You are.

Guidosoft That is a very good question Guidiosoft, but it is unlikely to be a question that is resolved directly. If we assume the position that consciousness is the activity of the brain it is reasonable to think that we should be able to alter the structure of the conscious state by altering the state of the brain.Have you ever been knocked unconscious? If so how do we explain this as a phenomena of the actions of particles. Is it possible that the interaction of the mass that knoocked you unconscious with the mass of your brain was accomplished through through the electromagnetic force? If not, how else do we explain the lack of a consciousness after a sufficient impact to the head?However, if we assume this to be the case then we can expect that the conscious state can be altered by a variety of means employing the electromagnetic force. Since we are aware that chemical properties are the result of the EM force then it stands to reason that there are chemicals that can do such things. In fact if you have ever had surgery and been under general anesthesia you would be well aware of the effects of the chemical injections.I am sure you have heard of the capital punishment method of lethal injection in which chemicals are introduced into the blood stream and produce not only unconsciousness but also cause the cessation of heartbeat and subsequent death from this.There is also the loss of consciousness as a result of a low oxygen enviroment. Why should such a situation result in the loss of consciousness unless the oxygen somehow interacted with the brain tissue in such a way that the lack of it does something to the brain tissues? Of course the means by which oxygen provides the cells of the body with this necessisty of life is well known and is interesting to explore.This does not of course explain how consciousness arises in brain tissue but it does place limits on what we can expect the reason to be.

---

But I realize now that these people were not in science; they didn’t understand it. They didn’t understand technology; they didn’t understand their time.

iano You are looking at the matter in the wrong frame iano. Starting with the initial conditions at the moment of the BB all possible outcomes were as likely as any other. Since an arrangement of some sort must occur out of all the possibilties from one moment to the next each moment as the universe assumes a given characteristic all other possible arrangements for that characteristic are eliminated.
All the new set of possible states for the next moment are just as likely again until the new arrangement lands where it will and again removes the possibility of others.You are looking at the situation at the present time where the set of possible states that were available have now assumed the states that did occur and wrongly assign it a deterministic status. This is a temporal bias on your part.You look at the universe and say that it had to occur that way when in fact it could have happened in any other way among the possiblities it had from momoent to moment and those possibilities are random.If you play golf try predicting where the ball will land on a given drive. Now after you go and retrieve the ball think of all the possible ways in which it could have gone due to all the factors involved. It is easy to say where it will be after the fact but quite impossible beforehand.

---

But I realize now that these people were not in science; they didn’t understand it. They didn’t understand technology; they didn’t understand their time.

Guidosoft I thought I had made a good case back in post 23 for the case of matter being necessary to enable consciouness. You did not reply so I will repost it for your convenience. Perhaps you could comment on this with objections relevant to my post. I would enjoy hearing your explanation of this.This message has been edited by sidelined, Wed, 2005-11-09 12:41 AM

Guidosoft So if we were to stick a fork into your brain {under anesthetic of course since we do not wish to be cruel} then whip it around so that the spatial arrangement of the atoms that make up the brain are well mixed do you suppose this would have an effect upon yoour consciousness?

Guidosoft Indeed this is true. It is also the basis for the illusion of self and why we feel as though "we" are located within our skulls. Since the brain has no sensory feedback to itself the brain cannot form a referential location for itself in the way we can for our limbs and thus we feel the notion of a self free from the brain.
I also imagine this is where the notion of a soul seperate from the body originates.

Guidosoft You will be interested to read up on research in this subject for yourself.Check out this website and then come back for a discussionBBC - Radio 4 - Reith Lectures 2003 - The Emerging MindI guarantee you will view things differently then

Guidosoft So how do you explain that if I take a big stick and whack you upside the head I can render you unconscious?

Guidosoft So what is the direct relationship between a consciousness you claim to be non physical and a physical brain? How can physical affect non physical since the two are contrary to each other?

Guidosoft If there is no interaction then how can the consciousness be said to respond in accordance with the brain? If the brain does something and the consciousness responds what is the activity of the brain that induces the response? To co-operate implies an interaction which you deny in the first place.This also does not answer what happens to the consciousness when the brain recieves an impact as I described. This cnnot be a proper ananlogy since a human and a computer program are both physical entities as they are both dependant upon physical interaction in order to affect their world.