Is it the brain that produces dreams?

It's a consolidation of 10 years of work, and then some, so I wouldn't expect people to get it... maybe get parts of it... most people look at me as if I'm off my rocker... but it's proven useful to me to put these thoughts down in writing anyway. The second to last para are difficult ideas that are my most recent from the last year or so.

I still say you are ignoring a mountain of evidence leading in a totally different direction. Some of it I have pointed you to earlier in this thread.

But there you go: we all have the same evidence to look at, but it is up to each of us to sort through it and make sense of it in what ever way we can.

With a variety of evidence, I refuted at least 1/2 dozen of your (honestly pretty lame) assertions about why brain is critical to dreams and life in general. 

OTOH- you're approach is to simply ignore all that, and make a new set somewhat incomprehensible assertions and back them up with nothing. 

That's a novel approach to discovery. 

Hey, whatever floats your boat.

Did I misunderstand it? Really?

OK. So let's just take just the first sentence of your post and break it down.

snip- brain's and neurons don't seem to be essential to organisms, so the non-functiong brain argument, may not be as relevant as we think. There are simple organisms (i.e. Paramecium) which don't contain any neurons at all

So you are asserting that the brain is not the most complex organ ever found by man. It is NOT the most powererfull processing machine of any type mankind has ever studied. 

According to your statement it is an assembly of unassociated cells,, stand-alone living organisms (paramecium). What could possibly lead you to this conclusion?

You can't just dream up whatever you like, and call it a theory. That's not how science works. 

I"m not asking for undeniable proof: after all if it has done anything, this forum has shown that very little in this world can be proven absolutely. However, I am asking for some logical train of thought and evidence trail.

Sorry Max, this seems like random meanderings to me that deserve no real consideration.

So you ignore a whole list of evidence to the contrary and pretend that it was never offered, and then you state that somehow I misunderstood your post? 

No, I think I understood it. I just feel it is babble.

If your brain is so important for dreaming, how would you explain the fact that people like Pam Reynolds and Eben Alexander (and hundreds of thousands of other NDE experiences) had their experiences w/o the benefit of a functioning brain?

You're  explaining one mystery using another mystery. Think about this. Would evolution go through all the trouble to produce a brain that uses 20% of the energy the whole body needs to function if it weren't necessary? Your basic fault is assuming the testimonial provided by Reynolds and Speltzer is an accurate accounting. Without a time machine to verify what happened we won't ever know how accurate the testimonials are. You assume far more than has been verified. I can't comment on Eben.

I don’t think anyone is suggesting a brain isn’t an essential component of life as a human being. Merely questioning its true role in consciousness.

With a variety of evidence, I refuted at least 1/2 dozen of your (honestly pretty lame) assertions about why brain is critical to dreams and life in general. 

OTOH- you're approach is to simply ignore all that, and make a new set somewhat incomprehensible assertions and back them up with nothing. 

That's a novel approach to discovery. 

Hey, whatever floats your boat.

Didn't I misunderstand it? Really?

OK. So let's just take just the first sentence of your post and break it down.

snip- brain's and neurons don't seem to be essential to organisms, so the non-functiong brain argument, may not be as relevant as we think. There are simple organisms (i.e. Paramecium) which don't contain any neurons at all

So you are asserting that the brain is not the most complex organ ever found by man. It is NOT the most powererfull processing machine of any type mankind has ever studied. 

According to your statement it is an assembly of unassociated cells,, stand-alone living organisms (paramecium). What could possibly lead you to this conclusion?

You can't just dream up whatever you like, and call it a theory. That's not how science works. 

I"m not asking for undeniable proof: after all if it has done anything, this forum has shown that very little in this world can be proven absolutely. However, I am asking for some logical train of thought and evidence trail.

Sorry Max, this seems like random meanderings to me that deserve no real consideration.

So you ignore a whole list of evidence to the contrary and pretend that it was never offered, and then you state that somehow I misunderstood your post? 

No, I think I understood it. I just feel it is babble.

Just to be clear, I am NOT asserting this incredible organ does what most in science says it does (that it is the seat of consciousness), but it's hard to ignore the fabulous complexity and array of capabilities that it seems to have.

If your brain is so important for dreaming, how would you explain the fact that people like Pam Reynolds and Eben Alexander (and hundreds of thousands of other NDE experiences) had their experiences w/o the benefit of a functioning brain?

You're  explaining one mystery using another mystery. Think about this. Would evolution go through all the trouble to produce a brain that uses 20% of the energy the whole body needs to function if it weren't necessary? Your basic fault is assuming the testimonial provided by Reynolds and Speltzer is an accurate accounting. Without a time machine to verify what happened we won't ever know how accurate the testimonials are. You assume far more than has been verified. I can't comment on Eben.

You're  explaining one mystery using another mystery. Think about this. Would evolution go through all the trouble to produce a brain that uses 20% of the energy the whole body needs to function if it weren't necessary? Your basic fault is assuming the testimonial provided by Reynolds and Speltzer is an accurate accounting. Without a time machine to verify what happened we won't ever know how accurate the testimonials are. You assume far more than has been verified. I can't comment on Eben.

Yes. Just like a few hundred years ago some people explained why sailors could sail around the world back to their departure point, and what they said was a deep and unexplained mystery at the time: that gravity could hold us all to a huge sphere. But it was eventually explained.  And like that mystery, at least the mystery I am using, comports with observations.

First- we already know a fully functioning brain is not completely necessary as shown by the cases of hydrocephalus and less convincingly to some, NDE. That's already been demonstrated right?.

Now: we know it seems to be a critical organ for most people, that is also undeniable. So that might help explain to you why it seems so important in terms of energy use and evolution.

As to it's actual purpose? Why are you assuming that if evolution has decided it is so important (BTW- I'm not fully on-board with this line of thinking, but I admit it is wide-spread in science) that it must be because it is the core of our soul or cognition? Is it not important enough that it seems to be deeply and inextricably involved with every sense and muscle action we produce? 

Is that not important enough for you? 

Must it be MORE important than that? If so, why?

I don’t think anyone is suggesting a brain isn’t an essential component of life as a human being. Merely questioning its true role in consciousness.

To be honest- That's just the starting point of my assertion.  I am ALSO claiming that it plays a minor, or maybe we could call it, a supporting role, in memory and cognition as well. And perhaps even with sense data, it is not omnipotent.