SCIENTIFIC QUEST FOR CONSCIOUSNESS

            Thanks to modern technological innovations like Positron Emission Tomography (PET), Magnetic Resonance  Imaging (MRI) and the most up to date technique of functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) that have enabled scientists to peep into the most spectacular creation of nature, the human brain. Until just a few years ago the scientific exploration of mind-body-brain phenomena was beyond the realm of scientific experimentation except inserting sensitive electrodes into the skulls of lower animals. But the above discoveries have provided an unprecedented opportunity to study the functioning of the brain with extraordinary precision. For example, the scientists are now able to see how an impulse from the retina of the eye travels, via the optic nerve, to the inner brain  and finally to the cerebral cortex to produce the sense of vision. They also have begun to hope that with the help of these new technologies, they would be able to solve many psychological puzzles and treat mental disorders like depression, schizophrenia etc. in a far better way, even within a decade. They also believe that, with the help of these techniques, they would be able to give plausible replies to philosophical queries such as: What is mind? What is our sense of self? And ultimately, what is consciousness?

             What is mind? Where do our intelligence, the faculty of decision making, our perception, awareness and, above all, the sense of self reside? The Hellenic philosopher Aristotle argued that mind is intimately connected with life and warmth. And since this warmth is carried by blood, heart must be the seat of the mind. But Plato and the philosophers of the mediaeval Europe were convinced that the brain was the seat of mind. In the 17^th century, the French philosopher René Descartes upheld the view that the mind was essentially a non-material entity and was entirely separated from the physiological tissues found inside the skull. His conclusion, “cogito erago sum” (I think, therefore I am) implies that the sense of self, which is not physical, is the only evidence that we actually exist.

  But, Dr. Antinio Damasio, a neurologist of the University of Iowa, is a staunch materialist. He strongly believes that the mind is a creation of the body and hence Descartes erred by saying that the mind and the body are wholly independent. Furthermore, he maintains that consciousness, or the sense of self, is nothing more than a simple by-product of more mundane and essentially physical process- as rainbow is the result of interplay of light and water droplets.

According to Dr. Damasio and other materialists, learning and memorizing are the processes by which we acquire the capability of storing and retrieving data in our brain. This storage takes place as patterns of connections among neurons or nerve cells. Our sensory organs produce electric impulses and though these impulses die away within one thousandth of a second, their passage reinforces a particular set of connections between particular set of neurons giving rise to our faculty of learning. More often the pattern is reinforced, more likely the pattern go into a permanent long term memory. According to Dr. Larry Squire, a professor of psychiatry at the University of California, every memory is made up of many different patterns of neural connections, some for sound, some for sight,  some for smell and so on. A combination of all such patterns, arising out of tens of thousands of neurons firing off minute electric impulses simultaneously, gives a complete sense of perception. The persistence of a firing pattern over time gives, on the other hand, the transformation from perception to the memory of the object. Furthermore, since the patterns are overlapped or interconnected, a single impulse brings a flood of related memories.

            Present researchers have also been able to ascertain that a particular location of the brain is responsible for handling a particular type of memory or emotion. For example, amygdale, an almond size knot of the nerve cells close to the brain stem, handles memories of fear; the basal ganglia, clumps of grey matter within both cerebral hemispheres, handles habits and physical skill; cerebellum at the base of the brain governs conditioned learning and some other reflexes and so on. A damage to any of these regions produces corresponding type of memory malfunctioning.

            To explain consciousness, Dr. Damasio says that there are convergence zones of neurons, thousands of which are spread through the cortex and they coordinate every other form of information the brain needs, so that perception, memory, emotion etc. to be fully functional. These convergence zones of neurons merge disparate pieces of information into a whole and that is called the consciousness. Furthermore, consciousness is a concept of one’s own self that one reconstructs moment by moment on the basis of external stimuli.

            Almost similar views are maintained by Dr. Cristof Koch of California Institute of Technology, Dr. Rodolfo Llinas of New York University of Medical School and Dr. Francis Crick, the discoverer of the structure of DNA. Dr. Koch believes that consciousness is somehow a by-product of the simultaneous high frequency firing of neurons in different parts of the brain. It is the meshing of these frequencies that generate consciousness. In his book ‘The Astonishing Hypothesis’, Dr. Crick has also expressed a similar view and says that, our emotions, personal identity and free will are no more than collective behaviour of a vast assembly of nerve cells.

