Is there afterlife?[i]

After Eben Alexander[ii] has a comma experience when he sees “the other side of the life” he discovered consciousness is more than a “little voice in the head”.
As a neurosurgeon he knows there are parts in the brain that generates the voice in the head, thoughts, linguistic human brain (ego and self), parts that are responsible for the speech production and interpretation. However, Eben states that they are small regions, tinny aspects of the cortex and are not consciousness at all. Even though, they are the awareness part of us, that knows the Universe and existence.
For him, the hard problem of consciousness, that philosophers of Mind and neuroscientist pursue, will not be achieved. The more the neuroscientist study and know the physical brain the more they realize the physical brain is not the creator of the consciousness.
To defend this view he points out common observed clinical phenomenon where dement patients near death can have very clear thinking, interaction and great clarity of memories. In cases of brain damage (like autism) they have super human ability like good memory, calculation power and musical creativity that emerge out of nowhere, in his point of view.
He also quoted the experiences of Penfield working with epilepsy in Montreal in 70 decade, using electrical stimulation of the brain. In that cases, Penfield didn’t find an event of free will: the patients always knew there was something triggering the action. Eben concludes saying what sounds bizarre: for him, free will and consciousness are not created in the brain and the brain is more a limiting. In fact, we have no limits when we are free of the experience to be here and now.


[i] My points of what was said in the video https://youtu.be/jXAWCS3FMPo. Accessed on March 8, 2020.
[ii] Despite of the facts one can find in Wikipedia reporting he had been the subject of several malpractice lawsuits, etc. Accessible here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eben_Alexander_(author), on March 8, 2020.
Location: Rua Henrique Schaumann - Pinheiros, São Paulo - SP, Brazil

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Free will and determinism*

          According to SoL (School of Life), the debate between free will and determinism has been crossing the Philosophy History since the beginning until our time reaching even the neuroscientists. It concerns about whether the human being is able to dominate their actions by themselves or they are determined by forces beyond their control, like fate and politics. SoL argues that the long running arguments in favor or against both sides are not conclusive because they are based on objective variables when they should be thought as what is relevant to me (to me… to me?). Also, they vary from person to person guided by two psychological aspects: defeatism and aspiration.           Does the course of our life belong to the others, like our parents, bosses and so on or can we change our life and our relationships based on our strenght and free will? The second should be even better but more difficult, of course. So moving far from the o...
Read more

The soul is just a function*

Image
Putman talks about the contribution of Computer Science to Philosophy of Mind in terms of thinking the mind as a kind of function rather than physical or chemistry. He says that the rise of computers could result in everything being explained in terms of machines but the paradox is that it didn´t contribute for this kind of reductionism . Generally, according to Putman, when we work with computer we think in its programs, instructions, rules, etc., and we ignore the hardware. Ironically, he says that there is an emergency (not violating the laws of physics) where we work in a high level of the organization, in the program level. So we can think in the mind the same way: instead of thinking we are spirit inboded would be better think in the relation between the mind and the body in terms of functions. * Short digest of short interisting vídeo: https://youtu.be/m0YIm8p30aU . Acessed in Jan, 28 th . Hilary Putnam on Functionalism.
Read more

Eudaimonia*

SoL (School of Life) worked with the eudaimonia concept in this video: a word that comes from Plato and Aristotle. Basically, SoL compares eudaimonia with a contemporaneous word - happiness - saying that the ancient philosophers didn’t propose us to have a happy life. The purpose of our life is not avoid suffering or be unhappy – the way the word is used today, but overcome the daily and simple challenges that come every day under pressure. For SoL, eudaimonia should be associated with the word fulfilment that is distinguished by happiness by pain. So, the word eudaimonia is able to accommodate happy and unhappy and, instead of pursuing a pain free existence, we need to go further and we can make the difference. In short terms, we need to do what is really important more than to smile all the time. Follows eudaimonia recommendation means that we can spend our whole life fighting in our job, relationship and political engagement but finishing our days feeling these tasks wer...
Read more