1. Introduction

Consciousness, often described as the subjective experience of being aware, encompasses a vast array of mental phenomena, including thoughts, emotions, sensations, and the sense of self. It is the very fabric that shapes our perception, cognition, and interactions with the world. Hence, understanding the origin, nature and inherent virtues of consciousness becomes very important.

This book intends to provide a clear and complete perspective of consciousness. It explains the fundamental aspects of consciousness, including its definition, origins, interactions with the brain and body, and the reasons why it is vital to grasp its complexities. Furthermore, it emphasises the significance of acquiring a proper understanding of consciousness and guides readers on the path to cultivating a consciousness aligned with purpose and clarity, ultimately empowering them to lead conscious and fulfilling lives.

The prevailing paradigm has viewed consciousness as an emergent property of complex neural activity within the brain. However, many pieces of evidence and insights compel us to reconsider this perspective.

To lay the groundwork for our understanding, we delve into the nature of consciousness, explore the brain to identify how a thought is created and experienced, go through a great neurosurgeon’s experiments that provide useful insights, explore the exciting findings that establish a relationship between quantum phenomena and consciousness, and delve into several medical mysteries.

2.    Consciousness – a brief overview

A person’s ability to be in a state of awakening, cognition, alertness, thinking, and many such phenomena are all attributed to consciousness. Among its many aspects, two main characteristics of consciousness are thoughts and experiences.

There can be varied explanations if we try to explore what we mean by consciousness. Then, there is always that debate about whether consciousness is an element of the brain or consciousness is an aspect of a separate metaphysical non-material entity that operates the brain.

Depending on this view, we can say there are broad categories of thinkers in the world. One category categorically believes that the brain somehow creates consciousness and that nothing is immaterial in this world. The other category believes that consciousness is metaphysical and a subjective matter, more by direct experience and also based on various knowledge gathered.

Assuming that consciousness is metaphysical, there is this question of how it interacts with physical matter and whether there is any “physical proof” or “evidence” that says consciousness does interact with matter.

As scientists study the brain intensely with key advancements in technology, a few things that may contradict each other are apparent.

1. On the one hand, it is claimed that much information exists about the brain. The brain is mapped in complete detail, with almost every voxel, region, and neuron accounted for. The resulting information apparently shows that scientists are able to explain every activity of the human being.
2. On the other hand, not much is clear about consciousness. The research in neurosciences has not been able to explain accurately what we all intuitively know as the “mind,” the thinking faculty. The brain remains an organ of mystery because the mind has been a mystery. As neuroscientists dig out more information, the mystery also deepens, with many activities of human beings not being explained with the current understanding of medical science, especially neuroscience, that accounts for consciousness.

In the following sections, we will explore consciousness through a combination of scientific studies and direct experiences.

3.    Dissecting the brain

A wealth of enlightening literature is available on how thoughts and consciousness arise. There are many valuable updates to this field based on patients’ ongoing diagnoses and treatment. However, we can safely make the following statements by sifting through much of the information based on vast studies, experiments, observations, and interpretations.

Given its apparent high complexity, a consensus on the precise meaning and understanding of numerous phenomena related to consciousness is lacking.

One perspective within the literature suggests the following:

• A lot needs to be understood about the nature of thoughts, consciousness, and mind.
• Precisely how thoughts are created is unclear.
• How consciousness arises in the brain remains unknown. Nevertheless, this lack of understanding does not hinder the effectiveness of general anaesthesia, making the patients unconscious.

Another perspective in the literature presents the following viewpoints:

• Neuroscientists’ view is that neuronal firing generates thoughts.
• The collective activity of billions of neurons somehow gives rise to the experience of consciousness.
• The mind is the product of the brain.
• Scientists are able to map every brain voxel to a related activity – seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting and sensing.

These conclusions have been drawn from the results obtained through deep brain stimulation, which has demonstrated a significant impact on the thought patterns of previously untreatable patients with depression. Specific information extraction based on specific neuronal firing has provided further insights.

