What is the definition of “I”? -- “I” is the software which runs on neural-network-HW

[neuroclusterbrain]

It is very interesting to find out what is the percentage in population of such people who have never seen human or animal in their dreams during their entire lifetimes. We have encountered only one such case in our experience. Maybe anybody can report similar cases? Please raise your hands and please respond all readers who also have never seen human or animal in your dreams during your entire lifetime.

Who is "we"? Are you a cluster of writers?

"We" == the authors/developers of Neurocluster Brain Model.

Who *all* can't spell, format, nor punctuate correctly? I doubt it...

Perhaps it's simply a language and culture barrier. I don't know.

That is correct – English is not the native language of neuroclusterbrain.

 

[neuroclusterbrain]

Yet, you claim:
However all these paradoxes can be easily solved using neurocluster brain model. Susane which you see in your dream is not the Susane’s spirit, but instead a neurocluster into which the model of Susane is written and stored. This neurocluster simulates all the behavior of Susane: how Susane moves, how Susane talks, etc. The more accurate and the more detailed the model of Susane is, the more realistic the dream scenario becomes

You've attempted to create an elaborate model to explain something as simple as imagination.

Barehl claims that “imagination is very simple” and according to the worldview of barehl all phenomena can be easily explained with the simple answer “that is imagination”.
Question: “how do dream-characters talk to you in the dream, what is the underlying mechanism of that?” According to the logic of barehl the answer is: “oh well, that is very simple, that is imagination”.
Question: “how does psychography work, what is the underlying mechanism of psychography?” According to the logic of barehl the answer is: “that is very simple, that is imagination”.
Question: “how does telepathy work, what is the underlying mechanism of telepathy?” According to the logic of barehl the answer is: “that is very simple, that is imagination”.
Question: “how does dowsing work, what is the underlying mechanism of dowsing?” According to the logic of barehl the answer is: “that is very simple, that is imagination”.
And so on.
And now the question: “how does the imagination work, what is the underlying working mechanism of the imagination?” According to the logic of barehl the answer is: “oh well, who cares… imagination is just very simple, and that’s it”.
Such approach is not scientific, this is the worldview of the religious adepts and pseudoscientists who are very happy with circular/recursive definitions (like “The Napkin religion is the one true religion because it says so right here on this napkin.” or “Object X has intelligence ONLY IF it has consciousness. Object X has consciousness ONLY IF it has intelligence.”)

The advantage of Neurocluster Brain Model is that it can explain the underlying working mechanism of the imagination, and bellow is the short explanation.

When a man sees new unknown object for the first time then finite number of neurons in the brain (cluster of neurons) stores information about object's model (how the object looks, how the object moves, how the object behaves, etc). Information about that object is saved not in the whole brain, but only in the finite “piece of the brain” – the evidence for that are experimental data about brain damage – if the brain is damaged in some local area then brain loses information only about some classes of objects, but not about all objects. The model of the object is stored inside the “piece of the brain” (cluster of neurons) and this neurocluster acts not only as passive “data file” but also under special conditions this neurocluster can act as “executable file” which can simulate the behavior of stored object for the main personality – this is the underlying mechanism of how religious adepts communicate with spirits/angels/Gods/etc and also the underlying mechanism of other religious and occult phenomena.
The surrounding objects (like sky, earth, grassland, forest, etc) are also modeled by neuroclusters which store the models about these objects. Let’s raise a question: how real are these “spiritual worlds”? To answer this question we will use the analogy. Let’s analyze a computer game which has its own 2D or 3D virtual world, its own virtual characters, its own laws and rules, etc. When a man plays a computer game, he interacts with this virtual game world, he communicates with virtual game characters as if this virtual world is real. However if we will physically destroy the computer then automatically this virtual world will disappear and all virtual characters will disappear too.
Exactly the same situation is with “spiritual worlds”. All these “spiritual worlds” are generated by the neuroclusters in the brain (exactly the same happens during dreaming) and the main personality (which enters such “spiritual world”) has no tools whatsoever to distinguish a simulated virtual world from the real world. When the main personality enters “spiritual world” then everything inside such “spiritual world” looks very realistic.
Like with the computer, exactly the same situation is with the brain – “spiritual world” exists only as long as the physical brain exists which generates the sounds and images of “spiritual world” – and if the brain is physically destroyed then all these “spiritual worlds” are destroyed too.
However religious adepts naively believe that “spiritual worlds” can exist without physical brain. Such a belief is equivalent to the belief that the virtual world of computer game will continue to exist after the computer has been physically destroyed.

