Without consciousness

we have no way of proving we or anything else exists and

Yet what it is and why we have it remain a mystery that some of the greatest minds have been unable to solve

The only way I know I exist is because I'm conscious I wake up in the dark of a hotel room I'm

Discombobulated because I'm jet-lagged. I've no idea where I am Who I am and what country I am yet

I know I exist because I see something

Rapid advances in our understanding of how the brain works might one day allow us to pinpoint the parts of the brain that generate consciousness

But will something as objective as science be able to explain what it feels like to be us

Consciousness - nature is private. It's subjective

I know about my consciousness from the first-person point of view other people don't know about my consciousness very indirectly

Philosophers have been trying to answer some of these questions for millennia in the past couple of centuries scientists have joined them

Debate can be fierce

In fact some scholars reckon, the puzzle of consciousness is something that human mind is incapable of solving. I think that's

Not just wrong. I think it's it's

Culpably wrong it isn't impossible at all. It's just that we have to buckle down and do it

One thing that both disciplines can agree on is that consciousness arises in the brain

Made up of roughly 85 billion neurons and other supporting cells about which we know little the brain consumes almost 20 percent of our energy

Despite comprising just 2% of our mass

Every so often I get kind of interested in astronomy and cosmology because you look out there and you think oh gosh

This is amazing. You know, it's almost limitless

but then I turn around and kind of

Introspective and think about the brain and it's kind of like a universe within

We're a long ways of understanding how it works. But if we can get down to figuring out how a neuron works

By God, then we could deal with it two neurons and then four neurons and four million neurons and then a hundred million

Helped by developments in imaging partly pioneered by dr

Reichal and his team scientists can study in some detail the two enormous folded sheets of out of rain called the cerebral cortex

This plays a crucial role in higher brain functions like memory perception thought and language

and I have two of them in my left hand height and

And it's part of this sheet that gives eyes to consciousness this sheet

Also give rise to intelligence and reasoning and all the other things that we hold dear

But the what the human brain in the human mind Christophe Kok wants to come up with a satisfactory

scientific theory of consciousness before he dies

Science wants to explain everything if if science fails to explain the central fact of my existence. I

Would say then it's a it's it's a failure

In order to gain a better understanding of how parts of the brain work scientists often. Look at bits of it that are broken

It's a little part of the brain called the cerebellum, which is at the back of my brain

If I lose it

I will be unable to let's say to dance or beer or climb and her difficulty moving my speech becomes slurred but

My consciousness will not be impaired

On the flip side. It seems that some parts of the brain may be essential for consciousness

Identifying these so called neural correlates of consciousness would help pin down what is happening?

What might the NCC the neural correlates of consciousness be like

Assuming that it is that it's an emergent and neuro scientific and let me say straight away that we don't know was his life

Before his death in 2004 Francis Crick the co-discoverer of the structure of DNA

Worked with dr. Cock on something. They termed the binding problem

Put simply the binding problem asks how the brain integrates different bits of information it gets both sensory and internal

into our conscious experience

in real life the brain is terribly good and puts everything together the movement the shape and

and the color

The usual way of saying the binding problem is if you have a red square and a green triangle

How is it that you don't have see it as that get the colors mixed up with the shapes. That's basically the problem

Because our experience of consciousness is derived from the data we get from lots of different systems the visual and motor being just two

The two men looked at a part of the brain that is connected to all these regions

They were especially interested in the claustrum a thin sheet of nerve cells that sits at the bottom of the cerebral cortex

in each hemisphere of the brain

Because testing the claustrum in a live human brain is invasive and risky. No formal experiments have been done

But one happened accidentally last year when a neurologist trying to understand the source of his patient's epilepsy implanted electrodes near her claustro

When he switched the current on she lost consciousness as soon as he switched it off. She regained it

No one knows why we have consciousness

It's one of the big mysteries

Why did evolution bother putting consciousness in how did evolution put consciousness in?

