Looking for definitions.

Looking for definition of consciousness lands us in a myriad of conflicting ideas. From the simple 'awareness' to arguably very complex ‘a creature is conscious if there is something it is like to be' definitions galore. Some persons have equated consciousness with god, others with the soul and yet others with the self, at times using the terms interchangeably.

When I read that one word - sentience, used by Sam Harris, it immediately struck my senses that this definition had substance. After all consciousness was a sensory experience. We can't have consciousness if it was not for our senses to perceive something. Every sensory input is processed by the brain and channelised into further use and the same holds good for consciousness as well. No matter how much exalted your consciousness is, it can’t foretell anything about the behavior of a conscious creature. It is highly subjective or phenomenal and we come to know of it only after some involuntary action had already happened.

There are a number of processes going on in various organs inside our body. Are we conscious of them? Human brain is processing lots of data at any given time and trillions of neurons are in action which we are not conscious of. A wound is healing but the individual is not conscious of the healing process. And when a malignant mutation is taking place somewhere inside the body, a medical scanner is required to detect it, not consciousness. What does consciousness do then? The closest analogy we can make is with ‘free will’ since consciousness is said by some to be directing functions of the brain. However, scientific studies on ‘free will’ have revealed that consciousness has always lagged behind involunteer acts of brain. In a sense consciousness is a thing of past as far as conscious observations / experiences are concerned.

Is consciousness some extra ability in addition to the ones we have like perceiving and feeling (sensory)? If yes, it means we evolved without it and it somehow got embedded into functioning of the brain. Where did it come from and with what functionality?

If on the other hand this is something intrinsic to our brains then do we have a need to make the issue complex by pursuing it? Why not then apply Ockham’s razor to consciousness and leave it aside for all practical purposes?

In my earlier blog post I raised this question; what would have happened if consciousness, as it is known, was removed from the human brain?  Here is another similar dilemma which I'd like to portray in a hypothetical scenario like this:

Assume a human being without knowing any language or manners of expression (linguistic or sign). How would that individual then convey to others his conscious feelings? And in a society of such individuals (it is not an animal state) it would be impossible to consciously communicate unless human brain adapted to the new reality and devised some ways of doing so. Releasing of hormones or scents and / or developing special organs like compound eyes or heat and vibration seeking forked tongues, helps animals get over the problem. That was all possible through evolution. Since I have portrayed this problem for a human state, it appears consciousness would be helpless unless the brain worked a way out.

Understanding a phenomenon from its ‘opposite’

Understanding a phenomenon from its ‘opposite’ is a perfectly valid method. Science is working on models that take the course of tracking events backwards. The Big Bang model is being tested the similar way.

In reply to a comment on my original post “Of consciousness and confusion” I asked, what will happen if we hypothetically removed consciousness from human beings. Will they cease to exist as human beings in absence of consciousness? Of course, all my doubts and reservations on the subject remain while this ‘removal of consciousness’ cropped up as a vague idea.

My friend Herbert Peters seems to have independently given this idea a serious thought and come up with a caption as above. However, I’d stick to word ‘opposites’ leaving out ‘antonyms’ that sounds too literal.

Herbert has cited ‘Fainting’ and ‘Death’ as two examples of the processes involving temporary and permanent loss of consciousness. I’d like to take on the permanent part as it somehow appears to be approximately in consonance with my vague idea of removal of consciousness.

Death is more than a mere permanent loss of consciousness, I think. To understand death we take the help of its ‘opposite’ – life. Life starts with Germ-plasm (that abiogenetic jelly like globule of protoplasm called cell of life) but as we go up the evolutionary ladder from simple to complex, life starts developing somatic cells which carry the element of death in them. Somatic cells die but the germ (plasma) cells don’t. Death, therefore, is a failure of one or more of the organs having somatic genesis. Then a brain dead person is technically alive and so is the one in terminally deep coma. However, consciousness in both the cases is absent implying that permanent loss of consciousness is possible even without being dead.