 

[Loss Leader]

The more I read, the more convinced I become that you are holding what my people call a silver-plated shmegegge.

 

[Donn]

The more I read, the more convinced I become that you are holding what my people call a silver-plated shmegegge.

Ah, those are some good people!

 

[neuroclusterbrain]

The truth is I can indeed describe consciousness with a rigorous scientific definition.

Barehl, please provide us the exact list of exact criteria (the list of exact features) which would allow unambiguously determine if object X has consciousness.
And when barehl will write down such list of criteria then please apply this list to some concrete cases in order to demonstrate that it really works for real world cases.
Let’s put this list of criteria to the test.
As for example, using your list of criteria please determine if the following objects have consciousness or not:
1) computer game character;
2) computer AI chatbot;
2) dream character (a character which you see during the dream and with which you communicate in the dream)
3) a tree,
4) an amoebae,
5) virus,
6) a stone.

please list the characteristics of object X. For example, does it have communication ability? Does it have memory? Can it manipulate abstractions?

When you are writing the definition then it is totally up to you to choose the needed list of the characteristics of object X.
Just feel free to choose all the needed characteristics of object X (size, weight, color, smell, or whatever you might need) and when the list is complete, then show this list to us.
And we will put to the test your list of characteristics, we will test your list on real world examples to see if it works or not.

And now the second question for the barehl: the consciousness is a 1) divisible object, or 2) indivisible object?
The feature divisibility/indivisibility is the most fundamental feature of the object, because it instantaneously reveals the fundamental flaws in the definition of the object.
So, what is your answer: the consciousness is a 1) divisible object, or 2) indivisible object?

Tell me clearly what you mean by divisible.
Do you mean that you could have two half consciousnesses or four one quarter consciousnesses?
Or do you mean division into functional parts?
Or do you mean some kind of scale of consciousness?

To try to help you understand, I can give examples.

An engine is made of functional parts. However, one engine cannot be divided into two working engines. On a scale there are engines with one cylinder, two cylinders, four cylinders, etc.

There are varying degrees of consciousness from territorial fish to reptiles to mammals. However, you could not divide a mammal brain and get two fish consciousnesses.

Barehl’s specifying question about the divisibility is valid and correct.
Yes, indeed, there are two types of divisibility:
1) after the division you have smaller parts which have the same name as the original object – as for example, if you will divide 1 liter of water into two equal parts then you will have two objects which are still called “water”.
2) after the division you have smaller parts which do not have the same name as the original object – as for example, if will divide laptop computer into the composing parts then you will have a bunch of electronic components (chips, capacitors, etc.) which no longer have the same name as the original object.

Ok, we will specify more detailed.
When we ask about divisibility/indivisibility of “consciousness” we mean the scenario when “one-consciousness (singular)” is divided into “several separate consciousnesses (plural)”.
So, what is your answer: the consciousness is a 1) divisible object, or 2) indivisible object?


As it was written in previous post,
=======================
it is very easy to prove experimentally that dream-characters do have their own “awareness/consciousness/soul/spirit/etc”. The experiment setup is very easy. Next time when you go to sleep and when you have a dream and when you see some dream-character-of-human-form (father/mother/brother/sister/friend/relative/etc) in your dream, go closer to that dream-character and ask him a simple question: “do you have your own awareness/consciousness/soul/spirit/etc?” and then wait for the answer from that dream-character.
Let’s raise a simple question: who is the best expert to decide whether dream-character has “awareness/consciousness” or not?
The answer is obvious: the best expert in this question is the dream-character himself.
So your job is very simple – just ask the dream-character himself whether he has “awareness/consciousness” or not.
=======================

Another experimental proof is experiments of “spiritualistic séances” using thread with the attached needle method as described in previous posts. After you will succeed in invoking the “spirit” simply ask him “do you have your own awareness/consciousness/soul/spirit/etc?” and then wait for the answer from that “spirit”.
Again, let’s raise a simple question: who is the best expert to decide whether the “spirit” has “awareness/consciousness” or not?
The answer is obvious: the best expert in this question is the “spirit” himself.
So your job is very simple – just ask the “spirit” himself whether he has “awareness/consciousness” or not.

As it was written in previous post,
=======================
It is interesting to note that all “proofs” which pseudoscientists are able to provide trying to prove that they themselves have “consciousness” always can be simplified/reduced into the following scenario: “I tell you that I have consciousness. How do you dare not to believe what I say? I tell you that I have awareness and I have consciousness. You must believe what I say – you must believe that I have consciousness.”
Pseudoscientists say that they have “consciousness” and that is the only “proof” that are able to provide.
And now go and do the described experiment – ask the dream-character/“spirit” himself about whether he has “consciousness” or not.
=======================

 

[Donn]

What is the minimum number of neurons in a cluster before no further consciousness can be exhibited by division?

 

[Donn]

Next time when you go to sleep and when you have a dream and when you see some dream-character-of-human-form (father/mother/brother/sister/friend/relative/etc) in your dream, go closer to that dream-character and ask him a simple question…

I see a problem here; it is, to be honest, that I am asleep.

… “do you have your own awareness/consciousness/soul/spirit/etc?” and then wait for the answer from that dream-character.

Yeah, a consequent problem really.

Another experimental proof is experiments of “spiritualistic séances” … After you will succeed in invoking the “spirit” simply ask him “do you have your own awareness/consciousness/soul/spirit/etc?” and then wait for the answer from that “spirit”.
… So your job is very simple – just ask the “spirit” himself whether he has “awareness/consciousness” or not.

I see a few problems. For one, you might not succeed in the invocation.
For another; should you get this facet of your imagination (or cluster flock) on the line, how do you confirm it?

How do you distinguish one cluster imagining some scene, from two clusters having a conversation?

…Pseudoscientists say

You read my cluster, I was just thinking that word.

 

[LarryS]

I see a problem here; it is, to be honest, that I am asleep.

It is called 'lucid dreaming', and it's learn able. In my case I started with something simple, I wanted to learn how to 'measure' in dreams, and began with looking down at my feet - or the feet of others to note what they are wearing. Currently I 'remember' to do so maybe once a week.

 

[Donn]

I'm not at all convinced that lucid dreaming is a subject delimited from nonsense by any serious pale.

 

[barehl]

Circular argument is automatically a recursive by definition. Bellow is the simple proof.

It's proof that you don't understand programming. Do you genuinely not understand the difference between a self reference and an instantiated self-reference? These are not even remotely the same. An actual self-reference will be flagged as an error by the pre-compiler. However, an instantiated self-reference is normal, recursive code.

unable to describe “consciousness” with a rigorous scientific definition due to the simple reason – nobody on the Earth was able to do that so far.

I'm not the only one who can define the characteristics of consciousness. There are in fact many people who can do that.

Object X has consciousness ONLY IF it has awareness
Object X has awareness ONLY IF it has consciousness

It would take about 4,500 words to explain this to you. I'm not going to write out an entire chapter here.

 

[barehl]

This thread is a lost cause. Bye bye.

 

[neuroclusterbrain]

I'm not the only one who can define the characteristics of consciousness. There are in fact many people who can do that.

Here is the summary of the endeavors of the pseudoscientists trying to define “consciousness”.