            This view suggests that unicellular plants and animals should be devoid of consciousness. But in reality, not only amoeba and other unicellular animals, but also our white blood corpuscles are seen to be fully conscious. They feed on other unicellular plants and animals and also procreate by cell division. So it seems that consciousness, as an entity, is more basic than just a coordination of convergence zones of Dr. Damasio, or meshing of neuron firing frequencies of Dr. Koch, or simply a collective behaviour of innumerable nerve cells as explained by Professor Crick. In fact, it appears to be an inner agent that stimulates, activates and coordinates the above functions of neurons. So, in the ‘International Dictionary of Psychology’, Professor Stuart Sutherland writes that, consciousness is a mysterious and fascinating phenomenon and it is impossible to specify it. In tune with Dr. Sutherland, traditional researchers who are working in this field for more than a century, have long since concluded that, there is no conceivable place for the sense of self or consciousness to be located in the brain and it is like a man acting behind the curtain – some kernel of awareness that runs the show. And hence a search for consciousness, as a material entity, is bound to lead to the conclusion that it simply does not exist.

            The Indian approach in treating mind, soul and the Self is quite different from that of the Western thinkers, who, in general, do not distinguish among the three. According to the Indian view, mind is different from soul and the Self and, curiously enough, Hindu philosophers treat the mind simply as a sense organ.  “Among the senses, I am mind”, says Bhagavadgīta (X,22). In fact, “The Western conception of mind roughly corresponds in Indian philosophy to intelligence (buddhi), ego (ahamkāra) and mind (manas) taken together”, says Professor P. T. Raju of the Rajasthan University, Jodhpur.

            It should be pointed out here that, according to the Sāmkhya school of Indian philosophy, the sense of Self  or Atman is completely detached from the body.  Ŗişhi Kapila, the originator of the school, argues, the fact that to designate each and every part of our body we say my hand, my foot, my brain, my eyes etc., conclusively proves that our sense of Self is not a material entity. To make the point clear, Bhagavadgīta compares body to the sense of Self nothing more than garments to an individual.

            Advaita Vedānta, on the other hand, says that the ultimate reality of this creation is the Divine Being or the Cosmic Consciousness Brahman, the Immense and the Vast, and at the same time Finer than the finest and permeates the entire universe. It is the source as well as the end of the entire creation and inner controller of every phenomenon. It is the Primeval substance from which all other contingent beings evolved. So, according to the Hindu view, not only unicellular plants and animals, but also the atoms and molecules that constitute the body of the unicellular organisms, are also conscious. Furthermore, the subatomic particles that constitute atoms and molecules are also conscious. Dr. Roger Penrose, the Oxford mathematician, has upheld the said Vedāntic view and has said, “Consciousness may arise from quantum mechanical phenomena – the laws that govern the behaviour of the subatomic particles”. Furthermore, Vedāntic seers have said long long ago that this Supreme Consciousness Brahman “cannot be comprehended by the sight, by the speech or by any other senses”, and Dr. Penrose and Dr. Sutherland simply confirm this conclusion of the seers when the former asserts, “Perhaps human mind will never be able to comprehend human mind”, and the latter says,”It is impossible to specify what it (consciousness) is, what it does, or how it evolved”.

             So, consciousness, which is merely collective effect of the functioning of the neuron convergence zone of Damasio, or meshing of the high frequency firing of the neuron cells, or gross and average behaviour of the neuron and nerve cells, is the all pervading Brahman to a Vedāntist, Paramātman to a yogi and Almighty God to an Hindu devotee, Whom cannot be apprehended by senses. “There no eye can penetrate. No voice, no mind can penetrate.  …  That which cannot be expressed by speech. By Which speech itself is uttered. That which mind cannot think. By which mind is thought. That which eye cannot see. By which the eyes have sight. That which ears cannot hear. By which ear is heard. That which breathes not by the breath. By which breath is drawn in. That is Brahman….” Says the Kena Upanishad (I/4-8) (translated by.R. C. Zaenner). Thus according to Hindu view, consciousness is the Brahman, Consciousness is the God Almighty and It is also the soul or Ātman and our sense Self, Whom one can perceive only through pursuit of pure knowledge, or by yoga and meditation, or by deep devotion. It could never be perceived with crude scientific instruments, as It is not a material entity.