The War on Neuroscience : Part 3, The Machinery of Consciousness

[Hyardacil]

It's curious how every new technological advancement leads to using that said technology as a metaphor to describing how our minds work for example.

In the medieval times the brain thinking was as if a windmill doing it's work.

Then clockwork, then steam-machine, then radio now computer.

[stinton911]

Just shows you how dangerous knowledge can be. Im not religious in any way ...Im fond of science, technology and a healthy mind-body connection, but sometimes I think certain things are best just left alone. Yes I understand the importance of this type of science and how it could help with successful treatments for other neurological diseases but I know how I just felt thinking that I may just be a computer...

And yes I do blame my mother for not buying me better software!

[PC160]

You're the one who's talking about this "radio receiver" theory of the mind, not Chopra. He's talking about consciousness not being a purely biological function.

And I agree. I think consciousness is a property of a living organism, and machines/computers will not attain self-consciousness, as they are not alive.

Certainly we will be able to create machines that emulate human intelligence, but that's not the same thing. It's just a clever deception, if you will, an imitation.

[voidCaptain]

@PC160 "You're the one who's talking about this "radio receiver" theory of the mind, not Chopra."

WTF?! Did you listen to Chopra talking about not being in TV box?

I've never seen anyone so badly misunderstand a video before.

[1simonmatthews]

So consciousness is a product of the brain? The brain is a complex structure made from matter with certain properties that evolved from simple structures. If we were to write a computer program to simulate the process from the big bang to the modern brain, the program would have to contain very precise coding. That coding would represent the way nature works with all its precisely balanced properties that came into existence for reasons unknown. That's one hell of a program to happen by chance.

[woo216]

ur smart become an astrophysicists bro

[CorporalNym]

Great three part vid. Loved it!

[KieIicious]

I believe the stance that Deepak is promoting is called Hyperdualism

[granddad2002]

i don't have problems with people believing strange or unusual things. Though when people try to debate an issue (e.g. 'evolutionary biology','cosmology' or 'neuro science) , I tend to want facts and reasons not sermons. I am biased; I plan for my brain to be in a jar in a lab, or a family heirloom? If medical technology could keep a brain living seperate for a body... I'd love to be a lecture prop like that french guy's fetal chicken heart in the 1920's...it pulsed for 27 years.

[azadeh2]

Very interesting arguments. I wish to hear more about the matter! And just a suggestion read Consciousness: a short introduction by Susan Blackmore, if you haven't already. Thanks for the videos.

[1221solstice2012]

Any "scientist" that believes in Dark Ages animal research needs a full lobotomy himself, except there's nothing to remove, haha. Deepak & the pompous "know-it-alls" refer to lab animal studies as proof of their inane points, which is the result of insanity & ignorance. I get a kick out of pseudo-intellectuals and their grotesque egos. Animal abusers will all pay in full for their crimes....research THAT lol. [Referring to the commenters below, one who comments but has an "unavailable" channel.]

[Mr12499421]

where is part 4? its been like 8 months fool!

[zarkoff45]

@Mr12499421

It's coming, but this series takes more time to prepare than any other videos I do and all the comments have been effecting my decisions on how to proceed.

[Mr12499421]

@zarkoff45 Ahh I see, well what ever way you decide to take the next video I will be waiting eagerly for the next episode.

[zarkoff45]

@Mr12499421

What would you prefer - that I finish up the story of Dr. P first, or that I deal with unrelated objections like the Chinese room, qualia, and philosophical zombies.

[Mr12499421]

@zarkoff45 Dr.P, I'm really curious about what he lost that could be so tragic to his sense of consciousness.

[crocoshocker]

"There is no radio receiver theory of the mind in use by robot makers."

So there are no remote controlled robots? Just wondering, I naturally assumed there was . . . .

Are there any experiments with genetically identical animals/humans raised in identical environments to see if they develop different personalities? To test for presence or absence of a third variable after genes/environment?

Though It doesn't matter if a soul exists, if it did every claim about it would STILL have no proof.

[zarkoff45]

@crocoshocker "So there are no remote controlled robots?"

No. Radio controlled robots are not based on Chopra's radio theory or any theory of how the mind works. You are ignoring some of the words.