1) What is the “consciousness”, how can we detect if object X has consciousness or not? --> Object X has consciousness ONLY IF it has awareness
=======================
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consciousness
Consciousness is the quality or state of awareness, or, of being aware of an external object or something within oneself."
=======================

2) What is the “awareness”, how can do we detect if object X has awareness or not? --> Object X has awareness ONLY IF it has consciousness
=======================
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Awareness
Awareness is the state or ability to perceive, to feel, or to be conscious of events, objects, thoughts, emotions, or sensory patterns. In this level of consciousness, sense data can be confirmed by an observer without necessarily implying understanding.
=======================

Wow… you just look at that: 1) Object X has consciousness ONLY IF it has awareness, 2) Object X has awareness ONLY IF it has consciousness.
It is really amazing that such huge number of people do not have enough neurons in their brains to be capable to detect circular/recursive definitions which are meaningless by definition.

I'm It would take about 4,500 words to explain this to you. I'm not going to write out an entire chapter here.
This thread is a lost cause. Bye bye.

Barehl became lost in his “chapter of 4,500 words” so he has promised not to return back here anymore – ok, let’s see if he will be able to keep his promise.

Who else thinks that he has "consciousness"? Please raise your hand and come closer. We will put your "consciousness" to the test.

 

[dlorde]

I'm not at all convinced that lucid dreaming is a subject delimited from nonsense by any serious pale.

Don't knock it until you've tried it.

Making dreamers self-aware.

 

[neuroclusterbrain]

What is the minimum number of neurons in a cluster before no further consciousness can be exhibited by division?

First, there is hundredfold difference in the number of synapses in different neurons. This means that computational power of one “big” neuron might be bigger than the combined computational power of hundreds of “smaller” neurons. This means that “minimum number of neurons” (which are needed to accomplish some task) drastically depends on the type of neurons which form the cluster.

=======================
http://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/facts.html#neuron
Number of synapses for a "typical" neuron = 1,000 to 10,000
Number of synapses made on a Purkinje cell = up to 200,000
=======================

Second, there is no consensus about the threshold (of computational power) value which would separate “intelligent agent” from “non-intelligent agent”.
=======================
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligent_agent
In artificial intelligence, an intelligent agent (IA) is an autonomous entity which observes through sensors and acts upon an environment using actuators (i.e. it is an agent) and directs its activity towards achieving goals (i.e. it is rational). Intelligent agents may also learn or use knowledge to achieve their goals. They may be very simple or very complex: a reflex machine such as a thermostat is an intelligent agent, as is a human being, as is a community of human beings working together towards a goal.
=======================

It is interesting to note that pseudoscientists claim that high level of intelligence is needed in order to possess abstraction capabilities, however it is very easy to disprove this claim.

We will remind that all organisms are able to distinguish “food” from “non-food”.
However “food” and “non-food” are abstract objects.
And that means that all organisms have abstraction capabilities.

=======================
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abstraction
Abstraction in its main sense is a conceptual process by which general rules and concepts are derived from the usage and classification of specific examples, literal ("real" or "concrete") signifiers, first principles, or other methods. "An abstraction" is the product of this process—a concept that acts as a super-categorical noun for all subordinate concepts, and connects any related concepts as a group, field, or category.
Conceptual abstractions may be formed by filtering the information content of a concept or an observable phenomenon, selecting only the aspects which are relevant for a particular purpose. For example, abstracting a leather soccer ball to the more general idea of a ball selects only the information on general ball attributes and behavior, eliminating the other characteristics of that particular ball. In a type–token distinction, a type (e.g., a 'ball') is more abstract than its tokens (e.g., 'that leather soccer ball').

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abstract_and_concrete
Abstract and concrete are classifications that denote whether a term describes an object with a physical referent or one with no physical referents.
<…>
Examples of abstract and concrete objects
Abstract||||Concrete
Tennis||||A tennis match
Redness||||The red coloring of an apple
Five||||Five cars
=======================

 

[neuroclusterbrain]

Next time when you go to sleep and when you have a dream and when you see some dream-character-of-human-form (father/mother/brother/sister/friend/relative/etc) in your dream, go closer to that dream-character and ask him a simple question ….

I see a problem here; it is, to be honest, that I am asleep.

