Split Brain: Philosophy Forums

Philosophy Forums » General Philosophy » Split Brain » Split Brain

Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Split Brain

Gryphus
Aspirant

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jun 16, 2009

Total Topics: 1
Total Posts: 21

Posted 06/17/09 - 09:59 AM:	#11
mway wrote: You have to understand that your brain is in constant change. You are not the same person from when you started reading this post a few moment ago. Removal of part of the brain is no different (just the amount of change has increased). Alright, by that rationality, a quantum measure of time after another we are no longer the same person, and the illusion of "self" is like the illusion of an animated picture. I'm actually very keen to the idea of conscious moments, that one after another, in a stream, produce the illusion of consciousness. But there is still the illusion. I'm thinking that the person with the split brain (actual medical considerations aside) would actually be both, but perceive itself as a single one, in both sides. And this makes me want to expand the concept to every conscious life form. You know, something like every consciousness being one consciousness with localized perceptions. "Quantumly" connected, perhaps. I'm currently subscribing to quantum consciousness theory. Kinda makes things "fit". I apologize if I'm having a hard time putting this stuff into words.

TheThoughtfulOne
Student

Usergroup: Members
Joined: May 04, 2009
Location: Evansville, IN

Total Topics: 2
Total Posts: 69

Posted 06/17/09 - 11:34 AM:	#12
You would cease to be an "I", and would become a "we" That's an interesting concept. Would both of you think the same and be connected to each other?
I am what I am, but what am I? - Me

Gryphus
Aspirant

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jun 16, 2009

Total Topics: 1
Total Posts: 21

Posted 06/17/09 - 01:20 PM:	#13
TheThoughtfulOne wrote: You would cease to be an "I", and would become a "we" That's an interesting concept. Would both of you think the same and be connected to each other? Well, assuming natural differences in brain physiology for either half, coupled with immediate exposure to different stimuli, would produce different thoughts, I think. In opposition to each other, these would be two different people, each with a distinct perception of "self". What I can't wrap my head around, and the heart of the matter to me, is the relation of both, to the previous singular "self". I mean, I can conceive going to sleep, having half my brain vanish, and waking up however different, but still "myself". With two halves in different bodies, how would "I" wake up as? I'm not even bringing up "God" and the "afterlife" yet...

Gulnara
Assistant Professor

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Dec 08, 2005
Location: USA

Total Topics: 17
Total Posts: 474

Posted 06/17/09 - 03:31 PM:	#14
The right and left parts of the brain are connected, they have neurons running to and from each other as well. If separated, they can not act as one person's brain. Besides, they are connected to spinal cord and all other nervous tissues in person's body. Brain can only identify with the person it is connected to with spinal cord, axons, nervous tissue, etc. Brain is part of the entire nervous system inside one person.
G.E.

mway
Professor

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 07, 2009

Total Topics: 14
Total Posts: 509

Posted 06/17/09 - 03:50 PM:	#15
Gryphus wrote: Well, assuming natural differences in brain physiology for either half, coupled with immediate exposure to different stimuli, would produce different thoughts, I think. In opposition to each other, these would be two different people, each with a distinct perception of "self". What I can't wrap my head around, and the heart of the matter to me, is the relation of both, to the previous singular "self". I mean, I can conceive going to sleep, having half my brain vanish, and waking up however different, but still "myself". With two halves in different bodies, how would "I" wake up as? I'm not even bringing up "God" and the "afterlife" yet... You would not wake up different, but still "yourself". 'You' is not a feasible description anymore. In your example, you would go to sleep, and two completely different people would wake up in the morning. Why is it so hard to accept that there is no 'You'. Gryphus wrote: Alright, by that rationality, a quantum measure of time after another we are no longer the same person, and the illusion of "self" is like the illusion of an animated picture. I'm actually very keen to the idea of conscious moments, that one after another, in a stream, produce the illusion of consciousness. But there is still the illusion. I'm thinking that the person with the split brain (actual medical considerations aside) would actually be both, but perceive itself as a single one, in both sides. And this makes me want to expand the concept to every conscious life form. You know, something like every consciousness being one consciousness with localized perceptions. "Quantumly" connected, perhaps. I'm currently subscribing to quantum consciousness theory. Kinda makes things "fit". I apologize if I'm having a hard time putting this stuff into words. There are many cases whereby split brain patients exhibit opposite behaviours, such as one side of the body trying to put a shirt on whilst the other side is trying to take it off. Basically the question at hand here is the binding problem, and the way I see it, it is a simple case of synchrony.
Lame is to Wav, as the Brain is to Reality.

