The Real 'Hard Problem' of Consciousness: Where Do Thoughts Come From, if Not the Brain?

This article argues that contemporary debates of the 'hard problem' of consciousness (i.e.how does 'mindless' matter produce 'matterless' mind?) cannot be resolved through philosophical analysis alone and need to be anchored to a comprehensive empirical foundation that includes psychophysiological research of psychosomatic phenomena and exceptional human experience. First, alternative perspectives on the mind–matter question and reasons why traditional formulations of the 'hard problem' have been so difficult to resolve are reviewed. Empirical evidence of mind modulation of bodily systems and its implications for the classical quantitative–qualitative distinction and construct of causal closure are then considered. A novel theory that combines bottom-up (panpsychism) and top-down (non-theistic panenpsychism) approaches relating physical processes to mental activity is then proposed that has practical implications for conceiving and exploring alternatives to current ways of thinking about the mind–matter question.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Consciousness Studies
Published
2024-08-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.53765/20512201.31.7.028
Primary Topic
Embodied and Extended Cognition
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The Real 'Hard Problem' of Consciousness: Where Do Thoughts Come From, if Not the Brain?

Paul F. Cunningham
Journal of Consciousness Studies
Embodied and Extended Cognition
article

The Real 'Hard Problem' of Consciousness: Where Do Thoughts Come From, if Not the Brain?

Paul F. Cunningham
article en

Abstract

This article argues that contemporary debates of the 'hard problem' of consciousness (i.e.how does 'mindless' matter produce 'matterless' mind?) cannot be resolved through philosophical analysis alone and need to be anchored to a comprehensive empirical foundation that includes psychophysiological research of psychosomatic phenomena and exceptional human experience. First, alternative perspectives on the mind–matter question and reasons why traditional formulations of the 'hard problem' have been so difficult to resolve are reviewed. Empirical evidence of mind modulation of bodily systems and its implications for the classical quantitative–qualitative distinction and construct of causal closure are then considered. A novel theory that combines bottom-up (panpsychism) and top-down (non-theistic panenpsychism) approaches relating physical processes to mental activity is then proposed that has practical implications for conceiving and exploring alternatives to current ways of thinking about the mind–matter question.

Journal of Consciousness StudiesVol. 31(7)
Rivier University (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 87%
Embodied and Extended Cognition
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

The Real 'Hard Problem' of Consciousness: Where Do Thoughts Come From, if Not the Brain? — Paul F. Cunningham · Journal of Consciousness Studies (2024) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS