Make a donation to Closer To Truth to help us continue exploring the world’s deepest questions without the need for paywalls:
Is consciousness a scientific problem to be solved? Or a philosophical problem that will remain a mystery? What do scientists who study the brain think? And why do they think the way they do? These leading brain scientists share their intimate ideas about how the brain generates consciousness.
Free access to Closer to Truth’s library of 5,000 videos:
Watch more interviews on neuroscience and the hard problem of consciousness:
Arnold B. Scheibel was a Professor of Neurobiology and Psychiatry and former Director of the Brain Research Institute (BRI) at UCLA.
Register for free at CTT.com for subscriber-only exclusives:
Closer to Truth, hosted by Robert Lawrence Kuhn and directed by Peter Getzels, presents the world’s greatest thinkers exploring humanity’s deepest questions. Discover fundamental issues of existence. Engage new and diverse ways of thinking. Appreciate intense debates. Share your own opinions. Seek your own answers.
source
WOW. explained so well. thanks to both of you.
How easily are you people swayed and fooled. The comment section is full of gullible souls
Its an Actual Honor to hear the Dr, but what about the theory that say Consciousness 'Its just electrical signs that occur in the brain'?
This is closer to truth: we can see and listen specialist talking about mechanism of our consciousness!
Splendid presentation.
Two brains talking about a brain
Whay do they start a discusion when they do not know
Integrated information theory, it explains how it works it doesn't explain how subjective experience occur, or what consciousness is
"We don't know".Arne. "It is stranger than we can think J.B.S.Haldane. "Just be kind" Kurt Vonnegut.
Here is my take as a advait philosophy reader
“Consciousness at the Crossroads: Advaita Vedanta vs Neuroscience” – Neuroscience views consciousness as an emergent property of the brain, arguing that all awareness arises from neural activity, supported by evidence such as brain lesions, neuroimaging, anesthesia, and split-brain experiments, which show that damage or alteration of the brain affects perception, memory, and self-awareness. From this perspective, the brain produces consciousness, and without it, awareness ceases. Advaita Vedanta, on the other hand, asserts that consciousness (Ātman or Brahman) is fundamental, self-evident, and independent, with the brain serving only as an instrument or medium through which consciousness expresses itself, much like a radio receiving signals. While neuroscience correlates brain activity with conscious experience, Advaita counters that correlation does not imply causation, emphasizing that the “hard problem” of consciousness—why subjective experience exists at all—cannot be explained by physical processes alone. Moreover, neuroscience relies on consciousness to observe and measure itself, creating a circular dependency, and phenomena such as near-death experiences suggest awareness is not strictly confined to brain function. Philosophically, the clash arises because neuroscience and materialism treat matter as primary and consciousness as derivative, whereas Advaita treats consciousness as primary, with matter appearing within it. Advaita’s logical strengths lie in the indubitable self-evidence of consciousness, the observer-dependent nature of all experience, and the conclusion that consciousness is the ultimate reality (Brahman). Neuroscience objects that consciousness cannot be demonstrated independent of the brain and that Advaita’s conception of Brahman is unfalsifiable, but Advaita replies that consciousness is the subject enabling all observation and that the death of the body destroys only the instrument, not awareness itself, with direct inner inquiry serving as the true experiment. In practical, empirical terms, neuroscience dominates due to its tangible applications in medicine, AI, and psychology, yet in the ultimate metaphysical realm, Advaita prevails by solving the hard problem and the observer paradox. Looking forward, neuroscience may adopt non-reductive frameworks like panpsychism or integrated information theory, which align more closely with Advaita’s claim that consciousness is fundamental, suggesting that science and Advaita can complement each other: science mapping the mechanisms of expression, and Advaita revealing the ultimate nature of awareness.
You have permanently closed the case. 💪🏆
We are the doomed puppetry of Nature!!! 😢🐒
Even our love is just inherited cellular slop. ❤
All hope is lost!!!!!!!
I started learning about the embryo of the brain and how it forms. And it looks like a baby embryo. So odd. So sacred. Made me wonder when our spiritual being becomes a part of it.
I learned so much I need to lie down and recover.
This is top-tier content, no question!
This video taught me more than my entire semester. Should I be worried?
This is professional-level teaching!
I understood this so fast I checked my pulse.
If consciousness ceasing equals non-existence then consciousness is fundamental, Materialism is self defeating.
There is no evidence for a state of nothingness that somehow does not exist within existence for the sole purpose of consuming the conscious experience and if there were it would still be a part of all that is. Correlation is not Causation!
The only way they will find that light, that consciousness, is when they stop being corrupt and greedy and start helping humanity. They must use that knowledge for the good of all, and not just for themselves, because at the end of life, everyone will be judged.
This one is tricky since it demands a higher functioning symbolism for the purpose of organizing a reference, consciousness. With that in mind, language as following might work: Consciousness are the relations made regarding real objects or abstractions and the combinations thereof (the puzzle and a table, man and his first love, the thought of happiness and sadness…). So, why is it that a machine cannot have consciousness? Because, nothing is real—all software. Hopefully, no longer will you fear your robot vacuum cleaner. Also, if you think you have a collective consciousness, like we have with our cat, you might be a Borg. In a circular design, it is like the egg invented the chicken so that the chicken can describe the egg. Could be that there is something beyond consciousness, like there was beyond 2 plus 2 equals 4.
Too bad I was unconscious during this video.
I dont believe in MAGIC but there is a magic to the fact of the universe being here and most of all consciousness being here.
Now just because its magic doesnt make it good.
It allows for conscious experience of great great pleasure and even worse pain.
Conscious pain and suffering too which to me makes it much worse.
This video deserves an award!
I'm always sad when brilliant people leave us and we're left with a load of dirt bags!