that seamlessly interconnects with the rest of the nervous system. But you can't, because the theory is not based in reality.

This was just a study in the nature of consciousness and how psychology interacts with neurology.

originally posted by: TzarChasm

This was just a study in the nature of consciousness and how psychology interacts with neurology.

I know. I was responding to barcs saying this:

originally posted by: Barcs
I'm doing it to show the latest developments in evolutionary science

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: Barcs

So prior to this amazing discovery
What did those scientists think?
That monkeys didn’t have something to wake them into consciousness from sleep, anethesia or unconsciousness
Did scientists originally think That no engine existed and it was magic they woke?
Or is the fascinating find that they found the “engine”

Seems underwhelming to me

Am I missing something?

100% right -- this is so "underwhelming". It basically confirms that science knows nothing about true consciousness i.e. self-awareness, awareness of the universe around us. As for the mechanism to wake us up from sleep? Who cares about that? That isn't a major life question.

Wow, I predicted this months ago!

I will go through my old threads and find it then post some of it. I said that immaterial Awareness interacts with the material brain. I said there must be a switch or a part of the brain that allows this field of experience or qualia to interact with the brain. The link says:

But that doesn't mean they've found the seat of consciousness in the brain.

"It is unlikely that consciousness is specific to one location in the brain," said Michelle Redinbaugh, a graduate student in psychology at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and lead author of the paper, published Feb. 12 in the journal Neuron.

www.livescience.com...

I said the material brain is like a receiver and there must be a part of the brain that's directly connected to this field of consciousness.

This is just more evidence that consciousness is immaterial and outside of the material brain. I will dig through my old threads this week and post links to them.

a reply to: neoholographic

A bunch of primates suddenly becoming self-aware and curious developing communicative language and a thirst for more knowledge to combat their opposition - sounds a bit 'planet of the apes' to me. Perhaps we'll get too smart of our own well-being eventually.

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: Barcs

I don’t mind why you are posting your information
Just seems underwhelming and wanted to know why I should be interested in scientists finding the power lines to consciousness

No doubt a piece of a jigsaw but it’s not earth shattering or anything as I understand and to be clear, not even sure that the scientists are sure

No individual study is earth shattering by itself. It paints us a picture along with all the other evidence and data. Do you really think that some study is going to come out that completely accounts for every single aspect of evolution on earth? Science builds on existing data, if you're expecting some earth shattering knowledge to come out that will totally change your perspective, don't hold your breath. Besides, you'll deny it, even if it does.