The Original Version – Preface

The nature of the mind has been intriguing mankind for a long time, and there are many puzzling questions about it. What exactly is the mind? Is the mind a non-physical entity separate from the brain, or are the mind and the brain the same entity [1-5]? Why are there the mind, the consciousness, and the phenomena called qualia? How do they occur? What is the purpose of having them in this universe? Is there life after death? And many other questions.

Fortunately, for centuries, a lot of neuroscientists, neuroradiologists, neuropathologists, and other scientists and researchers in related fields have gathered a lot of information related to these questions, and they and many philosophers have contributed a lot of useful ideas and theories regarding these questions. So, we now have a wealth of scientific evidence and concepts that are complete enough to form a theory that can answer these questions.

I think that many concepts in this theory, such as that the mind is dependent on the brain and that mental phenomena are closely related to neuronal signals, have been around in the scientific community and have been the bases for experiments in this field for quite some time. However, they have never been proved explicitly and rigorously. And although there are a lot of scientific theories about some important aspects of the mind, such as about consciousness and qualia [for example, ref 6-9], there has never been a basic theory that systematically deals with the fundamental nature of the mind and its important aspects as a whole. Thus, I consider that it is necessary to prove the basic concepts about the mind and its important aspects as a whole scientifically and state them definitely as theorems so that they can be understood clearly and quickly and can be the targets for further scientific investigations. By doing this, it is found that some new concepts have emerged and can be used to answer some important questions such as the hard problems of consciousness and qualia [10-14]. In this way, too, I think it will help future generations and new investigators in this field quickly get the idea of what the current scientific concepts regarding these matters are, what concepts are still incomplete, and what remains to be done. Also, I hope that this theory will help the general public understand the concepts easily in a short time and that they will become more interested in this important issue of life.

The Theory is a physical theory, not a philosophical or psychological theory. Its main objectives are to answer the questions, based on scientific evidence, of what the mind, consciousness, and qualia are, why they occur, how they occur, and other related questions. It is a basic theory that deals with only the fundamental concepts; it does not answer the specific questions such as what exact neural circuits create the mind, consciousness, and qualia or what exact signaling patterns of neural circuits create them. However, at present, great advances are being made regarding these specific questions, and one can find them in the current literature in cognitive neuroscience and related fields.

Whether this Theory is correct remains to be verified by experiments. Nevertheless, whether the Theory is finally proved to be correct, partially correct, or incorrect, I really hope that it will lead to discussions and experiments that will help humanity advance the understanding of the nature of the mind.

 

Chirapat Ukachoke

May 12, 2018

 

< Back to The Current Preface

References

  1. Nagel T. What is the mind–body problem? Ciba Found Symp. 1993;174:1–7; discussion 7–13. 
  2. Place UT. Is consciousness a brain process? Br J Psychol. 1956;47(1):44-50.
  3. Schneider S. Identity theory. The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved 2017 Apr 10 from http://www.iep.utm.edu/identity/
  4. Smart JJC. The mind/brain identiety theory. Zalta EN, editor. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2017 Edition). Retrieved 2017 Apr 5 from https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2017/entries/mind-identity/
  5. Sturm T. Consciousness regained? Philosophical arguments for and against reductive physicalism. Dialogues Clin Neurosci. 2012 Mar;14(1):55–63. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3341650/
  6. Block N. Comparing the major theories of consciousness. In: Gazzaniga MS, editor. The Cognitive Neurosciences (Chap 77). 4th ed., Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 2009:1111–1122. https://www.nyu.edu/gsas/dept/philo/faculty/block/papers/Theories_of_Consciousness.pdf
  7. Kanai R, Tsuchiya N. Qualia. Current Biology. 2012 May;22(10):392–396. http://www.cell.com/current-biology/fulltext/S0960-9822(12)00320-X
  8. Orpwood R. Neurobiological mechanisms underlying qualia. J Integr Neurosci. 2007 Dec;6(4):523-540.
  9. Seager W. Theories of consciousness. An introduction and assessment. 2nd ed. New York, NY: Routledge; 2016. ISBN 978-0-415-83409-4.
  10. Chalmers DJ. Facing up to the problem of consciousness. J Conscious Stud. 1995;2(3):200-219. http://consc.net/papers/facing.html
  11. Chalmers DJ. Moving forward on the problem of consciousness. J Conscious Stud. 1997;4(1):3-46. http://consc.net/papers/moving.html
  12. Grossberg S. Towards solving the hard problem of consciousness: The varieties of brain resonances and the conscious experiences that they support. Neural Netw. 2017 Mar;87:38-95. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0893608016301800?via%3Dihub
  13. Weisberg J. The hard problem of consciousness. The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved 2018 Jan 29 from https://www.iep.utm.edu/hard-con/
  14. Van Gulick R. Consciousness. Zalta EN, editor. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2017 Edition). Retrieved 2017 Sep 8 from https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2017/entries/consciousness

< Back to The Current Preface