Attention is another grey area in this matter. Herbert’s statement – it looks like that during unconsciousness, attention is disabled – appears to be true but its opposite is also true. Consider children quarrelling in your back room while you are busy with something else. Unless you are told about their fighting you may not even notice them shouting and crying. This implies that attention could be disabled even you are fully conscious. The ticking of the table clock by my bed side is noticed only during night when no other sound draws my attention. I’ll struggle to explain what I had for breakfast and that too only when you asked me about that, else that thing doesn’t appear to be in my consciousness.

Does this mean; a) something is not happening if I am not aware of that (children quarrelling). Where is my consciousness then in the first place which pops up suddenly when I am made aware of an event happening within my audible range? And, b) Am I doing many things automatically without being conscious of them (ref: Libet’s free will experimentation) like going through routines like having breakfast?

My idea is not semantics. What I am interested to know is how consciousness came into being and whether it directs human brain to do things in a particular way or this is purely a function of brain like cognition, perception, attention etc are.

To continue…..

Of Consciousness and confusion

The common viewpoint and generally accepted definition of consciousness is “awareness of the self or I”. This concept of “I” makes most of the confusion related to consciousness. Honestly, I haven’t so far been able to understand, accept or deny, or define this phenomenon which even science has just started studying and philosophers have always found difficult to handle.

Is consciousness something which has not been already defined? Is it different from human behavioural traits like perception, value judgement, sociability, emotions, and morality etc.? In short does consciousness at all exist as a separate and unique phenomenon?

If yes, then where does it come from? Is it something innate to our brain or it comes from outside of our physical self? If intrinsically related to our brain as a physically caused phenomenon then consciousness really doesn’t deserve any privileged position vis a vis other behavioural traits.

If it is something external to brain (not necessarily supernatural) where is it from and what is its purpose? We know every organ in our body, including brain, is meant for some function. Can consciousness manifest without being physically caused and then overwhelm and become causal of brain’s functioning? If yes, how and where does it fit in the evolutionary process if at all?

One viewpoint is about epiphenomenalism of consciousness. That is it has no causal powers. If that be the case, why bother about it? Could it better be left aside as non-existent or decidedly given another name, say, perception – which we already know a lot about scientifically?

Man with Indomitable spirit

This man, Kannan Kunhi Raman from Cannanore district of Kerala, despite having a physical infirmity as both his legs are rendered useless by polio, has a nerve of steel I must say. When I arrived at the conference venue of the Kerala Rationalists Association at Kollam, the man was already there and greeted me reminding that we had earlier met at Trichy in January of this year. Yes, I recognised him. He knows only Malayalam, the local dialect and I could understand only two words he spoke; Bhashana (speech) and Trichy (the venue city). He was referring to my speech at Trichy. Language or no language, but his face exudes a radiance of determinism and confidence. My friend Mr Raghunath, a Keralite now settled in Latur, was kind enough to translate for me his words and also tell me more about him. Raman's family has some land with Rubber plantation on it. He has gone as far as to Delhi in connection with a protest march held by some rationalist organisation.

As if his handicap wasn't a malady enough he suffered a serious injury to his hip when he fell down while boarding a bus. He had to be hospitalised for over a month. But all this infirmity and the accident couldn't dampen Kannan's spirit. A rationalist and an atheist with a commitment, Kannan has plans to go to any place in India if he came to know about a rationalist gathering.

Honestly, I feel envious of this man's indomitable spirit and determination.

Hats off to you Kannan.

In this picture (L – R) Mr K Raghunath, Yours truly and Kannan K R

On 'Why We Believe in God(s)' a book by J Anderson Thomson

Why We Believe in God(s) by J Anderson Thomson

A Review.

At the first glimpse one wonders why this 140 something page small format book was brought out in a book form when all this could well have been published online as an essay. However, the author explains that he wanted to write a small book which the reader can go through in a couple of hours. Point taken, but you certainly need more than that; a couple of days actually.

Anderson tries to explain scientifically how faith evolved in human mind whereas it has been proved that no “god centre” existed in the brain. Darwin’s Natural Selection is based on the concept of adaptation to the environment. How religion enters our mind is not through the evolutionary adaptation but as a by-product of adaptations that occurred for other reasons. What are these adaptations? Well, the psychological mechanisms like ‘social bonding’, ‘attachment system’, ’pleasure’, ‘craving’, ‘seeking protection’ and ‘desire’ are some of the adaptations our brain has through the evolutionary process.

