I would like to invite all those studious of the mind/brain interface puzzle to share our insights. What follows represents an ongoing series of reflections on the ontology of consciousness based on some intuitions on life, language acquisition and survival strategies to accommodate the biological, psychic and social imperatives of human life in its ecological niche, thus the BPS model. For the latest publication click on BPS Model. http://www.delaSierra-Sheffer.net/ID-Neurophilo-net/index.htm

"A Bradford book." Bibliography: p. [491]-523. Includes index.

This book introduces concepts in philosophy of mind and neurophilosophy. Inside, three scholars offer approaches to the problems of identity, consciousness, and the mind. In the process, they open new vistas for thought and raise fresh controversies to some of the oldest problems in philosophy. The first chapter focuses on the identity problem. The author employs an explanatory model he christened sense-phenomenalism to defend the thesis that personal identity is something or a phenomenon that pertains to the observable/perceptible aspect of the human person. The next chapter explores the problem of consciousness. It deploys the new concept equiphenomenalism as a model to show that mental properties are not by-products but necessary products of consciousness. Herein, the notion of qualia is a fundamental and necessary product that must be experienced simultaneously with neural activities for consciousness to be possible. The last chapter addresses the mind/body problem. It adopts the new concept proto-phenomenalism as an alternative explanatory model. This model eliminates the idea of a mind. As such, it approaches the mind-body problem from a materialistic point of view with many implications such as, the meaning(lessness) of our existence, the possibility of thought engineering as well as religious implications.

A provocative new account of how morality evolved What is morality? Where does it come from? And why do most of us heed its call most of the time? In Braintrust, neurophilosophy pioneer Patricia Churchland argues that morality originates in the biology of the brain. She describes the "neurobiological platform of bonding" that, modified by evolutionary pressures and cultural values, has led to human styles of moral behavior. The result is a provocative genealogy of morals that asks us to reevaluate the priority given to religion, absolute rules, and pure reason in accounting for the basis of morality. Moral values, Churchland argues, are rooted in a behavior common to all mammals—the caring for offspring. The evolved structure, processes, and chemistry of the brain incline humans to strive not only for self-preservation but for the well-being of allied selves—first offspring, then mates, kin, and so on, in wider and wider "caring" circles. Separation and exclusion cause pain, and the company of loved ones causes pleasure; responding to feelings of social pain and pleasure, brains adjust their circuitry to local customs. In this way, caring is apportioned, conscience molded, and moral intuitions instilled. A key part of the story is oxytocin, an ancient body-and-brain molecule that, by decreasing the stress response, allows humans to develop the trust in one another necessary for the development of close-knit ties, social institutions, and morality. A major new account of what really makes us moral, Braintrust challenges us to reconsider the origins of some of our most cherished values.

Writing from a scientifically and philosophically informed perspective, the authors provide a critical overview of the conceptual difficulties encountered in many current neuroscientific and psychological theories.

At Neurophilosophy of Consciousness, we are dedicated to providing the academic neurophilosophy professional with a friendly forum to debate, discuss, share and learn all relevant biopsychosocial (BPS) aspects of life and consciousness. We have made it our mission to advance and update this complex conundrum of variables to provide reliable information to our professional readers, such evolving variables as we witness during measurements and observations of perceptual, conceptual information with the help of the mathematical logic probability tool.

In this continuation of our speculations and conjectures about brain dynamics as it pertains the attainment of the introspective self conscious state and the concomitant brain proto language faculty activation -both sine qua non antecedents to the decision making process- we are now trying to get a clearer picture about what seems to our species confusion of consciously experiencing two simultaneous but opposing perspectives of the same existential 4-d reality and how it may impact the conscious free judgment on the priority to be assigned to any important and relevant issue to the human species. Which one should we adopt to guide our lives today and the day after tomorrow? Of course we are more concerned with the above average responsible citizen looking beyond the conveniences of a quotidian hedonistic Sartrean existentialism where pleasurable enjoyment is routinely satisfied ahead of known but ignored necessities for the lasting survival of the human species generations ahead. How can we reconcile these seemingly opposing views we need to take into account? This realistic approach is called compromise, hybridization or complementarity and the assumption that hidden variables -if any- beyond human brain phenomenological or combinatorial threshold would always bring Heisenberg-type uncertainties to reckon with. These can be either the choice of exclusive biopsychosocial (BPS) imperatives for any living species survival as opposed to the altruistic, spiritual life against self interests of the historical prophets or the more familiar Einstein, Podolsky, Rosen (EPR) complementarities between the position of a particulate object of mass (m) and its momentum when we try to measure them. Likewise for energy and time. Underlying these seemingly opposite/contrasting appearances are subthreshold physical interactions. These considerations force you to adopt a quantum statistical probabilistic view of reality relying on falsifiability, predictability and mathematical logic manipulations of symbolic representations of measurable/observed facts. But when it comes to human judgments these coexisting complementarities, i.e., the subconscious species survival BPS imperative drives we share with other evolved species to stay alive now and then and the conscious species survival across generations sacrifices a few were willing to endure against self interest, resist being framed into coherent rules of metaphysical logic for analysis..