Does Consciousness Exist Outside Of The Brain

[Kittens Are Jerks]

6 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

Myself and the OP scientists are well aware of that. Some think DMT can trigger 'real' separation between the physical and higher subtle bodies. 

No it can't, regardless of what some people might think.

[papageorge1]

Just now, ai_guardian said:

Talking to oneself? That's quite normal. And the other forms, like?

Intelligent hauntings.

[Black Red Devil]

Just now, papageorge1 said:

No, unless you have solved the mystery of consciousness and not told the rest of us.

Have you?

[papageorge1]

Just now, Kittens Are Jerks said:

No it can't, regardless of what some people might think.

Show us how you can say that with such certainty or reason will have to judge you a closed-minded zealot of your particular worldview. 

[papageorge1]

2 minutes ago, Black Red Devil said:

Have you?

I only have my leading theory as given earlier. The paranormal evidence has really made the materialist theory untenable for me.

[Dejarma]

1 minute ago, Black Red Devil said:

You're joking right?

unfortunately not .... Forget ufos aliens bigfoot spirits etc etc=== nout stranger than folk

[Kittens Are Jerks]

Just now, papageorge1 said:

Show us how you can say that with such certainty or reason will have to judge you a closed-minded zealot of your particular worldview. 

If REASON were the judge, it would point to you as the close-minded zealot, not me.

[psyche101]

2 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

Demonstrate that failure and get your Nobel Prize.

Already been done by neuroscientist Michael Graziano at Princeton University. 

Do I still get a prize though?

2 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

Well in this particular thread it is 'the decades-long research of Dr. Peter Fenwick, a highly regarded neuropsychiatrist who has been studying the human brain, consciousness, and the phenomenon of near death experience (NDE) for 50 years'.

And is rejected by pretty much everyone else in the field right? Has no peer reviewed papers on the subject and resorts to paperbacks. Inspired by Moody's book first, not evidence.

Seriously, you've got to be kidding me.

[Dejarma]

6 minutes ago, Kittens Are Jerks said:

Consciousness exists as long as the brain does. Brains don't twitch. They are either "living' or they're not.

are you suggesting there's some kind of understanding of what's going on around them under the discussed circumstances here?

[papageorge1]

Just now, Kittens Are Jerks said:

If REASON were the judge, it would point to you as the close-minded zealot, not me.

I am open-minded to all theories and judged the one reason best supports.

[papageorge1]

2 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

Already been done by neuroscientist Michael Graziano at Princeton University. 

 

Sounds like another neuroscientist that has not solved the problem of the source of consciousness to the agreement of all intelligent scientists such as those mentioned in the OP. But you are quick to say he solved the problem of consciousness because you happen to prefer what you think he says at this point in your life.

[Dejarma]

5 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

I am open-minded to all theories and judged the one reason best supports.

do you think outside of the box?

[papageorge1]

Just now, Dejarma said:

do you think outside of the box?

Well perhaps from my study of the paranormal and such I see a bigger box than you.

[psyche101]

21 minutes ago, Dejarma said:

yeah but what does that mean? Brain activity? If one cares to consider that as some form of consciousness then fair enough..

You stated:

(parts of the brain can continue to get oxygen thus sustaining some form of consciousness)

yeah physically meat would still get oxygen but no real proof that there's any form of consciousness.. How can it be proved?

You speak as if it's fact, all due respect

imho it's probably just the brain twitching= that doesn't prove consciousness, does it? Again, just a theory

Genes continue to grow and work for several days after death in a corpse, trying to repair it. I'm not so sure there's oxygen involved but about four years ago, a mass of genes that continue to work after death were identified.

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20161103-the-macabre-fate-of-beating-heart-corpses

[Kittens Are Jerks]

3 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

I am open-minded to all theories and judged the one reason best supports.

That is not true. You support only those theories that align with your personal beliefs. 

Medical facts do not support Fenwick's theories, and yet you deem his lack of evidence superior to those facts.

[Dejarma]

1 minute ago, papageorge1 said:

Well perhaps from my study of the paranormal and such I see a bigger box than you.

i feel no need for a box

[papageorge1]

Just now, Kittens Are Jerks said:

That is not true. You support only those theories that align with your personal beliefs. 

Medical facts do not support Fenwick's theories, and yet you deem his lack of evidence superior to those facts.

Come now. After 50 years he has no evidence????

[Kittens Are Jerks]

Just now, papageorge1 said:

Come now. After 50 years he has no evidence????

Correct.

[Dejarma]

1 minute ago, papageorge1 said:

Come now. After 50 years he has no evidence????

well evidence you like to hear= yeah of course.. enjoy the fantasy- who's to say you can't!?

[psyche101]

3 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

Sounds like another neuroscientist that has not solved the problem of the source of consciousness to the agreement of all intelligent scientists such as those mentioned in the OP. But you are quick to say he solved the problem of consciousness because you happen to prefer what you think he says at this point in your life.

Sounds like you refuse to acknowledge that you are wrong. 

Again you over reach. Fenwick is not a scientist. He has a medical background. Not a scientific based one. 

I say Graziano has solved the problem because he has provided papers that have been peer reviewed and accepted. He has supporting evidence for his papers, not writing paperbacks and is inspired by evidence, not some NDE proponents paperback that is considered a joke by the much better versed community.

[psyche101]

5 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

Come now. After 50 years he has no evidence????

No, that's why he is writing paperbacks not papers. 

[ai_guardian]

1 hour ago, papageorge1 said:

Intelligent hauntings.

There are no intelligent (or unintelligent) hauntings, just people with wild imaginations and inadequate pattern-matching (matching to mundane events) skills, imho.

[papageorge1]

8 minutes ago, ai_guardian said:

There are no intelligent (or unintelligent) hauntings, just people with wild imaginations and inadequate pattern-matching (matching to mundane events) skills, imho.

And IMHO there is overwhelming evidence supporting these things.

[Free99]

It's all just speculation on what will be after death. What we will be if anything after we are dead. The only truth in any of it is the living will never know. It's one of those things we all wonder about and always will.

[Habitat]

28 minutes ago, ai_guardian said:

There are no intelligent (or unintelligent) hauntings, just people with wild imaginations and inadequate pattern-matching (matching to mundane events) skills, imho.

I don't mind people making strident assertions, when they can be substantiated, but this bluster is far from humble, it is just guesswork masquerading as fact.