Why couldn't we have done everything that we do with a set of objective mechanisms and no first-person subjective experience of the world

It's one of the biggest questions and philosophy in science just as the processes of consciousness remain a mystery

So does its purpose is it a high-level summary?

the brain generates to help us plan for what comes next a

Clever way of designing our brains to make us more adept at being social neither both

One evolutionary explanation for why we have consciousness suggested an animal capable of modeling the behavior of another can anticipate it to its advantage

The surprising thing is that so few animals actually have this ability

Humans have it

so I have a very good idea of what you're going to do and when you're going to do it and why you're going to

do it and

Children starting it maybe around three years old get that Janet Metcalf

the theory of mind a theory of mind is actually misnomer the way we tested is whether a person

or an animal

Can give evidence that they can get into the other person's shoes or the other person's mind and see the world from that

person's perspective

now the

the test of it is often not just can you see from the viewpoint of the other person but could you see that someone has

a different viewpoint from your own

the theory of mind might provide one way of working out if animals other than humans are conscious the

Only species that we're absolutely sure has theory of mind is human

and

maybe

humans older than

roughly three years old

It's very controversial whether any other animals have it. They're arguing about whether chimps have theory of mind or not

Before we can have a theory of mind

We must recognize ourselves for decades scientists have used something called the Rouge test to see whether animals do just that

Human babies do from about eighteen months old

Chimpanzees presented with mirrors soon use them to groom themselves much as we do

Elephants dolphins and Magpies also can respond to mirrors in ways that suggest self recognition

The problem with the roush test that the animal researchers

Always raise is that maybe there? It's just body knowledge

That it's not mind knowledge

so it was interpreted as the animal knowing that they have a mind and

Theory of mind as we normally think that is related to another person not to the self

But presumably you have to know that you have a mind before you project that same capability onto someone else

Identifying the neural correlates of self recognition in animals would be a hard task

But if we were able to do it comparative studies would be possible

That would be hugely valuable

Science is edging closer to understanding what parts of the brain might be involved in generating conscious experience

By some estimates we may not be far away from an empirically sound theory of consciousness and how it evolved

But could a physical theory ever satisfactorily address what it is that people are feeling when they are conscious

David Chalmers calls consciousness the hard problem a deft description for something that is hard to explain and hard to solve

The methods of science right now are great for explaining objective processes and objective functions

So when it comes even to explaining things like the behavior of an organism

You can tell some story about a bit of the brain a neural process or a computer leg process in the brain

That makes us behave a certain way, but the problem of consciousness what we call the hard problem of consciousness, which is explaining

How you get subjective experience from the brain is not that kind of question

It's not a question about how we behave it's a question about

You know what? It's like about how it feels from the inside and looks like you can explain all those

Objective mechanisms and objective processes and you still won't have answered the hard problem which is why is it that all that functioning is?

accompanied by consciousness

The hard problem divides philosophers and scientists alike

some philosophers argue that consciousness can be explained far more simply a

lot of puzzles Bell mysteries

We're going to understand it from the bottom up and from the top down. I

Have no doubt about that

Daniel Dennett argues that consciousness is nothing more than a cognitive illusion that science will into course explain

Our brains have been designed by evolution and then redesigned by cultural evolution

to give us a

user-friendly

System of things in the world that we deal with so

the

user-friendly world that we live in the manifest image is a sort of

friendly user illusion in the same way that the

Desktop of your laptop is a user illusion it simplifies and it distorts in

Helpful ways for most purposes if you really want to know what's going on

You have to go backstage and the same thing is true about the bay

Until recently we didn't have very good tools for doing it the brain was just

off limits as off-limits as

distant galaxies

we're now developing the tools for non-invasively studying the brain and we're now developing the

Computational ideas

and models so that we can understand how a brain can non miraculously deal with information and

refine it and

uncover the

semantics of the world or outside and inside

So we're now we now have the toolkit and it's taken this long to develop it now. We just have to use the tools

Perhaps but for the time being the puzzle of consciousness continues to pose more questions than it does answers

Yet another philosopher Pythagoras of Abdera proclaimed that man is the measure of all things

Until the problem of consciousness is solved though. That might better be phrased the measure of all things but himself