… “do you have your own awareness/consciousness/soul/spirit/etc?” and then wait for the answer from that dream-character.

Yeah, a consequent problem really.

It is called 'lucid dreaming', and it's learn able. In my case I started with something simple, I wanted to learn how to 'measure' in dreams, and began with looking down at my feet - or the feet of others to note what they are wearing. Currently I 'remember' to do so maybe once a week.

LarryS is correct – the awareness in the dream can be achieved using training and special techniques. By using these special techniques you will be able to achieve lucid dream and/or OOBE state.

=======================
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucid_dream
A lucid dream is any dream in which one is aware that one is dreaming.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Out-of-body_experience
An out-of-body experience (OBE or sometimes OOBE) is an experience that typically involves a sensation of floating outside one's body and, in some cases, perceiving one's physical body from a place outside one's body (autoscopy).
=======================

Despite the fact that the humankind had been researching OOBE (out-of-body-experience) topic for thousands of years and there are myriads of tractates written on this topic, however from the scientific point of view all these works are at extremely low level.
The breakthrough was done only in year circa 2000 when Michael Raduga began conducting experiments almost at industrial scale using thousands of people as a research object.

Michael Raduga has conducted repeatable experiments using groups of people and during these experiments people have experienced:
1) leaving the physical body;
2) clinical death experience;
3) meeting with the dead people;
4) meeting with the dead angels/demons/aliens/etc;
5) recreated biblical stories of “divine visions”;
6) etc.

For more details please read articles in mass media about Michael Raduga's experiments at page:
http://neuroclusterbrain.com/michael_raduga_articles.html

The techniques for artificial induction of OOBE and/or lucid dreaming phenomena are described in details in Michael Raduga’s books which are available at the address:
http://neuroclusterbrain.com/michael_raduga_books.html

Please note that Michael Raduga is from Russia and his English writings are quite hard to read because Michael Raduga is not fluent in English. So in case if you know Russian language then it is much better to read his books in original Russian language because Russian originals are much better than English translations. Original books in Russian language are available at the address:
http://aing.ru/priroda_yavleniya/knigi/

The more efficient way to get acquainted with techniques of Michael Raduga is to watch video lectures instead of reading books, which are available at the address:
http://neuroclusterbrain.com/michael_raduga_videos.html

The bad thing is that these lectures are mostly in Russian language (let’s hope they will be translated into English some day), however if you know Russian language then these lectures are really worth watching, especially the 3 day length seminar with the title “Exiting your body in 3 days”.

=======================
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QHmYWprrWJU
(In Russian) Михаил Радуга - "Выход из тела за 3 дня". Весь семинар.
Length: 9 hours 43 minutes
=======================

Also Michael Raduga provides live teaching of OOBE induction techniques in his experimental seminars and whoever wants can attend these seminars .
Michael Raduga guarantees that about 50-70% of people attending the experimental seminar in two days will experience OOBE from 1 to 6 times. This guarantee is based on previous seminars in which thousands of people attended Raduga’s seminars and have learned to artificially induce the OOBE state.

 

[ctamblyn]

[...]

We will remind that all organisms are able to distinguish “food” from “non-food”.
However “food” and “non-food” are abstract objects.
And that means that all organisms have abstraction capabilities.

[...]

The mere fact that an organism consumes certain items and not others is not evidence that it is carrying out an abstraction process. "Upwards" and "downwards" are abstract concepts, but that doesn't mean that freely-falling house bricks have abstraction capabilities.

 

[tsig]

What is the minimum number of neurons in a cluster before no further consciousness can be exhibited by division?

One because it's the loneliest number.

 

[barehl]

Barehl became lost in his “chapter of 4,500 words” so he has promised not to return back here anymore – ok, let’s see if he will be able to keep his promise.

Who else thinks that he has "consciousness"? Please raise your hand and come closer. We will put your "consciousness" to the test.

That's okay; I'm sure there is plenty of wisdom on your website.

1. The new scientific model of the brain called Neurocluster Brain Model has been proposed which is able to explain all religious and occult phenomena.