[crocoshocker]

@zarkoff45 Is it chopra's theory? I thought it was older than that, but okay. Anyway

How about that genetically identical animal experiment idea I had? Has anyone ever done that?

[MemeMachine1]

Excellent.

[AxisMundiOnline]

Nice one!

[cmpresents]

YOu critisized Deepak for using the term secretion, yet you just used the term emergence which is the same thing.

[zarkoff45]

@cmpresents "... term secretion, ... emergence is the same thing."

No, it is not.

Is a bag of flour, a cup of water, two eggs, and a cup of sugar a cake? No, the cake emerges from the process of mixing that stuff and baking it.

That's emergence.

A hydrogen atom is not wet. An oxygen atom is not wet. A single water molecule is not wet. 3 water molecules are not wet. It takes millions of the molecules do get the property we know as wetness.

That's emergence.

[cmpresents]

Marvin Minsky is or was dead wrong, you can't explain consiousness with a theory like that, he failed just like the rest of all the theories of the mind. Why can ppl like you understand that machines can't think, how can you have autonamous agents that are not conscious, produce a conscious feeling mind, how can you logically accept that. The point here is that I have watched all 3 videos and you have yet to explain what consciouness is.

[cmpresents]

For the record, I don't agree with Deepak's theory, I think he is an idiot.

[cmpresents]

zarkoff45; why build an android, why complicate your life. I'll give you a simple challenge, build a sensor, a simple sensor that can feel pain, if you can do that, I'll stop believing in God. That android is a stupid as a calculator. You are going to build an android and prove that there is no soul, you are amazing, but good luck.

[zarkoff45]

@cmpresents "build a sensor, a simple sensor that can feel pain"

Do you think a single nerve cell can feel pain without a brain to interpret it?

[cmpresents]

@zarkoff45 I don't know how we feel pain, but complexity doesn't feel pain either. The brain does not interpret pain, pain is not an interpretation. We feel pain, our conscious self feels pain, pain is not the product of complexity, that makes no sense.

[zarkoff45]

@cmpresents "The brain does not interpret pain, pain is not an interpretation."

I will, later in this series, prove you are dead wrong there. We can know that pain is interpreted by the brain because we know it gets misinterpreted in certain situations.

[cmpresents]

@zarkoff45 Listen I only have to ask you one question that you can't answer. Tell me who is interpreting the pain. I know you don't know. So whatever you said it' impossible. If you can answer the question it would mean that you are the only person in the universerse that knows what pain is, and who interprets this pain. YOu can't even define pain, let alone know that it's interpreted. No disrespect, but you are limited to understanding only actions and reactions, and nothing else.

[zarkoff45]

@cmpresents "Tell me who is interpreting the pain."

The "who" in this case is the entire system.

Pain receptors called nociceptors activate when there's been an injury. Your reflexes react when the signal hits the dorsal horn, but the pain signal continues to the deeper brain where it becomes more than a simple stimulus and response. Your brain needs to make sense of what has happened. Pain gets catalogued in your brain’s library, and emotions become associated with it.

[cmpresents]

@zarkoff45 Wrong, it's not the entire system. PPl have had half their brain taken off and they still feel pain. What system are talking about. You realize that you keep doing the same thing, but sir, you are not explaining or saying what pain is. You are just saying that this and that happens, but you have no clue as to what pain is. If you knew you would have said it already. Tell me what it's is and who feels it, but dont' say the system, that means nothing.

[zarkoff45]

@cmpresents "PPl have had half their brain taken off and they still feel pain."

Is that what happened to you?

It's called a hemispherectomy and it's only half the cerebral cortex, not half the brain. The procedure is usually performed only on children because their brains have more neuroplasticity, allowing neurons from the remaining hemisphere to take over the tasks from the lost hemisphere.

The parts of the brain that deal with pain are redundant in each hemisphere.

[zarkoff45]

@cmpresents "I don't know how we feel pain"

Then why don't you learn something about it before assuming things in ignorance:

These vids will help:

watch?v=n8y04SrkEZU

watch?v=gQS0tdIbJ0w

[cmpresents]

@zarkoff45 I have been around, and I know what science knows and what it doesn't know. There not a person alive that knows what consciousness is or what pain is. Just ask Richard Dawkins, he'll tell you. By the way what is watch?v=n8.......