The human brain has developed a region called the Medial Frontal Cortex for the purpose of perceiving the non-physical. Anderson calls this ‘hard wired’ for the things non-physical.  God was created as a protective figure and the attachment system (an adaptation) is keeping it alive in human psyche.

The abilities of the human mind like ‘decoupled cognition’, ‘theory-of-mind mechanism’, ‘transference’, ‘hyperactive agency detection’ etc. are directly responsible for perception and interpretation of religious phenomenon, in the guise of the non-physical. The author pertinently provides a link with the primitive religion and the mechanisms through which it affected human brain.

The earliest and the most primitive form of religion that our ancestors practiced was that of rituals based on song, dance and trance. When in a trance brain chemicals get a boost and the neurotransmitters that regulate various social functions of our brain caused specific behavioural patterns depending upon the intensity of their stimulation. The state of trance was caused by excessive physical exercise, sleep deprivation for longer periods of time and also some potions or concoctions etc. In trance people spoke to their dead ancestors (later gods), heard extraordinary voices etc. The author also reveals that the feeling of “oneness with the universe” – as claimed by the godly and the religious people, is in fact a disorder of a specific area of the human brain. Similarly, epilepsy of the Frontal Lobe of the brain leads one to behave with extreme religiosity. Some godmen claiming having experienced contacts with god were in fact epileptic and suffered from hallucinations and that sort of mental disorders caused by electro-chemical disturbances in the brain.

What reinforce religion in our brain are the factors like ‘deference to authority’, ‘kin psychology’ and ‘morality’. Morality is easily identified with religion which is not at all true because our primitive ancestors living in social groups and in absence of religion would not have survived without the sense of right or wrong. Therefore, putting morality in realm of religion is not only conceptually wrong but also scientifically untrue.

Anderson believes that once religion’s psychological roots are exposed – something this book does, it will wither away. Moreover, his research is helpful in revealing that religion was man made and not sent from any heavens.

All in all, a nice little ‘mind-opening’ book. 

- R K Sudan

Quickly through Kerala

"God's own country", well, I certainly don't agree with this adage. However, Kerala seems surely gifted by Nature. A land that has water, trees, greenery, topographical variety and mild climes naturally appears favoured. Crossing over into Kerala at Palghat brings a feel of the state. Lush green countryside and a range of NilgiriHillspresent a beautiful landscape. The only problem is the condition of the roads and to cite an example, the state highway up toTrichur which is very bad. The traffic is too heavy for this two lane highway. Moreover the drainage system is poor and there are stretches that could have better been in embankment. This highway needs due attention of the engineers of the PWD. You are comfortable only when your vehicle touched the 4-lane NH-47.

 
Entering any city brings traffic woes to the fore and Ernakulam / Kochi is no exception. It took the KSRTC bus about an hour and a half to find its last stop and my hotel besides the Ernakulam Bus Stand. The road is again bad, full of ruts and deep troughs where enough water had accumulated so as to squirt and bathe a passer-by in dirty water if a driver with the typical Indian mindset happened to be pulling a vehicle along.

Kerala has a landscape that has all type of topography like seaside, plains, hills and backwaters. Here are historical ports / harbours like Calicut (Kozhikode), Cochin (Kochi), Alleppey (Alappuzha) and Quilon (Kollam) to name some. Vasco da Gama had landed in 1498 at a beach called Kappad that is near to Calicut. Of course, the long coastline has beautiful pristine beaches as well. Bekal, Kollam, Verkala and Kovalam are famous beaches of Kerala.

Then there are hill stations like Wynad and Munnar, so very rich in wildlife and exquisite flora and fauna. Periyar wild life sanctuary has the reputation of having some rare species of animals and birds in the Nilgiries.Wynad is famous for coffee and tea plantations besides the famous Kerala spices. Cochin, the twin city (along with Ernakulam) has many historical places like the Fort Cochin, Mattancherry (famous for its Jewish synagogue and the palace) Bolghatty Island and Willingdon Island. Chinese fishing nets are unique to Cochin. Rubber plantations are found in Kottayam, Wynad and Cannanore districts.