Well, yes, but how could we prove it?

5. The validity of Neurocluster Brain Model can be proved experimentally in many ways, as for example one such proof is spiritualistic séances

if you will personally yourself carry out spiritualistic séances then you will find out that communication with autonomic neuroclusters inside medium’s brain is a very real phenomenon and under special conditions you can have quite meaningful communication with these autonomous neuroclusters.

What about multiple personalities?

7. From a normal healthy man it is possible to artificially create MPD (multiple personality disorder), it is possible to artificially implant into human brain up to 20-40 independent personalities which can remain dormant (latent) for years until the demand of the creator who can provoke manifestation of these hidden independent personalities to accomplish the needed mission.

What about scientology?

Egregoric neurocluster which has “declared independence” from the rest of the brain and which can communicate with the main personality as a separate entity in scientology is called as “demon circuit”. For as long as people have been speaking they have been hearing voices in their head. The founder of scientology L. Ron Hubbard in his “Dianetics” book described the source of these voices or “demons”. He described that these voices are stemmed not from another entity but from a heretofor unsuspected part of the mind. L. Ron Hubbard’s definition of “demon” is bellow.

You are actually using Hubbard as a reference? Oh, that's right, you claim that you are ahead of Hubbard:

L. Ron Hubbard’s definitions of “demon” and “demon circuit” show that L. Ron Hubbard was very close to defining “demon” as the part of the physical brain formed from egregoric neurocluster, however L. Ron Hubbard failed to reach this simple conclusion

And you are ahead of psychiatry:

The term “subconscious” has the same problems as the term “intuition” – official psychiatry/psychology is unable to provide clear scientific definition of “subconscious” and is unable to explain the underlying mechanism of “subconscious”, however Neurocluster Brain Model provides clear and simple definition:
subconscious is the array of autonomous neuroclusters which are insubordinate to the main personality.

It's a good thing you straightened those psychiatrists out.

Official psychiatry/psychology is unable to provide clear scientific definition of “intuition” and is unable to explain the underlying mechanism of “intuition”, however Neurocluster Brain Model provides clear and simple definition:
intuition is the flow of information from autonomous neuroclusters to the main personality.

The level of intuition is directly proportional to the percentage of autonomous independent areas (neuroclusters) in the brain which do not let the main personality to control calculations which occur in these areas of the brain. The bigger the number of such uncontrollable independent neuroclusters in the brain – the higher the intuition. The level of intuition is a measure of how much the main personality does not have the control over neuroclusters inside the brain.
If main personality has 100% control over all neuroclusters in the brain then intuition is equal to 0%.

So, the less control you have, the more intuitive you are.

When the main personality has no control over some areas of the brain then the following scenarios are possible with these uncontrolled areas:
1) they may become a chaotic anarchy (which happens very often) and such phenomenon is called “schizophrenia” – lunatic asylums are full of such people and many such people are freely walking in the streets;
2) these uncontrolled areas may be taken over by Gods/demons (such cases are quite rare).

...the main personality voluntarily “sells” the brain resources (areas of brain) to the demon naively believing that he will get something valuable in exchange/return. The demon/God happily takes over given areas of brain, however if the demon/God will thank to the main personality for the gift – that remains an open question – the most probable scenario is that demon/God will give nothing valuable in return.

So, high intuition causes you to be possessed by demons. Interesting. What about astral projection?

The physiological nature of the “astral body” is exactly identical to physiological nature of demons/Gods which were described above, the only difference from demons/Gods – the “astral body” is not independent – the “astral body” is like a diving/space-suit, a vehicle into which the main personality can transfer itself and the main personality can use this vehicle for traveling inside “spiritual worlds”. If you want to be able to travel inside “spiritual worlds” then having “astral body” in your disposition is not enough. You also need that your “astral body” would be strong and powerful because feeble “astral body” is incapable to carry you far away.

I'm not sure what these astral exercises would be, some type of astral jogging perhaps. What about eastern religions?