[zarkoff45]

@cmpresents "I know what science knows"

You are insanely arrogant and very wrong.

[cmpresents]

@zarkoff45 But u still have not answer the question.

[zarkoff45]

@cmpresents

explaining pain : It is an aversive experience.

[cmpresents]

@zarkoff45 Well time is up. I told you, you don't know what pain is. 

[zarkoff45]

@cmpresents

You don't think pain is an aversive experience?

[cmpresents]

@zarkoff45 Pain is this and pain is that, pain is hell, but what is pain.

[zarkoff45]

@cmpresents "...but what is pain."

What is "is"? If you don't know then you don't know what you're talking about.

[KingOfMadCows]

@cmpresents Pain is SCN9A.

[Axon36]

@KingOfMadCows

Nav. 1.7 it's hardly responsible for the encoding nor the activation of any nociceptor. All the attempts to relate a particular voltage gate channel with different neuropathic syndromes has fail..or it's leading to an incomplete answer.

[KingOfMadCows]

@Axon36 Nav1.7 may not be responsible for the activation of nociceptors but it is responsible for the conduction of action potentials, which is just as important, if not more so. The activation of a neuron is useless if the action potential is not propagated. The loss of Nav1.7 function is found in people with congenital analgesia.

[Axon36]

@KingOfMadCows

Rigth...but conduction it doesn't means transduction, encoding or integration. It's a gross simplification. I'm well aware about that Pakistani family...however...all the attempt trying to relate that channelopathy with the genesis of the pain perception it had been unsuccessful. Nav 1.7 it just one channel..so far detected in IB4 + C fiber nociceptors more likely C-polymodals...but it doesn't appears on A-HTMRS Type I or Type II....as I said... gross simplification.

[KingOfMadCows]

@Axon36 It is a gross simplification, but I was responding to vague comments questioning what "pain" is.

[Axon36]

@KingOfMadCows

As you probably know...in sciences..more in neurosciences.... it's inappropriate to give an answer without precision or at least.. respect. We're after all just a bunch of "illustrated ignorants". He doesn't know what pain it is.... but he want!. Since you're closer to that knowledge it's your responsibility to try to give a competent answer. We don't need to go to the core...just show than Mr. Taxpayer...has his money well invested...in us!

[KingOfMadCows]

@Axon36 But cognitive dissonance theory, among other psychological theories, tell me that some people are so entrenched in their beliefs that they can suppress any dissonant thought. For example, one of the survivors of the Jonestown massacre still thinks that Jonestown could have been successful. Scientific evidence will never be enough to convince some people of the truth. In order to really turn them around, some sneaky psychological tricks may be needed, and I'm too lazy to use them here.

[Axon36]

@KingOfMadCows

The ultimate scientific goal it's not to convince any one about anything....that it's just futile. They can think whatever they want....but shearing information...in a adequate fashion...at least let open an alternative for dialogue...and curiosity......that it's after all....the meaning of this place (youtube).

[KingOfMadCows]

@Axon36 But the problem is that there are people who are trying to hurt science. Look at the people who want to stop the teaching of evolution in the US. There's also tons of pseudoscience you have to deal with. Look at homeopathy and people like Deepak Chopra. Not to mention the fact that scientific research needs more support and money. You have to go beyond just showing people the evidence and convince them that the science is right or the future of scientific research will be in trouble.

[Axon36]

@KingOfMadCows

That it's precisely my point......just remember that people doesn't gives a damn about the "highest scientific arcane"...they wants solutions..or at least hope. They need to know that we're kicking our own asses trying our very best to resolve their problems...not because we must...just because we can. I don't really care pseudoscience. Thanks for shearing your thoughts with me. Cheers....and good hunt.

[0299792458]

@Axon36

I don't care what the video is about, I'm just here to insult you.

Axon36, suck my balls.

[Axon36]

@0299792458

You should read my comments before I can accept your invitation.... :D.

[zarkoff45]

@cmpresents "what is watch?v=n8......."