Aetixintro
Concepts and descriptions

Usergroup: Sponsors
Joined: Jul 12, 2008

Total Topics: 35
Total Posts: 391

Posted 06/17/09 - 06:09 PM:	#16
I think consciousness is necessarily waved to one or the other half and that the remaining part is just merely a dead part of that former consciousness. The OP of this is very exaggerated. Are you entertaining us?
Efficacy of "for since it is at present manifest to me that even bodies are not properly known by the senses nor by the faculty of imagination, but by the understanding alone" - Descartes, Meditation II I'm always wanting more, Anything I haven't got, Everything, I want it all, I just can't stop - The Cure, Want

mway
Professor

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 07, 2009

Total Topics: 14
Total Posts: 509

Posted 06/17/09 - 06:28 PM:	#17
Aetixintro wrote: I think consciousness is necessarily waved to one or the other half and that the remaining part is just merely a dead part of that former consciousness. The OP of this is very exaggerated. Are you entertaining us? What is your basis for this? The OP is a hypothetical thought experiment and explains that both bodies were fine and functional.
Lame is to Wav, as the Brain is to Reality.

Crackers
Professor

Usergroup: Members
Joined: May 28, 2009

Total Topics: 5
Total Posts: 519

Posted 06/18/09 - 06:37 AM:	#18
Each of the divided brains each have a stream of consciousness. Now suppose these streams of consciousness are connected as one. All the information that one brain recieves so does the other. So that if the brains were each in a separate person, and each of these persons were looking directly at each other, person A would not only see person B looking at him but he would also see himself looking at person B. If person B lifts his arm then person A feels it. In effect, there is only one consciousness and two bodies. All memories, perceptions, feelings and thoughts are shared. If we imagine that my body serves as a puppet for my consciousness; then we assume that in the above case there is still only one consciousness yet two puppets. Any instincts/impulses that person A feels due to the nature of his body so does person B. So that the bodies are shared too. How would we classify identity in this case? I feel that this is more what the original post was referring to.

Gryphus
Aspirant

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jun 16, 2009

Total Topics: 1
Total Posts: 21

Posted 06/18/09 - 09:14 AM:	#19
Gulnara wrote: The right and left parts of the brain are connected, they have neurons running to and from each other as well. If separated, they can not act as one person's brain. The issue is not whether both halves would work as one brain, but what becomes of the "self-awareness" of that individual. If he was called "John", who would we call "John" after the procedure? After all, people aren't given new names after an hemispherectomy... that I know of. Gulnara wrote: Besides, they are connected to spinal cord and all other nervous tissues in person's body. Brain can only identify with the person it is connected to with spinal cord, axons, nervous tissue, etc. Brain is part of the entire nervous system inside one person. For purposes of this exercise, the conditions are ideal. If you can think of a medical drawback, just assume it's currently possible. If it settles that particular issue, than let's assume the brain is divided all the way down. Heck, let's split the whole person in half keeping both halves alive. In fact... why not assume the subject is conscious, and it's possible to slowly start splitting the person in half. Can you guys picture that happening to yourselves? What a brain fart...

Warshed
Graduate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Aug 20, 2008

Total Topics: 9
Total Posts: 216

Posted 06/18/09 - 11:16 AM:	#20
Gryphus wrote: But consider the following... someone takes a tiny bit of my brain while I'm sleeping. The first time it's so small it's perfectly negligible. I would wake up still "me", same as any other day. If the piece taken gets increasingly larger, at which point does it start being another person waking up, as opposed to "me"? Personality aside (as perceived by a 3rd party) isn't it always "me"? That is a simple sorieties argument. You can answer it in a lot of ways. Either there is a point where your identity ceases, but you just don't know when, or you can use it to argue that identity doesn't exist in the first place. Our intuitions want to maintain identity because otherwise we could never make sense of the world around us, since we would not exist, and therefore would have no will or desires that progress into the future. So in essence, in order to maintain our intuition, we must assert that at a certain point you cease to exist, and eventually two new identities come into existence. This answer will probably seem unsatisfactory, but if you want to maintain that identity is an illusion, then please stop writing, stop doing anything, because if you don't exist then you should not act on false motivations since individuals are motivated, but if you deny individuality, then you deny your own motivations. I just find it funny how people postulate inane philosophies without living by them. I think they just like to entertain themselves or find themselves clever. Even if it is true that we live in a Hericlitean universe (ie. change is all there is) we have to ignore that and treat the illusion of identity as reality, but if everyone subscribes to the same illusion, it is reality, and I don't know anyone in the world who truly behaves as if nothing is something from one moment to the next. Within the human sphere, things (entities with identities as such and such) exist through time, we merely need to make sense of it.

Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Sorry, you don't have permission to post. Log in, or register if you haven't yet.