Eastern esoteric schools are superior to abrahamic religions because eastern esoteric schools have workable techniques and tools for “getting into the spiritual worlds” and “meeting spiritual beings”, while in abrahamic religions only few random adepts manage to “get into the spiritual worlds” and these “spiritual” adepts have no clue how did they managed to “get into the spiritual world” and they can’t teach these skills for other adepts.

They have the tools and techniques. I see.

When a man is in “astral worlds” then the brain blocks the movement of the physical body, however the control of 1) the breathing, 2) eye movement and 3) tongue movement stay intact thus every action done with “astral” eyes/tongue/ breathing is perfectly mirrored in physical body. Which means, that when a man is in the “astral world” he can still send signals to physical world using his eyes/tongue movements and breathing – all you need to do is to arrange in advance the communication codes (as for example Morse code could be used) to transfer meaningful information into physical world thus proving that a man has awareness when his physical body is immobile.

Lucid dreaming is higher level than simple dream, because clarity of perception is higher than in simple dream. OOBE is higher level than lucid dreaming because in OOBE the seen world quite closely resembles real physical world while in lucid dream a man travels in fictitious non-existing worlds.

True, I wouldn't want to be doing astral projection and mistakenly think I was at the highest state.

What is the underlying mechanism of the sleepwalking? It is very simple. During the sleep the main personality of a man falls asleep and during that time the autonomic neurocluster takes over the control of the human body and initiates actions.

You know, maybe it's just me but the term "autonomic neurocluster" seems to be a blanket explanation for anything you can't actually explain.

When spiritualistic séances are performed regularly for prolonged periods of time then autonomic neuroclusters in the brain develop more and more the ability to control man’s body independently from main personality – at first only small microscopic hand movements and later autonomic neurocluster becomes able to take over the control of whole body and this phenomenon is called “sleepwalking”.

When Christians pray to Jesus and Mary then by definition the Christians are actually conducting unidirectional spiritualistic séances with Jesus and Mary.

What do you think of the ideomotor effect?

Skeptic scientists who investigate the dowsing phenomenon use the term “ideomotor effect” which supposedly explains phenomena like automatic writing, dowsing, facilitated communication, and Ouija boards.
However the truth is that the etymology of the term “ideomotor” (derived from the components “ideo”, meaning "idea" and “motor”, meaning "muscular action") reveals the complete lack of understanding of the underlying mechanisms of these phenomena.

Psychologist/psychiatrists tell us that some vaguely ill-defined “subconscious” moves the hand, and when you ask them to provide the exact scientific definition “what is the subconscious” then they flood you with pseudoscientific self-contradictory blabber about “subconscious” which has no semantic meaning whatsoever – that blabber is not any better than a blabber of the occultists on the same topic.

So let’s fix this mess, let’s make things clear and scientific once and for all. Autonomous neuroclusters inside the brain of the dowser are moving the hand of the dowser. These autonomous neuroclusters inside the brain of the dowser act as independent agents who are able to act independently from the main personality of the dowser.

What do you think of artists?

The physiological mechanism of the brain – the possibility to turn off the “critics” in the brain – is the reason why the majority of artists are winos and dependant on alcohol/tobacco/narcotics/etc. After drinking of alcohol (or taking of narcotics) in dizziness state the “critics” in the brain become turned off and as the result any crap which is painted/composed/etc begins to appear like super magnificent and divinely beautiful.

What about demonic possession?

Majority of doctors who treat the “demonic possession” incorrectly assume that “demonic possession” is exactly the same phenomenon as epilepsy – this confusion is due to the lack of knowledge about the existence of autonomic egregoric neuroclusters.

What about telepathy?

The underlying mechanism of the telepathy is the following. The behavior of any man is governed by a simple law – standard stimulus invokes standard reaction (for that particular man) and this reaction can be forecasted with high probability (for example with 90 % probability). As for example, if Mary will be asked to do the housecleaning there is 90 % probability that Mary will become hysterical and will not do the housecleaning, however if Peter will be asked to do the housecleaning there is 90 % probability that Peter will do the job without any salvos and put-offs, if Laura will be offered to eat a cake there is 90 % probability that Laura will happily eat all the cake, however if John will be offered to eat a cake there is 90 % probability that John will decline the offer, etc. Everybody has seen in their lives huge number of people whose reaction so some stimulus (phrase/action/etc) can be forecasted with almost 100 % probability

Clearly any cognitive theory that I could come up with would be vastly inferior to yours.