The brain consists of 87 billion nerve cells and forms trillions of connections. While a significant portion of brain functioning remains elusive and inconclusive, the sheer complexity of its connectivity gives the impression that it holds answers to numerous unexplained phenomena. It is anticipated that advancements in technology in the future may unveil many of these mysteries, shedding light on currently unresolved aspects of brain function.

87 billion neurons, trillions of connections

However, it is important to acknowledge the following points:

• The relationship between neuronal firing and thoughts is intricately connected, but it has not been definitively established through direct experiments that neuronal firing directly generates thoughts.
• Several aspects of neuronal firing are not clear, such as what initiates the neuronal firing, where and how it originates, and why or where it concludes.
• No instrument has ever directly measured, characterised or sensed a thought directly. EEG picks the electrical activities of the brain.
• A thought has always been only the direct experience of the person creating it.
• When a person creates specific thoughts, the corresponding electrical signals are detected by EEG and transmitted through the nervous system, which can also be monitored.
• But, the converse has to work if the neuronal firing results in thoughts. There has been no evidence of a person reporting, “I had such specific thoughts” when the brain is stimulated,
• Detailed brain mapping does not explain how thoughts or consciousness are created. It does not showcase “the mind” in the brain.

Everyone will accept the fundamental premise that inanimate things like potassium, calcium, amino acids, proteins,  and glucose are neither living nor can generate thoughts. This is because they are made of innately insentient elemental particles like electrons, atoms, and molecules. The same insentient particles make up neurons and other cells in the body.

The fundamental building blocks that lack inherent living characteristics do not transform into “living” entities simply by huddling themselves, even though they work in deep harmony and synchrony at such sub-micro levels. These elementary particles, which are non-living, cannot create a “life” or “living entity” through their mere grouping. It is important to note that neurons or other cells are not inherently “life”, nor can they generate thoughts. Thoughts are observed only in living beings.

The meaning of “life” is explored further in subsequent sections. It is worth mentioning that it can be somewhat misleading to use terms like “living cells” or “dead cells” in a general sense. Instead, it would be more accurate to describe them as “functional cells” or “non-functional cells” rather than categorising them as living or dead.

Upon profound observation, it becomes apparent that there is a unique invisible force that binds all these elementary materials together and orchestrates their functioning in such a remarkable manner. 

These observations provide empirical evidence suggesting that neuronal firing is not the cause of thoughts or consciousness.  Instead, it is the thoughts of an individual that lead to neuronal firing. This line of reasoning leads us to conclude that there must be an entity independent of the brain that generates thoughts and produces consciousness.

4.    Absence of Logic Functional Entity in Brain

We are continuously fed with inputs from sense sources like eyes, ears, nose, tongue and skin.  The inputs from all these senses interface with neuronal firing that terminates in their designated regions in the brain. The source of the stream of neuronal firing indicates the type of sense. Only neuronal path decides whether it is sight, hearing, smell, taste and touch. The characteristics of neuronal firing remain the same for all different sensations.

Then, this leads to the question – which part or parts of the brain or the place of neuronal firing decides the type of sensory inputs? Further, is there any logic function block found in the brain that determines the source of particular kinds of information and decides what action has to be taken for that particular stimulus?

Of course, it should be noted that in day-to-day life, a person also performs multiple actions without any physical stimulation. There will be an idea or an action for no reason, or they may ignore inputs and do nothing. They may remember something for no reason and start doing some activity, or they may overlook doing anything. For example, while idling on a couch, a  person for no reason takes a walk or drinks water even when not thirsty, eating even when not needed, and there are so many.

Now, let’s delve a bit more into this topic. If such a functional block exists, it will be similar to how a microprocessor is programmed to function. In other words, it requires the presence of some intelligence that identifies the kind of all actions for the specific combination of inputs.

First of all, there is no evidence that such a functional block exists in the brain. Neuronal firing cannot explain these phenomena.  Further, there is no possibility that such an intelligence block exists in the brain. One should accept the simple truth that the inputs are utterly unpredictable, and they keep changing unpredictably every instant. Further, the existence of such a logic function block in the brain would mean there is already inbuilt information about every future event. This is an impossible hypothesis.

