Important Missing Dimensions in Our Current Understanding of the Mind

Prologue

F:\my_books\amazon\am_ancient_wisdom\cover_design\cover_logo_old.jpg This is the second part of the 3 part series namely Marvels of the Mind. In the first part I dealt mainly with our current idea of how the mind works. This was based on current scientific research in various areas of neuroscience. Towards the end of that book I had mentioned about some dimensions our current scientific approach seems to have missed. I continue in this book by elaborating what science has missed and the questions that arise as a result.

Many ancient philosophies had focused on these missing issues and probably they can provide us some clues about these unanswered questions. Instead of dismissing these ancient philosophies as mere speculations, it is prudent to look at them in an unbiased way. Probably we will find some answers that guide our future quest for understanding of the mind.

When one talks about ancient philosophies, at once one is reminded about the philosophies of ancient Greece. These philosophies are well known and are greatly written about. But what are not so well known are those equally ancient philosophies that seem to have many more interesting aspects. In this book I focus more on these lesser known philosophies, while summarizing the ancient Greek philosophies.

My purpose of writing this book is not only to bring these great philosophies to light, but also to explore some of the dimensions our current scientific approach to understanding of the mind has missed.

Overview of the book

In Chapter 1, I summarize our current understanding of the mind that was discussed in the first part namely, "How does the Mind work? (Marvels of the Mind Part I)" I also highlight various questions that arise as a result of over insistence on objectivity that forms the basis of current scientific approach. These are not just questions but dimensions that are missed by our current way of looking at things. These questions cannot be answered unless there is a paradigm shift in our outlook.

I suggest that a closer look at some of the ancient philosophies that dealt with these issues, possibly throw some light.

We often downplay these ancient philosophies as mere speculations. In Chapter 2 I suggest a more pragmatic way to look at these philosophies. Probably then, we can find some answers from these philosophies about the missing dimensions in our understanding of the mind.

I discuss a range of ancient philosophies – from ancient Greece to ancient Indian subcontinent. But I focus more on those that arose in the Indian subcontinent since

These philosophies have several interesting aspects that benefit us in our efforts to know the mind better.

These philosophies have almost an unbroken thread of tradition and many of them are alive even to this day, though not well understood outside the Indian subcontinent.

These are well documented and commented upon, albeit in Sanskrit or Pali, and have amazing clarity on the subject.

These philosophies are not as well known as their counter parts from ancient Greece.

However, I start with a summary of the landmark contributions of great philosophers from ancient Greece, in Chapter 3. This was where the word ‘Psychology’ came into being. I briefly cover contributions of Thales (640 B.C.) to Herophilus and Erasistratus (~260 B.C.).

Ancient Buddhists (around 600 B.C.) from India had their own excellent explanation of how the mind works. Their view almost parallels our current scientific view of the mind. Unlike the ancient Greek and the Vedic Indian philosophers, the Buddhist philosophers did not accept the concept of soul. So their psychology was without the ‘psyche’! I discuss this very interesting psychology in Chapter 4.

Our current science does not accept the concept of a ‘subject’ who is behind all our mental activities. But another interesting philosophy from India namely the Sänkhya (originally propounded earlier to 3000 B.C.) is all about this ‘subject’. It views the mind as only a tool used by this ‘subject’. It almost makes a direct attack on our current scientific approach, by saying that equating the ‘object’ and ‘subject’ – the mistaken identity - is the root cause of all our problems. In a way, that is what our science seems to be doing! This interesting argument of Sänkhya is the topic of Chapter 5.

Another ancient philosopher from India namely Gaudapäda (600 A.D.) goes to the extent of saying that the world does not exist and it exists only as an illusion in the mind. But this mind of Gaudapäda is something quite different from what we understand by that term. I discuss this ‘Mind only’ theory of Gaudapäda in Chapter 6.

Šankara (700 A.D.) may be probably one of the great Indian philosophers well known outside India. His theory of Advaita is well known. But what is not so well known, and something that is the source of lot of controversy, is his theory of illusive reality. Šankara views the world as real, though it does not exist the way we perceive it.  In Chapter 7, I go into the details of how Šankara puts forth his philosophy.

Upanishads are the most ancient (earlier to 3000 B.C.) of the Indian philosophic works, that we know of today. The philosophies discussed in these books are by means of simple stories or assertions. The key focus is on the reality that is beyond the reach of the mind. Chapter 8 discusses some fragments from these ancient Upanishads dealing with these ideas.

There is one interesting phenomenon, which if proven to be true, can not only throw lot of light on our understanding of the mind but also can totally redefine our scientific approach. This is the concept of rebirth or reincarnation. There are reports of some scientific studies that have gone into this phenomenon. Chapter 9 discusses how ancient philosophies explain this phenomenon.

