E-LOGOS 2019, 26(2):14-34 | DOI: 10.18267/j.e-logos.465

Conscious Experience and Quantum Consciousness Theory: Theories, Causation, and Identity

Mika Suojanen
Department of Philosophy, Contemporary History and Political Science at University of Turku, Finland

Generally speaking, the existence of experience is accepted, but more challenging has been to say what experience is and how it occurs. Moreover, philosophers and scholars have been talking about mind and mental activity in connection with experience as opposed to physical processes. Yet, the fact is that quantum physics has replaced classical Newtonian physics in natural sciences, but the scholars in humanities and social sciences still operate under the obsolete Newtonian model. There is already a little research in which mind and conscious experience are explained in terms of quantum theory. This article argues that experience is impossible to be both a physical and non-physical phenomenon. When discussing causality and identity as transcendental, quantum theory may imply the quantum physical nature of conscious experience, where a person associates causality to conscious experience, and, thus, the result is that the double-aspect theory and the mind/brain identity theory would be refuted.

Keywords: experience, mentality, physicality, contrariety, quantum consciousness theory, double-aspect theory, mind/brain identity theory.

Published: December 31, 2019  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Suojanen, M. (2019). Conscious Experience and Quantum Consciousness Theory: Theories, Causation, and Identity. E-LOGOS26(2), 14-34. doi: 10.18267/j.e-logos.465
Download citation