The structure of the brain, with its neuronal firing, even with its uniqueness in every individual, leads to the conclusion that it is meant for doing fixed routine activities. It is a passive organ meant for doing assigned duties.  There is no scope for changing its working on its own. Neuronal firing patterns can change only upon the directions given by someone else who has intelligence.

This will then conclusively establish that there has to be an intelligent entity independent of the brain but which continuously takes inputs through the brain, thinks and decides independently, and responds accordingly. It further prompts us to consider that this conscious, intelligent entity influences and directs the functioning of the brain.

5.    Results of a great neurosurgeon’s experiments on his patients

A scientist working in a laboratory brings out observations that result in ground-breaking understanding, views, and insights on particular phenomena and concepts. For anyone, it would be interesting to wonder if such an experiment would be possible on the brain of a live person to explore consciousness. In fact, such experiments are going on and will keep going in the future.

But, here, we will discuss the experiments conducted on live patients during brain surgeries between 1940 and 1970 by world-famous neurosurgeon Dr Wilder Penfield. He was a staunch believer that the brain accounts for everything about consciousness. During his years of interaction with patients, he discovers many aspects, which he writes in his priceless book “The Mysteries of the Mind.”

He injected current at a spot in the brain, due to which the patient’s hand went up. He asked the patient if he had lifted his hand. The patient replied, “I didn’t do it; you did it.” He injected current at another place, due to which a patient started speaking. He asked the patient if he was talking. The patient replied, “I didn’t make that sound. You pulled it out of me.”

Note the responses of the patients. If the brain was indeed the ‘person,’ further, neuronal activity produced thoughts, and if the mind is a product of the brain, then the person would have told, “You are forcing me to lift my hand up” or  “You are forcing me to blabber.” It is amply clear that the “person” who was speaking was someone other than the brain.

If the brain was everything, it would hypothetically be feasible to elicit thoughts or experiences by stimulating it with electric currents through electrodes. This is precisely what the neurosurgeon did to find out. The neurosurgeon clearly mentions that he was not able to change beliefs or decisions by way of inducing currents in the brain. The doctor says in the book, “…there is no valid evidence that electrical stimulation can activate the mind….none of the actions that we attribute to the mind has been initiated by electrode stimulation.” Further, he says, “There is no place in the cerebral cortex where electrical stimulation will cause a patient to believe or to decide.”

Based on many experiments, the doctor makes many other interesting observations in the book about the nature of the brain and what is understood as the “mind”. He gives his verdict in the end, saying that the mind is an independent, immaterial entity acting with an energy of its own. He concludes, saying, “What a thrill it is, then, to discover that the scientist, too, can legitimately believe in the existence of the spirit!”.

Spirit or soul has long been considered to be a philosophy of faith rather than a philosophy of facts. The usual tendency is to argue that since they cannot be “physically observed,” “experimentally verifiable,” and “practically perceivable,” they are labelled as items of belief.

There could not be a more direct experiment than this that proves that some other entity is operating the brain. Further, it is clear from the experiments that the brain is not experiencing anything. The brain was only facilitating the entity that was experiencing’.

Upon a meticulous analysis of Wilder Penfield’s ground-breaking experiments, one is introduced to a multitude of factors that the esteemed neurosurgeon deeply explored. The exploration included the possibility of one region of the brain “disagreeing” with another brain region. As a result, it becomes evident that relying solely on the brain to account for thoughts, beliefs, decisions, and consciousness is inadequate. Indeed, there emerges a resounding consensus that an independent entity exists, exerting a causal influence on brain processes and bearing the responsibility for thoughts, decisions, beliefs, and consciousness itself. With these empirical findings as a guiding light, we are led to embrace the wondrous notion that there is more to our existence than what can be confined within the intricate workings of the brain, stirring our curiosity to explore the depths of this mysterious realm of the self.