After having discussed various ancient philosophies, I do an evaluation in Chapter 10 and suggest what we can learn from these ancient philosophies. These are the pointers that probably help us in broadening our outlook and provide inputs while exploring the missing dimensions.

I conclude the book with a fascinating prospect of going even beyond the limits of the mind, the subject matter that would be discussed in the third part of this book series.

How to read this book?

Ideally, I would like you to read this book from cover to cover. That would give you complete understanding of the book. However, you may have your own limitations in doing that.

In this section, I will provide you a reading roadmap to make your reading more comfortable and tailored to your needs. As far as possible I have made sure that the chapters in this book are independent of each other. However, there are unavoidable dependencies forcing a reading order.

As shown in the figure, you can quick read the introductory material in Chapters 1 and 2 and then pick any of the 7 chapters that follow, in any order. I would suggest that you read all of them since each of them is extremely interesting in itself. Chapter 10 is needed to understand what we can learn from these philosophies. Don’t miss the epilogue that prepares you to the next part of this series. Happy reading!

Our current scientific understanding of the mind

Questions that science fails to answer

Next chapter

F:\my_books\amazon\am_ancient_wisdom\cover_design\cover_logo_old.jpg In the past few decades there has been rapid progress in our understanding of functioning of the mind. This has been mainly due to the invention of sophisticated computer aided instruments such as the Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI), Positron Emission Tomography (PET), and so on. At a functional level, we now have fairly good understanding of the various regions of the brain and how they collectively function together.

However, our current scientific understanding of the mind does not seem to be complete. There seem to be several unanswered questions awaiting further exploration. These questions pertain not only to lower level details of functioning of the mind, but also to some additional dimensions that we seem to have missed. This chapter focuses mainly on these missing dimensions that make our current scientific understanding of the mind incomplete. Before I get into these issues, let me start with a brief look at our current understanding of the mind.

Our current scientific understanding of the mind

I have discussed some of the scientific findings about the mind and the basis for these findings in the first part of this book series. I am not going to repeat them here, but merely recapitulate them.

Our current scientific understanding of the mind links the mind to the brain. In fact, it views the mind as the brain in action. At the lowest level, this brain is mostly an interconnected pool of neurons – the basic building blocks of the brain. During the early stages of development of the brain, some of these neurons get interconnected into networks called processors. These processors perform special functions of the brain. During the lifetime of a person, various new networks of neurons are also formed, implementing various other functions of the brain as the need arises.

Some of the processors in the cerebral cortex region of the brain process the inputs from each of our sense organs. The outputs of these processors are combined by some coordinating mechanism in the brain to give us a coherent picture of the world around us. In effect, our brain is  a complex mechanism that transforms sensory inputs into some mental states. These mental states can be memory, experience, feelings, emotions, and so on.

Figure 1.1 Brain as a transformer of sense inputs to mental states

Most scientists are of the opinion that these mental states are represented by some changes in the structure of the brain - may be some rearrangement of neuronal interconnections or some physical matter that is part of the brain. 

Even a simple act of watching a musical performance can invoke several – not necessarily adjacent- regions of the brain.  Even without our conscious knowledge, they would be doing several judgments, recalling other related incidents that might have taken place in the past, at the same time giving us the feeling of enjoyment and storing this experience in our memories for later recall.

The following figure shows various functional areas (indicated by oval or rectangular blocks) of the brain that need to work together while watching a simple drum playing performance.

Figure 1.2 Brain regions working while watching a drum performance

The complex mechanism of the brain is a result of millions of years of evolution. One often wonders what the ultimate purpose of such a complex mechanism is. Our current scientific understanding recognizes ‘survival’ and ‘evolution’ as the only two ultimate purposes of the functioning of our mind. Our sensory and motor organs, in coordination with our mind, help us in our struggle for existence. Some of our experiences that get recorded as mental states make us better equipped to face events that we may encounter in the future. In the long run, these experiences may also get imprinted in our genes, so that they can be passed on to our progeny, making them better suited to handle similar situations. Our feelings and emotions are also supposed to have a similar role.

It is important to note that science clearly avoids issues of ‘subjectivity’ to which ‘we’ are so accustomed. According to science, there is no ‘we’ that perceives things. Nor there is any ‘we’ that ‘wills’ or acts. The feelings, emotions, experiences, etc have no agent associated with them, as we normally presume. ‘I’ don’t see things. It is just that the images captured by the eyes and transmitted to various parts of the brain get processed, and finally get recorded in some parts of the brain. Each of these activities is some passive happening in the brain. Neither any of the neurons that take part in implementing them undergo any feeling or emotion, nor is there anyone who is the ultimate beneficiary of these events.

Questions that science fails to answer

Our current scientific view of the mind raises several uncomfortable issues. It also fails to answer some questions, without which our understanding remains incomplete. Let us look at these issues and questions one by one.

Are we just a bundle of neurons or cells?