<![CDATA[The prevailing materialistic paradigm in neuroscience posits that consciousness is an emergent property of complex neural computation.]]>The prevailing materialistic paradigm in neuroscience posits that consciousness is an emergent property of complex neural computation. This paper proposes an alternative framework: the Consciousness Field Hypothesis.

https://www.sflorg.com/2026/04/opin04082601.html

]]>https://board.circlewithadot.net/topic/ab69ad49-02d3-49d8-9e76-0ce63b0f0f0f/the-prevailing-materialistic-paradigm-in-neuroscience-posits-that-consciousness-is-an-emergent-property-of-complex-neural-computation.RSS for NodeFri, 15 May 2026 01:56:26 GMTSat, 18 Apr 2026 11:12:10 GMT60<![CDATA[Reply to The prevailing materialistic paradigm in neuroscience posits that consciousness is an emergent property of complex neural computation. on Sat, 18 Apr 2026 16:49:07 GMT]]>For those that thinks this is not science, and very radical:
Here are some other thoughts that are similar, yet different: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9490228/#:~:text=Neuroscience%20today%20says%20consciousness%20is,be%20dependent%20on%20the%20brain.

]]>https://board.circlewithadot.net/post/https://mastodon.social/users/sflorg/statuses/116426732156575399https://board.circlewithadot.net/post/https://mastodon.social/users/sflorg/statuses/116426732156575399Sat, 18 Apr 2026 16:49:07 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to The prevailing materialistic paradigm in neuroscience posits that consciousness is an emergent property of complex neural computation. on Sat, 18 Apr 2026 12:18:48 GMT]]>@sflorg again: not a trace of science here. it's embarrasing.

you're talking to one of the few people on here who'd be open to the idea of bacteria chatting to each other in some way. but it's not science!

]]>https://board.circlewithadot.net/post/https://social.tchncs.de/users/fishidwardrobe/statuses/116425669248772882https://board.circlewithadot.net/post/https://social.tchncs.de/users/fishidwardrobe/statuses/116425669248772882Sat, 18 Apr 2026 12:18:48 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to The prevailing materialistic paradigm in neuroscience posits that consciousness is an emergent property of complex neural computation. on Sat, 18 Apr 2026 12:16:21 GMT]]>@sflorg with all due respect — no, you don't. science is about what is proven and what *can* be proved. you can't prove string theory and you can't prove a "universal hyperconsciousness"; what's more there is no evidence for it, how could there be?

radical theories require strong evidence. there is none that can't be explained much more simply. and *that* is science.

do *i believe* in universal hyperconciousness? actually yes, different terms, but yes!

is it in any way scientific? no! if it was i wouldn't have to believe in it!

]]>https://board.circlewithadot.net/post/https://social.tchncs.de/users/fishidwardrobe/statuses/116425659635231299https://board.circlewithadot.net/post/https://social.tchncs.de/users/fishidwardrobe/statuses/116425659635231299Sat, 18 Apr 2026 12:16:21 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to The prevailing materialistic paradigm in neuroscience posits that consciousness is an emergent property of complex neural computation. on Sat, 18 Apr 2026 12:10:40 GMT]]>@fishidwardrobe
https://www.sflorg.com/2026/04/wi04152601.html

]]>https://board.circlewithadot.net/post/https://mastodon.social/users/sflorg/statuses/116425637238656555https://board.circlewithadot.net/post/https://mastodon.social/users/sflorg/statuses/116425637238656555Sat, 18 Apr 2026 12:10:40 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to The prevailing materialistic paradigm in neuroscience posits that consciousness is an emergent property of complex neural computation. on Sat, 18 Apr 2026 12:08:56 GMT]]>@fishidwardrobe
Science is based on theories and hypotheses. That is what science does. Science is not just the proven, if it was there be no more need.
With all due respect—you don't understand science.

]]>https://board.circlewithadot.net/post/https://mastodon.social/users/sflorg/statuses/116425630433704245https://board.circlewithadot.net/post/https://mastodon.social/users/sflorg/statuses/116425630433704245Sat, 18 Apr 2026 12:08:56 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to The prevailing materialistic paradigm in neuroscience posits that consciousness is an emergent property of complex neural computation. on Sat, 18 Apr 2026 12:02:25 GMT]]>@sflorg it isn't, no more than string theory is. can you prove the existance of a "hyperconsciousness field"? you cannot.

it's fine to believe in things you can't prove! not everything has to be science!

]]>https://board.circlewithadot.net/post/https://social.tchncs.de/users/fishidwardrobe/statuses/116425604818595626https://board.circlewithadot.net/post/https://social.tchncs.de/users/fishidwardrobe/statuses/116425604818595626Sat, 18 Apr 2026 12:02:25 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to The prevailing materialistic paradigm in neuroscience posits that consciousness is an emergent property of complex neural computation. on Sat, 18 Apr 2026 12:00:00 GMT]]>@fishidwardrobe
But it is science, if was not—why have scientists searched for years upon years to explain consciousness. Quorum Sensing is science. Read on.

]]>https://board.circlewithadot.net/post/https://mastodon.social/users/sflorg/statuses/116425595340050238https://board.circlewithadot.net/post/https://mastodon.social/users/sflorg/statuses/116425595340050238Sat, 18 Apr 2026 12:00:00 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to The prevailing materialistic paradigm in neuroscience posits that consciousness is an emergent property of complex neural computation. on Sat, 18 Apr 2026 11:56:17 GMT]]>@sflorg that does not appear to be science, and i'm personally sad that it's presented as such.

i absolutely love the idea! (i'm afraid i got lost after the abstract.) but, not really science. not everything has to be; it's fine. but when we pretend things are that aren't, we cheapen them. that's my view.

]]>https://board.circlewithadot.net/post/https://social.tchncs.de/users/fishidwardrobe/statuses/116425580720683193https://board.circlewithadot.net/post/https://social.tchncs.de/users/fishidwardrobe/statuses/116425580720683193Sat, 18 Apr 2026 11:56:17 GMT