Can We “Think” Outside of Our Consciousness?

Save Article As PDF

Snipped from the Blog.SCIAM.com.

This article was really interesting to me for many reasons. One, I think any new discovery about the brain is REALLY cool. I don’t think that needs much explanation. Second, I have noticed a very strange way that I process information in comparison to that of “normal” people. Not that I am a genius or anything, ha ha, but I do tend to “think” outside my “consciousness”. My problem solving is more like a reaction than a act of “thinking”. If that confuses you even further, let me give you a story that led me to this strange conclusion.

Below is an article snipped from Scientific American, and it discusses a new finding called blindsight. This is a phenomenon that has been recently discovered, and it explains how people that are blind due to an injury to their visual cortex may actually be able to see without knowing it. Sounds strange? Here is some of the article to help you understand it:

When can you see what you can’t see? When you have blindsight, a “condition,” says the Oxford Concise Dictionary, “in which the sufferer responds to visual stimuli without consciously perceiving them.” Here vision researcher Susana Martinez-Conde describes how a man named DB perceives flickering Gabor patches (see illustration above) much more accurately and consistently in his “blind” eye than in his sighted eye — even though he denies ever seeing anything with the blind eye. Sacksian stuff here; read it and wonder. …

Astonishingly, DB performed better in his blind field than in his sighted field, and by a wide margin. He correctly identified the time span containing the stimulus 87 percent of the time in his blind field as opposed to only 50 percent of the time in his sighted field — a rate consistent to that he would achieve if he were guessing. …

An interesting aside concerns DB’s reports of subjective awareness during the experiments. In Experiment 1, DB was asked to report any feelings of subjective awareness of the stimuli, or lack thereof, after each stimulus presentation. He reported no awareness of stimuli presented to the sighted field (confirming that he was essentially guessing), but he had subjective awareness of 80 percent of stimuli presented to the blind field. However, this subjective awareness was nothing like a visual experience; he denied having any experience of vision in his blind field, but described his subjective awareness of stimuli as “feeling as if a finger is pointing through the screen.”

Okay, now that you are aware of what I am talking about [pun intended], what if we could all process information outside of our consciousness? Does our consciousness muck up our decision making? Does it create an emotional bias? Can we train the mind to “think” outside our “awareness”, so that we can “think” faster and more efficiently just as DB has done above? Let’s think about this … okay, now without “thinking” about it!

If you would like to read the full article click the image below.

Read Full Article Here!

  • Thank you, 127001, about IMHO. By Gawk, you computer geeks and IMers are killing the language!
  • Gosh!

    Did I say all that?

    IMHO ... In My Humble Opinion
  • Yo! 127001, What is IMHO? Plants are not beasties.
    Dictionary def: beastie |?b?st?| |?bisti| |?bi?sti|
    noun ( pl. -ies) Scottish or humorous
    an animal, insect, or germ : our immune systems are killing millions of wee beasties.
    • [with adj. ] a vehicle or device of a particular kind : these little beasties only have three wheels.
    -- Oxford American Dictionary

    I can side with your point/queries to ponder in this way. The plants and beasties including man were supposed to be symbolis//sp? -- You know, where the birds co-exist with the crocodiles to pick their teeth clean// We beasties which includes the animal man are here to eat, mate, and shat to fertilize the plants who are the rightful rulers of this Earth.

    I believe the American Indians knew this. When they taught the very first settlers (white gods, then white devils) how to plant corn, they demonstrated: dig hole, throw in kernels of corn, then throw in a dead fish. Cover hole. Wait.

    So you could say we are here to fertilize the plants, the trees, the forests. And that is our o-n-l-y function in life. To live to shat for the green stuff. In return, the green stuff feeds us beasties.

    As for awareness in plants, fungi and moss on a tree will seek the north side of the tree to grow upon. I think. This is an early primitive form of a “compass” but something I was told by a forest ranger but never did check it out. If so, then the fungi/moss had awareness.
    Ergo....

    I agree with you on the who says human communication is better? The above shows that human thinking and awareness may not be better; and the poor condition of the sick earth due to the meddlesome of man verifies that. And I agree that other forms of life would be fine if we were not around. Maybe George W. and Dick can fix that if they hit Iran first. Especially with the Stealth Hydrogen Baboom Bomb. “You have zero seconds to seek--”
    -30-
  • Stan...

    I beg to differ. Who says the animals and plants/trees are the beasties?

    Or that human communication and consciousness is "better" ...

    What if...

    They are in charge and we are the slaves? IMHO humans are the only ones who think inside the box. Appears other life forms get along fine if we aren't around.
  • The phrase, “I think, therefore I am” is, I guess, an interesting way to prove that one does exist. Yet, wouldn’t “I have consciousness, therefore I am” or “I exist” do as well, or better, to prove existence? How much of a mind is needed to have consciousness? Does a worm have awareness? Dolphins? Whales? Do plants and trees have awareness? Silly, no?

    But can we “think” outside of our consciousness? Yes, it was demonstrated by examples in the earlier comments. So maybe what separates man from all others is the ability to “think” outside of consciousness. The other animals and fish have too much to do, perhaps, to maintain consciousness/awareness that they can’t “think.” Hence, the difference between man and beasties. By Gawk, is this Philosophy 101 or what?
    -30-
  • Okay, Cerebral...
    EOJ -- end of joke.
    -30-
  • Hmmm...

    Stan, m'dear ... IRL is "in real life" a common Net term.

    You do know what 127001 is? I can't use the "dots" i.e. 127.0.0.1 because most servers get too confused and reject the nick, but its pointing at the self. It's every computer's name that exists.

    I rather enjoy the little jokes I pass along these days. In my youth I tried to make sure I had one handy each day. Now that I've generally lost my sense of humor, they are fewer and far between. Some humor is lost in the text format; some is lost in the IRL format.

    Your irreverence is funny to me, as are some of your assumptions. Funny in a way you make me stop and think in a different direction... Not necessarily "funny" in a joke way.

    Have you looked around at the population that is so busy thinking INSIDE the box, they have forgotten they are in a box?
  • Jesus, this conversation is hurting my brain. I have a weird feeling that this conversation could end up hurting someone's feelings. I just don't want any of this to get mistranslated. Can we move on to another topic? Sorry to be a party pooper, but I just want to keep everyone in a good mood. Thanks guys.

    [Cerebral]
  • Oh say, 127001, what is IRL? You have discovered on your own the best way to beat being down, either psych down or circumstances-in-life down, that the best way to keep from offing yourself is to laugh, laugh, laugh, joke, joke, joke.

    One of the problems with making up a joke is that to you, it's funny, but not to others. The problem usually is that one didn't complete the joke. The funny part, visual or text, is still in your head. You have the complete set and laugh. They don't because no one can see the funny pivot of the joke that's still in your head. I don't know how clear I have made this, but it is a very important and vitial part of joke-writing. I have been writing cartoon gags since the summer of 1960. I kid you not. O funny is me! -SWAK
    -30-
  • Stan...

    You are so funny! I hope you are appreciated IRL.
blog comments powered by Disqus