Who observes, that the brain observes ?

[Howard Is]

Brain activity, when anesthetized, is similar to that of deep sleep. I've experienced both.

As I see it, these states are an experience of absence, not an absence of experience. There is still an underlying consciousness that is constant.

I don’t find there is any underlying consciousness.

The nurse says “Count down from ten to zero”, I get to about seven, and in apparently the next moment she says “It’s time to wake up Mr Is”

I have expressed to lots of people how unnerving I find that, and they all agree that’s what happens.

Maybe you got a different anaesthetic.

 

[SalixIncendium]

Either wizardry or sorcery. Not sure which.

As much as I like being playful, it was a serious question. With which of the senses is the brain aware of itself? Can the brain see, hear, touch, taste, or smell the brain?

 

[stvdv]

"I"

What is this "I" ?

For "me" to know, for you to find out

 

[SalixIncendium]

"I"

What is this "I" ?

Sākṣī

 

[Father Heathen]

As much as I like being playful, it was a serious question. With which of the senses is the brain aware of itself? Can the brain see, hear, touch, taste, or smell the brain?

Is self-awareness not an example?

 

[SalixIncendium]

Is self-awareness not an example?

No. The brain is aware of what it can detect through the senses, and much of the self it can detect through these senses. I can touch my face, my legs, my head, etc.

Through these senses, it cannot be aware of itself. I'm not understanding how you're concluding that the brain is aware of itself.

 

[chinu]

For "me" to know

The one which is telling you that you don't know this yet. Is your brain.
But, who wants to know ? just think about that

 

[stvdv]

The one which is telling you that you don't know this yet. Is your brain.

You mis-translated my line

 

[chinu]

You mis-translated my line

Okay.

Who told you that chinu mis-translated your line ? Ans: The brain.

But, who will be saved from the harm of this mis-translation ? Just think about.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Interpret whom, or what ?

There is no who. The brain is where what we call the workings of the "mind" come from.

Take these theories of how we hear our voices in our head
A neuroscientist explains why we hear a voice in our heads when we are reading

Another phenomenon mentioned in other answers is subvocalization... the act of reading actually activates the muscles in the throat, vocal cords and sometimes the lips. When we learn to speak, we learn to make sounds with our mouths. Learning to read often involves reading out loud also, in which case we hear our own voice. As vocalization is suppressed in order to read silently, the muscles may still move slightly, and we "hear" what we know we would sound like if we were to speak out loud.

There is a nerve bundle in the brain called the arcuate fasciculus that connects the speaking part of the brain (Broca's area) to the speech understanding part (Wernicke's area). This nerve bundle seems to play a role in the experience of inner speech.

Incidentally, inner speech does show up in fMRI brain scans as activation of the speech areas of the brain, so whatever is going on does have an identifiable neural correlate.

No "one" is observing voices. When the process of the part of the brain stops, our mind interprets it (maybe try to find a abstract cause like god or so have you) but it's all neuroprocesses etc.

I mean you can "say" there is something that observes the mind but that observation Is the mind not a product of something observing it.

I missed to write this option.

I don't understand.

-

I mean it's fine to find a abstract or mystical cause to the process of our brain and consciousness. People do it through meditation, prayer, etc. I just see it as the product of the brain neurology. Some people can't even hear thoughts.

But not sure where you got the who from. That and how did you draw a conclusion there is an observer when the process of what we think is the observer is the brain itself.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

No. The brain is aware of what it can detect through the senses, and much of the self it can detect through these senses. I can touch my face, my legs, my head, etc.

Through these senses, it cannot be aware of itself. I'm not understanding how you're concluding that the brain is aware of itself.

Well, the short answer is that some people have the ability of being introspective towards their own behavior, thoughts and feelings/emotions. It is connected to other aspects in psychology and it should be noted that not all humans have the same degree of being introspective.
In short the brain is aware of itself, when it e.g. thinks about think; i.e. a variant of meta-cognition.

 

[SalixIncendium]

Well, the short answer is that some people have the ability of being introspective towards their own behavior, thoughts and feelings/emotions. It is connected to other aspects in psychology and it should be noted that not all humans have the same degree of being introspective.
In short the brain is aware of itself, when it e.g. thinks about think; i.e. a variant of meta-cognition.

You're conflating awareness of thinking and emotion with awareness of the brain.

 

[chinu]

Well, the short answer is that some people have the ability of being introspective towards their own behavior, thoughts and feelings/emotions. It is connected to other aspects in psychology and it should be noted that not all humans have the same degree of beinganaesthetised.
In short the brain is aware of itself, when it e.g. thinks about think; i.e. a variant of meta-cognition.

Who has the true capability to make this note ?

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

You're conflating awareness of thinking and emotion with awareness of the brain.

Okay, I get what you are saying. The brain is not aware of the brain.

 

[Polymath257]

Interesting take. What if one loses all senses and cellular/neural communications?

At that point, you die.

 

[Polymath257]

How?

Feedback loops in the circuitry.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Who has the true capability to make this note ?

I didn't write all of what you quoted, but what the "I" really is, I don't know. We can play different belief systems all you like, so here is mine.
The "I" as for how the world appears in a story that some brains produce and in a sense, it is an illusion that appears to work.

 

[Polymath257]

There's a general claim that its the brain who observes all the activities done by that human body. Fine.

If so, then at the very same moment who/what observes, that the brain observes ?

There is no homonculus. The brain processing the information in a certain way *is* observation.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

At that point, you die.

In your belief system.

 

[SalixIncendium]

Feedback loops in the circuitry.

Can you please elaborate?