 

[neuroclusterbrain]

Clearly any cognitive theory that I could come up with would be vastly inferior to yours.

Barehl’s “cognitive theory” is based on strong religious fanatic faith that barehl posses “consciousness”. Barehl can believe whatever he wants, however this is religion, this is not science.

Let’s raise a simple question: did barehl provide us the definition of “consciousness” which would meet the scientific criteria? In order to meet the scientific criteria, you must provide the list of criteria (the list of features) which would allow unambiguously determine if object X has consciousness.
Actually barehl did not provide list of criteria which would allow unambiguously determine if object X has consciousness.

Question for the barehl #1:
barehl, please provide us the exact list of exact criteria (the list of exact features) which would allow unambiguously determine if object X has consciousness.
Just feel free to choose all the needed characteristics of object X (size, weight, color, smell, or whatever you might need) and when the list is complete, then show this list to us.
And we will put to the test your list of characteristics, we will test your list on real world examples to see if it works or not.
When a man uses a term/word which he is unable to define then it is quite obvious that such man does not understand himself what he is talking about, it is obvious that his speech is meaningless by definition, isn’t it?

Question for the barehl #2:
the consciousness is a 1) divisible object, or 2) indivisible object?
The feature divisibility/indivisibility is the most fundamental feature of the object, because it instantaneously reveals the fundamental flaws in the definition of the object.
So, what is your answer: the consciousness is a 1) divisible object, or 2) indivisible object?
Also please provide experimental proofs which would support your claim about “divisibility/indivisibility of consciousness”.

Question for the barehl #3:
barehl, please provide at least one evidence that barehl has “consciousness”.

Question for other readers #4:
Who else thinks that he has "consciousness"? Please raise your hand and come closer. We will put your "consciousness" to the test.

 

[Kid Eager]

Barehl’s “cognitive theory” is based on strong religious fanatic faith that barehl posses “consciousness”. Barehl can believe whatever he wants, however this is religion, this is not science.

Let’s raise a simple question: did barehl provide us the definition of “consciousness” which would meet the scientific criteria? In order to meet the scientific criteria, you must provide the list of criteria (the list of features) which would allow unambiguously determine if object X has consciousness.
Actually barehl did not provide list of criteria which would allow unambiguously determine if object X has consciousness.

Question for the barehl #1:
barehl, please provide us the exact list of exact criteria (the list of exact features) which would allow unambiguously determine if object X has consciousness.
Just feel free to choose all the needed characteristics of object X (size, weight, color, smell, or whatever you might need) and when the list is complete, then show this list to us.
And we will put to the test your list of characteristics, we will test your list on real world examples to see if it works or not.
When a man uses a term/word which he is unable to define then it is quite obvious that such man does not understand himself what he is talking about, it is obvious that his speech is meaningless by definition, isn’t it?

Question for the barehl #2:
the consciousness is a 1) divisible object, or 2) indivisible object?
The feature divisibility/indivisibility is the most fundamental feature of the object, because it instantaneously reveals the fundamental flaws in the definition of the object.
So, what is your answer: the consciousness is a 1) divisible object, or 2) indivisible object?
Also please provide experimental proofs which would support your claim about “divisibility/indivisibility of consciousness”.

Question for the barehl #3:
barehl, please provide at least one evidence that barehl has “consciousness”.

Question for other readers #4:
Who else thinks that he has "consciousness"? Please raise your hand and come closer. We will put your "consciousness" to the test.

What competency are you claiming to be able to "test" anything?
ETA - and quite frankly, this whole thing about consciousness seems to be a digression from the core assertion that the NCB hypothesis is a superior fit to the evidence, all achieved without actually presenting... Um... Evidence...