If you were n’t conscious , you would n’t be reading this clause . Or , at the very least , you would n’t be aware you were reading this article . Consciousness is responsible for all our thought , experiences , and feeling . Without it , we would have no spare will , no sentience of self , and no awareness of our environs . To quote Descartes , " I think , therefore I am " .
But what if this assumption is wrong ?
What if you were told that free will and personal duty are just social concept ? That our cognizance has no command over our beliefs , feelings , thoughts , and perceptions of the human race ?
That ’s the last made by two scientists , David Oakley from University College London and Peter Halligan from Cardiff University . Their theory , print inFrontiers in Psychology , takes into thoughtfulness enquiry into neuropsychological and neuropsychiatric disorder and recentcognitive neuroscience discipline .
The pair habituate Victorian biologist Thomas Henry Huxley ’s metaphor of a train to clarify their idea . The relationship between the mind and the brain , they say , is like that between a steam pennywhistle and an engine . The steam whistle act in response to the work of the engine , but has no influence over it . likewise , knowingness is the production of the mind . It can not control it .
The current consensus among expert is that consciousness can be split into two elements . The first is a sense of personal awareness . The second is a personal narrative , i.e. the combination of intellection , belief , emotions , memory , and sensations we are bombarded with constantly . Oakley and Halligan argue that this personal narrative is a fraction of the emotion , experience , thoughts , and beliefs get in the brain during non - conscious processes .
So what , then , is the dot of awareness ?
According to Oakley and Halligan , it ’s a communication tool . A sense of ego and personal history allows us to communicate to others what we have perceive and experience . This ability to communicate is imperative to our survival and gives humankind an evolutionary edge .
There ’s also the question of complimentary will . Without an active knowingness , can we be held personally creditworthy for our action ?
Yes , say Oakley and Halligan .
" Just because consciousness has been placed in the rider posterior , does not think we need to dispense with important everyday notions such as free will and personal obligation . "
" In fact , they are engraft in the working of our non - witting nous systems . They have a muscular purpose in lodge and have a cryptical impact on the direction we understand ourselves . "