For the religious minded there are temples and shrines like Sabrimala, Guruvayur and now the richest one in Asia; the Padmanabhaswamy temple at Trivandrum.Culturally, Kerala is very rich. Museums, art galleries etc are located in big cities. It has Kathakali and Mohinattam forms of Indian classical dance as well as the Kalaripayattu martial art of ancient standing. Onam (Aug – Sept) is a famous festival and so are the boat races conducted through the back waters. The Nehru trophy boat race at Alleppey is very famous. This year it was on 13^th August, the second Saturday, and I happened to be there.Kerala Back waters are world famous and a cruise through them is a lifetime experience and a dream of every tourist.
 

Kerala is home to many rationalist movements and people are amenable to reason and rationalism. People from different faiths are turning to atheism and materialism and feel no discrimination either from the society or the establishment.

Kerala rightly boasts of its 100% literacy rate. Mathribhumi, the Malayali daily sells about 2 million copies. Availability of reading material is in abundance. Prof Ravichandaran of English department at the Trivandrum University whom I happened to meet twice this year has to his credit translation into Malayalam of many books including Richard Dawkins’ best seller - The God Delusion. People are not only literate but they actually read a lot.

Unfortunately, Kerala has a higher suicide rate in the country. What makes rich and well off people of Kerala to go into depression and end their lives? One Keralite told me that it was the signs of a possible recession and the likely ensuing economic hardships that was causing distress in minds of some people. They feared that they might not be able to cope with such situations and that thinking caused in them deep anxieties and suicidal tendencies. I may not entirely agree but the gentleman certainly has a valid point there.

Kerala women are beautiful and they look more so in SalwarKameez, the usual north Indian attire that is making a remarkable appearance in Kerala and other South Indian states. Here they call it theChuridar. I think more and more young women are abandoning the traditional sareeand dressing up in the churidars. Perhaps this Churidar doesn't have that grace and flair of the salwar-kameez, yet it is making a definite mark on the dress culture of these women. We were having coffee together when Sandeep Krishna, my friend from Cochin, raised this topic of beauty of Kerala women. They are beautiful indeed but drawing a comparison I expressed that women from Coorg (Karnataka) were more beautiful. Sandeep exclaimed, 'Oh, Pahadiladki' (dame from the hills). Yes, I said that the women from the hills were stunningly beautiful and men, well, suavely handsome.

 
Transport, despite bad roads, is cheap in Kerala. The Kerala State Road Transport service is cheap and efficient.  I was told that auto rickshaws in Kerala were as good or bad as anywhere else in the country. However, in Trivandrum city, I was told,they were all good i. e., they didn’t overcharge. Untrue. From Trivandrum city to the airport the auto man asked for Rs 150 but eventually settled for Rs 80. I think Bhubaneswr (Orissa) has the best autorickshaws followed by Gwalior (M P).

A trip to Munnar and Waynad alongwith a backwaters cruise remains hence the desire to come back.

Ridiculously Rich Temple

This Padmanabhaswamy temple in Trivandrum is ridiculously rich. Remember the recent gold haul valued at crores of rupees found in the cellars of the temple. Every temple or religious place is full of irrationality and corruption. However this temple is ridiculously irrational. They want all men to remove their clothes and clad themselves in a dhoti (loin cloth) and a plain upper cloth (angavastram) before entering the temple premises. Women too have to clad themselves in a dhoti though they are allowed to have their upper attire intact. I asked why one be not allowed inside barefooted but in a dress of one’s choice. Someone tried to convince me that cladding in a dhoti was traditionally and culturally maintained on the principle that all were equal before god. I wondered if that was a symbol of equality or discrimination. A forceful implementation of a religious diktat is discriminatory as it implies recognition of only one viewpoint. This means exclusiveness. Then what right the god or his priests have to impose a uniform dress code? It surprises me why the god didn’t decree people come to his temple in their birthday suit.