Neuroscience is pre-paradigmatic. Consciousness is why

https://www.theintrinsicperspective.com/...radigmatic

John Horgan linked this article in a tweet (X).  I found it very interesting and well written.  Curious for the community's take.  Another step away from reductionism?

Of course, ever since researchers in the mid-aughts threw a dead salmon into an fMRI machine and got statistically significant results, it’s been well-known that neuroimaging, the working core of modern neuroscience, has all sorts of problems.

Here’s a cruel parlor trick: ask a neuroscientist to explain something about human cognition. Listen to their answer. Then ask them to explain again, but to say nothing in their explanation about location. The second ask is far harder, almost embarrassingly so (and I say this as a neuroscientist by training). “Speech is processed in Wernicke’s… no wait.”

For to this day, neuroscience has no well-accepted theory of consciousness—what it is, how it works.

https://www.theintrinsicperspective.com/...radigmatic
John Horgan linked this article in a tweet (X).  I found it very interesting and well written.  Curious for the community's take.  Another step away from reductionism?

Great find! Yeah it looks there are more and more scientists willing to challenge the orthodoxy of reductionism.

Seems like he pretty much killed off neurophilosophy with this article heh...especially when combined with the neuroscientist-philosopher Raymond Tallis' criticisms of the field. (For example this old chestnut.)

"What would a philosophy look like that had given up on all reductionist dreams?”
 -Hilary Putnam, Renewing Philosophy

https://www.theintrinsicperspective.com/...radigmatic

John Horgan linked this article in a tweet (X).  I found it very interesting and well written.  Curious for the community's take.  Another step away from reductionism?

well I agree with a lot of that, lots of public (or private) funded researchers trying to justify their position/salary publishing crappy papers... there again, perhaps he's a failed neuro-researcher who's been advised by his publisher that he can promote his book/career as a writer with provocative articles...

Thanks Silence - that is a superb find - it has gone straight on to my Kindle for a more detailed read. Inevitably it encourages me to believe that the brain merely communicates with a non-physical entity - much as some of the NDE and Reincarnation accounts suggest.

I think it relates to this much earlier article (that I admit I have posted here already more than once).

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10....source=mfc

I suspect the neuroscientists didn't take its message to heart!

David

After reading the article fully, I felt that the author started off really well, and made a lot of interesting observations that I think are best explained basically by Dualism - the brain is only an organ to contact the mind.

However, once he had established that there is something deeply wrong with conventional neuroscience, he seemed to become a bit vague - so overall I was rather disappointed.

David