Look at the top of your browser window, there's an IP address of my video - you'll see the letters "h" then "t" another "t" then "p" and two backslashes followed by a w and w and w dot youtube dot com then another backslash and you get the "watch?v..."

What you do is copy the "watch?v" line I gave into the space where the current one is and click. You're sent to a new video.

[zachariahi]

Also if there are aliens or advanced creatures out there you must believe through common sense that universe is greater than the human brains can comprehend. You can call it a soul, or a ghost in the machine, but either way we're all the same. We're all looking for answers of where we'll go after we die. No one will know, yet we all believe we know. All that matters is here and now. Behave naturally, it's not about all about good or evil.

[zachariahi]

I thoroughly enjoyed your series. You are a genious working on something you have passion for which should be respected.  I would love to know your thoughts on aliens and U.F.Os. Do you think they exist in this universe? I believe you stated humans naturally think that there is more out there. Your theory is basically about nothing else out there because we can't scientifically prove or disprove it yet. What about the countless sightings of UFOs which have been documented?

[1aaronaaron1]

deepakchopraeraed: the art of bullshiting at an advance level. ex) billy knew he had not spend enough time preparing for his presentation in psychology class so he deepakchopraed it.

[Mitche23]

My memories, my emotions, my imagination etc is the product of the brain.

What exactly is the product of the mind?

[Setar]

I can probably guess what he lost based on my knowledge of schizophrenia and related studies. If one imagines the brain as an orchestra, Dr. P's seems to have lost its conductor.

[guillerms289]

You are portraying a straw man of dualism by using clip from you-tube made by amateurs. Many dualists are neither theists nor motivated by soul or after life. The motivations are a lot more complex. Bertrand Russel, a paragon of atheism was a dualist, just not the kind of dualist you attack. For more contemporary dualists read the works of David Chalmers and Galen Strawson, both of which are not theists in their motivation

[paganiniGOGO]

@guillerms289

You're right, dualism is used more or less as a curse word in philosophy sometimes, even though there are many respectable contemporary versions.

Although interactionism I think is quite ridiculous, and usually motivated by religion.

[AmGoDDoGmA]

Hey Zark, I enjoyed this series. I have heard similar arguments before. I have listened to Daniel Dennett, and others. I still think you need to read, "The God Theory" by Bernard Haisch. I still think his arguments make more sense, he uses many different lines of evidence, and from watching your videos... I think you would the enjoy what this impeccable astrophysicist has to say!

[AmGoDDoGmA]

@AmGoDDoGmA cont'd.

Even if you ultimately disagree with his conclusions, it is fun too challenge your beliefs... especially when there is actual evidence to evaluate! If you decide to read it, let me know what you think. PEACE!

[zarkoff45]

@AmGoDDoGmA

Well, you did what I asked, so I'll put Bernard Haisch's, "The God Theory" on my reading list.

[mangm1o2]

Conciousness is you presence to experience. Experiences vary, they can be flawed, altered. Our body and knowladge are experiences. Those are nothing but categories. The brain computes. Damage can accur and categories can get scrambled wich influence thought and behaviour. One thing that doesn't vary is the person's presence to all of those. Conciousness doesn't vary and science is the study of variables. Thus a new paradigm will soon be upon us

[zarkoff45]

@mangm1o2 wrote: "Conciousness doesn't vary and science is the study of variables."

What a crock. You're wrong on both counts. Consciousness does vary and science is more than the study of variables.

[ricardas83]

So, will be there fallowing part??? I want to know about these tests from last book in this video!!! You promised to tell us. I don't want to go and read. Will wait for next part.

[zarkoff45]

@ricardas83

Yes, there will be a part 4.

Sorry, to take so long with it, but I've been having a hard time with it.

[ricardas83]

@zarkoff45 OK, thanks for reply. I thought maybe I missed that part, started to look on your channel, then get frustrated LOL.

You ar an asshole for making people interested in subject LOL.

Will wait for new part.

[smiledammit24]

@zarkoff45 Get on with part 4 already! I MUST SEE IT.

[zarkoff45]

@smiledammit24

Thanks for letting me know there is still someone out there that wants to see part 4.

