Narrow Minded MSM Scientist

It's a deep and rich science which seems to take at least 488 pages to summarize...what exactly are you asking from me? A soundbite, like "consciousness resides in the brain"?

I'm sure you're aware of this, but just because you are unfamiliar with the science, and unwilling to read a book about it, does not make it go away.


You mean the part where he says, "we're looking at the brain" with respect to tackling the mystery of consciousness?

You may be conflating two different things. There is a difference between understanding where something is to be found, and having worked out all the details. For example, just because we don't know the details of how gravity is produced doesn't mean that we can't say that it's tied to mass/inertia.

Linda

Since you clearly are uninterested in an honest, forthright discussion, I'll bow out.

Off topic (apologies) but relevant to Laureys and consciousness)

(Laureys) "NDE's are characterised by a feeling of well being. More than 90% of our sample reported that it was so extreme they had difficulty putting it into words. Then they have the feeling of leaving their bodies, there, on the accident scene or in the OR, seeing the very intensive resuscitation, when we know that the brain during an accident, haemorrhage or cardiac arrest is the organ that requires the most energy.

So how do we explain that these people can have very detailed memories when their brains are not working ? We can measure the brain with our instruments and see that it has very diminished activity/low glucose consumption, so how do we explain that these people experience this phenomena?

It's something that fascinates us and I think medical science has shown way too little interest in the subject. Maybe we considered them a little crazy. There has been a lot of media interest numerous books and documentaries but not enough research and we want to change that." 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AXLwrKyPHQc (summary from 3.47 to 5.40) 

The only thing I would disagree with is that he makes it sound as if his group is leading the way when in fact there's been a substantial amount of research over 40 years, just not with enough funding.

Nevertheless some carry a responsibility to be careful about how they express off-hand opinions. If you’re a powerful politician then you should not be tweeting misinformation or stirring up prejudice and division. If you are considered to be an expert then you should be aware that people may take your expertise as infallible and quote you in support of their own opinions.

True enough, though I don't know that I'd consider a professor of mild celebrity in one country especially powerful. And I don't love the idea that an educator can't have some space in public to voice their personal thoughts, divorced from their job.