References

  1. Atmanspacher, H. (2015). Quantum Approaches to Consciousness. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2015/entries/qt-consciousness/. Accessed 14 April 2019.
  2. Bohm, D. (1990). A new theory of the relationship of mind and matter. Philosophical Psychology, 3(2), 271‒286. Go to original source...
  3. Boyle, A. (2015). How to Spot Quantum Quackery. NBC News, November 3. https://www.nbcnews.com/sciencemain/how-spot-quantum-quackery-6C10403763. Accessed 3 December 2018.
  4. Churchland, P. M. (1981). Eliminative Materialism and the Propositional Attitudes. The Journal of Philosophy, 78(2), 67‒90. Go to original source...
  5. Churchland, P. M. (1984). Matter and Consciousness. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.
  6. Churchland, P. M. (1985). Reduction, Qualia, and the Direct Introspection of Brain States. The Journal of Philosophy, 82(1), 8‒28. Go to original source...
  7. Dancy, J. and Sosa, E. (1992). A Companion to Epistemology. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Basil Blackwell. Go to original source...
  8. Feigl, H. (1958). The "Mental" and the "Physical". In H. Feigl, M. Scriven and G. Maxwell (Eds.), Concepts, Theories and the Mind-Body Problem (Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Volume 2). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
  9. Feyerabend, P. K. (1963a). Comment: Mental Events and the Brain. The Journal of Philosophy, 60(11), 295‒296. Go to original source...
  10. Feyerabend, P. K. (1963b). Materialism and the Mind-Body Problem. The Review of Metaphysics, XVII(1), 49‒66.
  11. Feyerabend, P. K. (1969). Science Without Experience. The Journal of Philosophy, 66(22), 791‒794. Go to original source...
  12. Hameroff, S. (1998a). Quantum Computation in Brain Microtubules? The Penrose-Hameroff 'Orch OR' Model of Consciousness. Philos Trans R Soc Lond Ser A, Math Phys Sci, 356, 1869‒96. Go to original source...
  13. Hameroff, S. (1998b). 'Funda-mentality': Is the Conscious Mind Subtly Linked to a Basic Level of the Universe?. Trends Cogn Sci, 2, 119‒27. Go to original source...
  14. Hameroff, S. and Penrose, R. (1996a). Orchestrated Reduction of Quantum Coherence in Brain Microtubules: A Model for Consciousness. In S. Hameroff, A. W. Kazniak and A. C. Scott (Eds.), Toward a Science of Consciousness; the first Tucson discussions and debates (pp. 507-40). Cambridge (MA): MIT Press.
  15. Hameroff, S. and Penrose, R. (1996b). Conscious Events as Orchestrated Space-time Selections. Journal of Conscious Studies, 3(1), 36-53. Go to original source...
  16. Hameroff, S. and Penrose, R. (2014). Consciousness in the universe: A review of the 'Orch OR' theory. Physics of Life Review, 11, 39-78. Go to original source...
  17. Hiley, B. J. and Pylkkänen, P. (2005). Can Mind Affect Matter Via Active Information?. Mind & Matter, 3(2), 7-27.
  18. Jackson, F. (1982). Epiphenomenal Qualia. The Philosophical Quarterly, 32(127), 127-136. Go to original source...
  19. Jackson, F. (1986). What Mary Didn't Know. The Journal of Philosophy, 83(5), 291-295. Go to original source...
  20. Kant, I. (2010/1781/1787). Kritik der reinen Vernunft. J. Timmermann (Ed.). Hamburg: Meiner. Kant, I. (1998). Critique of Pure Reason. P. Guyer & A. Wood (Trans.). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Go to original source...
  21. Kent, A. (2018). Quanta and Qualia. Foundations of Physics, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10701-018-0193-9 Go to original source...
  22. Leon, M. (1987). Character, content, and the ontology of experience. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 65(4), 377-399. Go to original source...
  23. Marr, D. (1982). Vision. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman.
  24. Nagel, T. (1974). What Is It Like to Be a Bat?. The Philosophical Review, 83(4), 435-450. Go to original source...
  25. Nicholas of Cusa. Metaphysical Speculations. In J. Hopkins (Trans.), Six Latin Texts Translated into English. Minneapolis, Minnesota: The Arthur J. Banning Press.
  26. Ouellette, J. (2016). A New Spin on the Quantum Brain. Quanta Magazine, November 2. https://www.quantamagazine.org/a-new-spin-on-the-quantum-brain-20161102/. Accessed 18 December 2018.
  27. Penrose, R. (1989). The Emperor's New Mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Go to original source...
  28. Penrose, R. (1994). Shadows of the Mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  29. Penrose, R. and Hameroff, S. (1995). What 'Gaps'? Reply to Grush and Churchland. Journal of Conscious Studies, 2, 98-112.
  30. (2017). Physics in a minute: The double slit experiment. Plus Magazine, February 5. https://plus.maths.org/content/physics-minute-double-slit-experiment-0. Accessed 3 December 2018.
  31. Place, U. T. (1954). The Concept of Heed. British Journal of Psychology, 45, 243-255. Go to original source...
  32. Place, U. T. (1956). Is Consciousness a Brain Process?. British Journal of Psychology, 47, 44-50. Go to original source...
  33. Pylkkänen, P. (2015). Quantum theory, active information and the mind-matter problem. In E. Zhafarov (Ed.), Contextuality from Quantum Physics to Psychology (pp. 325‒334). Advanced series on mathematical psychology, World Scientific. Go to original source...
  34. Rorty, R. (1965). Mind-Body Identity, Privacy, and Categories. The Review of Metaphysics, XIX(1), 24-54.
  35. Rorty, R. (1970). In Defense of Eliminative Materialism. The Review of Metaphysics, XXIV(1), 112-121.
  36. Ryle, G. (2000). The Concept of Mind. London: Penguin Books.
  37. Smart, J. J. C. (2007). The Mind/Brain Identity Theory. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2017/entries/mind-identity/. Accessed 6 March 2019.
  38. Smith, D. W. (2013). Phenomenology. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2013/entries/phenomenology/. Accessed 25 September 2018.
  39. Strawson, G. (2016). Consciousness Isn't a Mystery. It's Matter. The New York Times, May 16. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/16/opinion/consciousness-isnt-a-mystery-its-matter.html?_r=0. Accessed 4 June 2016.
  40. Wendt, A. (2015). Quantum Mind and Social Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Go to original source...
  41. Wittgenstein, L. (1953). Philosophical Investigations. G.E.M. Anscombe and R. Rhees (Eds.), G.E.M. Anscombe (Trans.). Oxford: Blackwell.