I was intrigued by this story in Nature:
“A 25-year science wager has come to an end. In 1998, neuroscientist Christof Koch bet philosopher David Chalmers that the mechanism by which the brain’s neurons produce consciousness would be discovered by 2023. Both scientists agreed publicly on 23 June, at the annual meeting of the Association for the Scientific Study of Consciousness (ASSC) in New York City, that it is an ongoing quest — and declared Chalmers the winner.”
Koch made the bet on his confidence that science would pinpoint the exact location in the brain that produced consciousness because of the advances in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), which reveals changes in blood flow associated with brain activity. The wager, a case of wine, added incentive in addition to both bragging rights and the lure of discovery.
So the game was on!
As the Nature article concludes, the researchers confirmed “areas in the posterior cortex do contain information in a sustained manner,” and that “some aspects of consciousness, but not all of them, could be identified in the prefrontal cortex.” Koch admits his theories were not totally proven, and, being a scientist of his word, paid up.
Who says science isn’t entertaining?
What’s distressing, however, is how proponents of dualism are using this story as some kind of vindication. The notion that humans are unique assemblages of mind and matter and therefore outside of and superior to nature goes back to Plato, the Vedic writers, and that notorious rascal Rene Descartes. One commenter claimed Koch’s failure to prove his hypothesis as vindication that we are truly “ghosts in the machine.”
Interesting they used that term, which was coined by philosopher Gilbert Ryle in his argument against dualism. He deemed the position as a gigantic category mistake. I love his illustration: A visitor to a university may see classrooms, libraries, and other parts of the campus, but at the end of the tour, asks, “But where is the university?” not realizing the term refers to all of its components working as a unit. Similarly, the various sections of the brain handle their own functions, and we use the term “consciousness” to refer to all those functions working in harmony.
Why is this important? If our supposedly supernatural minds make us superior, all of nature is dumb matter good for nothing but exploitation. This not only imperils nature but alienates us from the world in which we live. The next step is contempt for our own bodies. A philosophy that leads to ecological ruin and rootlessness is an evil that must be exposed for what it is. And just as Koch and Chalmers could entertain and enlighten us with their little joust for science, we can enjoy stories that both inspire and force us to consider where we’re going and where we could end up.
M.C. Tuggle, Writer 
That’s an interesting story, and I agree with you “What’s distressing, however, is how proponents of dualism are using this story as some kind of vindication.” It is no vindication of dualism or any other ontological belief.
LikeLiked by 1 person
thomasstigwikman,
As the two gentlemen agreed, the experiment is ongoing. Stay tuned.
LikeLiked by 1 person
There is considerable EXPERIENCE (not theory or conjecture) that the seat of consciousness resides in the human heart. Ramana Maharshi and others have discovered and experienced this phenomenon for themselves. There may be a seat or seats of consciousness in the brain, but I’ve never come across anything to confirm it.
LikeLike
David,
I’ve wondered if certain profound experiences could be retained in the body.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Quite interesting…we’ll all stay tuned 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
June,
I certainly will.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Mike, I think this wonderful bet connected people to science. It sounds simple, but it’s really not. It takes people, together, to further science. Our brains are triggered by each other, and develop in ways that we hadn’t imagined.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Jennie,
I quite agree.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m so glad!
LikeLike
The point where you insinuate that it’s just inside brain and rest of the nature is exploitation : it’s illogical. Consciousness isn’t localised in any one organ or organism. And even when I(you/we) identify with my body as mine/very own, in my waking state consciousness: the body is whole cosmos: nothing is excluded from it. You can’t feel your body or mind without a constant feedback from your immediate environment: which extends to infinity, if you want or shrinks to a mere pinpoint in some cases. When there’s nothing excluded from it- there’s no outside nature.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Don’t see how recognizing that we are a natural part of the universe leads to exploitation. I do agree with you that feedback/interaction with the rest of the universe makes us whole and human.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Considering nature to be dumb matter waiting to be exploited versus considering nature to be one with consciousness as an inalienable reality of ourselves is what I was trying to refer to. I think you were referring to supporters of dualism and it’s not your viewpoint.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Go it! Yes, I do not agree with dualism.
LikeLike
I love the interplay between science and its progenitor, philosophy. I often err on the philosophy side of course, but embrace a scientific sense of skepticism and wonder about the world. I’ve cited quite a few neuroscience works in my academic scholarship, but I also maintain a healthy understanding that there are some things that we can only ever begin to understand without ever proving. Hence, philosophy. Intriguing post, Mike, and thanks for sharing.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It’s a balancing act. We make our philosophical conclusions based on our experience, but should constantly refer to experience to validate those conclusions. It’s a little dance of learning and becoming.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I love the emphasis on learning and becoming, two of my favorite things.
LikeLiked by 1 person
We’re all a work in progress.
LikeLike
It’s a good point but I don’t think the consciousness debate pertains only to human consciousness. There’s an argument that all living things… maybe even non living… have consciousness. You may be right that consciousness is an emergent property of the brain, but it hasn’t been proved yet
LikeLiked by 2 people
Excellent science 🥉
LikeLiked by 1 person