Falsifications of Hameroff-Penrose orch OR model of consciousness and novel avenues for development of quantum mind theory
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
In this paper we try to make a clear distinction between quantum mysticism and quantum mind theory. Quackery always accompanies science especially in controversial and still under development areas and since the quantum mind theory is a science youngster it must clearly demarcate itself from the great stuff of pseudo-science currently patronized by the term "quantum mind". Quantum theory has attracted a big deal of attention and opened new avenues for building up a physical theory of mind because its principles and experimental foundations are as strange as the phenomenon of consciousness itself. Yet, the unwarranted recourse to paranormal phenomena as supporting the quantum mind theory plus the extremely bad biological mismodeling of brain physiology lead to great scepticism about the viability of the approach. We give as an example the Hameroff-Penrose Orch OR model with a list of twenty four problems not being repaired for a whole decade after the birth of the model in 1996. In the exposition we have tried not only to pesent critique of the spotted flaws, but to provide novel possibilities towards creation of neuroscientific quantum model of mind that incorporates all the available data from the basic disciplines (biochemistry, cell physiology, etc.) up to the clinical observations (neurology, neurosurgery, molecular psychiatry, etc.). Thus in a concise fashion we outline what can be done scientifically to improve the Q-mind theory and start a research programme (in Lakatos sense) that is independent on the particular flaws in some of the existing Q-mind models
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library||
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Eliano Pessa & Giuseppe Vitiello (2003). Quantum Noise, Entanglement and Chaos in the Quantum Field Theory of Mind/Brain States. Mind and Matter 1 (1):59-79.
Michael Lockwood (1989). Mind, Brain, and the Quantum. Oxford University Press.
D. Zohar (1995). A Quantum-Mechanical Model of Consciousness and the Emgerence of 'I'. Minds and Machines 5 (4):597-607.
Roger Penrose & Stuart R. Hameroff (1995). What 'Gaps'? Reply to Grush and Churchland. Journal of Consciousness Studies 2 (2):98-111.
Michael Esfeld (1999). Quantum Holism and the Philosophy of Mind. Journal of Consciousness Studies 6 (1):23-38.
Euan J. Squires (1993). Quantum Theory and the Relation Between the Conscious Mind and the Physical World. Synthese 97 (1):109-23.
Stuart R. Hameroff (2001). Biological Feasibility of Quantum Approaches to Consciousness: The Penrose-Hameroff 'Orch Or' Model. In P. Loockvane (ed.), The Physical Nature of Consciousness. John Benjamins.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads30 ( #63,693 of 1,139,891 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #165,020 of 1,139,891 )
How can I increase my downloads?