Just come across a critic of Dr Ramachanderon's ideas about consciousness from Raymond Tallis:
"The trouble begins when the neurologist turns philosopher and tries to use these insights to get closer to "what makes us human." He suggests that such cross-wiring underpins both humans' ability to enjoy metaphors and artists' capacity to create novel connections—an assertion that has scarcely any research to back it up. (What little has been done depends on laughably simplistic models of how metaphors and creativity really work.) Likewise, his explanation of how we became speaking animals has scarcely a toe-hold on empirical data."
In essence, any attempt to explain human conscious awareness in terms of the reactions in material particles is doomed to failure, because there can be no material explanation for human conscious awareness.
But of course by simply using your imagination, all of the enquiry that others make can easily be dismissed, so sorry Alan, how silly of me not to have allowed for the power of imagination, your imagination.
I suppose you're so used to being asserted at with a strong form of authority from, I suppose mostly a pulpit, then you seem to think we're all going to accept authoritative assertions from you as though you're issuing facts, why do you keep on doing this, it's not as though you're stupid, I wonder? You must know that all you're doing is asserting and you have never provided anything viable that would support your rather outrageous assertions, you must even be lying to yourself.
So sorry you haven't gone through more of Dr Ram's works, perhaps one day the penny'll drop, Alan, regards ippy.
