Graduate studies at Western
|Abstract||Neuropsychological research on the neural basis of behaviour generally posits that brain mechanisms will ultimately sufﬁce to explain all psychologically described phenomena. This assumption stems from the idea that the brain is made up entirely of material particles and ﬁelds, and that all causal mechanisms relevant to neuroscience can therefore be formulated solely in terms of properties of these elements. Thus, terms having intrinsic mentalistic and/or experiential content (e.g. ‘feeling’, ‘knowing’ and ‘effort’) are not included as primary causal factors. This theoretical restriction is motivated primarily by ideas about the natural world that have been known to be fundamentally incorrect for more than three-quarters of a century. Contemporary basic physical theory differs profoundly from classic physics on the important matter of how the consciousness of human agents enters into the structure of empirical phenomena. The new principles contradict the older idea that local mechanical processes alone can account for the structure of all observed empirical data. Contemporary physical theory brings directly and irreducibly into the overall causal structure certain psychologically described choices made by human agents about how they will act. This key development in basic physical theory is applicable to neuroscience, and it provides neuroscientists and psychologists with an alternative conceptual framework for describing neural processes. Indeed, owing to certain structural features of ion channels critical to synaptic function, contemporary physical theory must in principle be used when analysing human brain dynamics. The new framework, unlike its classic-physics-based predecessor, is erected directly upon, and is compatible with, the prevailing principles of physics. It is able to represent more adequately than classic concepts the neuroplastic mechanisms relevant to the growing number of empirical studies of the capacity of directed attention and mental effort to systematically alter brain function..|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Only published papers are available at libraries|
Similar books and articles
Henry P. Stapp (2005). Quantum Physics in Neuroscience and Psychology: A Neurophysical Model of Mind Brain Interaction. Philosophical Transactions-Royal Society of London. Biological Sciences 360 (1458):1309-1327.
Henry P. Stapp (2006). Quantum Interactive Dualism: An Alternative to Materialism. Zygon 41 (3):599-615.
Henry P. Stapp (2005). Quantum Interactive Dualism - an Alternative to Materialism. Journal of Consciousness Studies 12 (11):43-58.
Giuseppe Vitiello (2001). My Double Unveiled: The Dissipative Quantum Model of Brain. John Benjamins.
Tuomas K. Pernu (2011). Minding Matter: How Not to Argue for the Causal Efficacy of the Mental. Rev Neuroscience 22 (5):483-507.
Henry P. Stapp (2006). Quantum Interactive Dualism, II: The Libet and Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Causal Anomalies. [REVIEW] Erkenntnis 65 (1):117-142.
Henry P. Stapp (2007). Quantum Mechanical Theories of Consciousness. In Max Velmans & Susan Schneider (eds.), A Companion to Consciousness. Blackwell.
Henry P. Stapp (1997). Science of Consciousness and the Hard Problem. Journal of Mind and Behavior 18 (2-3):171-93.
M. Ruz (2006). Let the Brain Explain the Mind: The Case of Attention. Philosophical Psychology 19 (4):495-505.
Added to index2010-12-22
Total downloads56 ( #21,575 of 754,681 )
Recent downloads (6 months)24 ( #5,213 of 754,681 )
How can I increase my downloads?