There are a number of ideas as there are interpretations on the nature of our consciousness. There ends the comparison. However, there is one idea that is different from any such prospective work in the field. A perceptive study, it breaks new ground and develops a strongly meditative and original insight into the nature of evolution, science and humanity. Its beginning honours a timeless maxim: that the mind has evolved from living organisms. Hence, it also argues that intelligent life developed; it wasn’t merely pushed to propel life as a stereotyped design. In so doing, it triumphs without falling into a mix of claims and resistance. The resultant effect is more than sincere: of an insightful examination secured to a classy underpinning of human consciousness.
This new understanding relates primarily to parallel concepts of reductionism, and a theory of everything: both problematic identities in today’s realistic world of experimental science. Applied to the biological domain, one may argue that a theory of everything runs repellent of a virtually boundless aggregate of probabilities at elevated levels of narration. Modern research in physics, with all its cerebral sparkle and gloss, for instance, is no different to the nature of chemistry — the solid ground upon which biology is based.
Put simply, the idea is itself an extension: of a secondary nature, where the rules of the game change over time. Which leads us to yet another big question: how has nature ‘fixed’ to resolve and execute winning systems in such a composite mental game like chess? Answer: a compound web of positive feedback running through corresponding planes of the biosphere, which permits abrupt antecedent circlets to arise. In other words, this explains for the transition from brains to minds — one that can be traced back to time when animals came up with non-genetic routes to protect their offspring.
This is also an idea that provides for a context in which intelligence can develop — not just as survival smarts but as individualistic, genetically stored, or relearned, personages of trial and error, where culture cushions a context in which it can also advance. Once evolution started down this avenue, things have got all the more better for the talented. Intelligence and culture now comprise a handy pair and/or the corresponding positive feedback loop — or, growth of intelligence-stimulating-culture-inducing-intelligence — leading to the emergence of our mind. This may be called as a ‘pluralistic’ perspective: one that is not intended to replace reductionism, but complement it. It is an extension too of our understanding beyond the customary sentiment — a response to combatant tensions through which our brains would have evolved.
That we’ve managed to invent language, and become conscious… by way of our task as apprentices of the mind sculpted to discover where consciousness is located in the machinery of the brain is exemplary. This is a formulation that is so well provided to emphasise the context in which our mental processes emerge. It is not certainly a cursory look at the neural components of the brain — something that has always amused us to ‘compute’ how they might be correlating.
Add to it a sense of wonderful symmetry — the connection of neural processing — and, you have a contemplation of recognition that takes advantage of the manifestation of the variance between the average man and a woman.
In other words, it is a true, pragmatic understanding of the nature of empathy and also consciousness.