Viewership on the series has been decreasing.

Alas, it's going to be a month or so. I've got a lot of things I need to do first.

[smiledammit24]

@zarkoff45 Of course. This is very important work you're doing though, and you should really keep it up. It's really significant that you also mention people like Chopra in your videos. Those of us who are so used to fighting radical evangelicals often fail to recognize the witch doctors of other denominations for the charlatans they are. The War on Neuroscience won't be fought along the same lines as the War Against Evolution and it's great that you make that observation!

[TheBottomContributor]

Look at Hippocrates and his beliefs on the mind. Even during those times, there were people like him that knew that the brain creates the mind. The sad thing is that idiotic beliefs keep existing despite evidence.

[7zness]

I disagree with him

[oooshiny888]

Prosopagnosia is definitely one of the more interesting disorders, but I think all the agnosias are pretty fascinating. just try to wrap your mind around having such distorted perception, while having perfectly in tact primary sensory modalities! The brain is remarkably complicated. its mind boggling! (haha.... ok yeah i'm a dork. but still.)

[metaphysicslab]

Hasnt science already evidenced that thoughts are electrical pulses?

thought is a non-physical energy

that certainly doesnt mean you need to call it a soul

but thought is a non-physical energy, thought is electrical pulses

[zarkoff45]

"thought is a non-physical energy, thought is electrical pulses"

You don't think electricity is physical?

[metaphysicslab]

It really depends on the context your using the word physical in.

I know there are contexts in which you could say electrons are physical

But the way I was using it was more in the context of, physical things are solid... or liquid, or gas. Like you could fill an empty space with only one of. Whereas electricity operates on a different set of dynamics. Electricity can run through a solid

[trmblingblustar]

Now is this a war on Neuroscience? Not even neuro-scientists agree on this point!

[zarkoff45]

You don't think an attempt to resurrect dualism is a war on neuroscience?

[metaphysicslab]

The brain developed over time, naturally, just by due process of nature becoming more complex. To the point where its neural networks became so complex, it could do highly complex tasks

What if the entire entire earth is becoming the framework for a silicone neural network, within the computers and internet itself. What if the web of silicone becomes so intricate that just due to the nature of its complexity it begins to exhibit consciousness like traits completely out of human guidance

[metaphysicslab]

I say that because I think it's a much more probable scenario for a system of silicone becoming comparable to an actual human brain than humans making an android.

For a human to make an android would be like a computer trying to comprehend that it is running on electricity. The very thing it is using to think, is the thing it is trying to comprehend. It seems recursive, infinite, impossible to me.

However nature itself might evolve a sillicone neural network out of the wires of the web

[zarkoff45]

Your misunderstandings will be the subject of a future video in this series.

[metaphysicslab]

no dude

that was me telling you my own theory

I wasnt explaining to you your theory

[metaphysicslab]

In order to prove that you are correct you require the construction of a functioning android on par with real human consciousness?

LOL ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME

you already lost your own argument by default

You cannot make the evidence for you being correct rely on sci fi and anime

its like saying, hey guys, light can be focused into a saber, just look at Star Wars!

[zarkoff45]

"In order to prove that you are correct you require the construction of a functioning android on par with real human consciousness?"

Go back to part 1. You have misunderstood.

[metaphysicslab]

I only watched part 3

and in party 3 you are using the theory behind androids as a reason why deepak chopra is wrong

[zarkoff45]

No, I am not. I referring to part 1 when I talk about the android.

In part one it was used to see if a guy would accept any evidence.

[metaphysicslab]

oh. well then I shall watch it then

[zarkoff45]

The link is in the sidebar, you should watch the series in order.

[S33KY]

its pretty simple god gave you a brain and a conscience

[zarkoff45]

"god gave you a brain and a conscience"

But no soul?

[S33KY]

yea a soul also i forgot about that

[Paradoxical003]

@zarkoff45 is not conscience a product of the brain?

[zarkoff45]

Both your consciousness and your conscience are the product of the neural circuitry in your brain. This is what my series is attempting to demonstrate. They are explainable and can, in part, be reproduced in a computer. As time goes on we will learn to replicate more brain functions in our computers and our robots.

[cmpresents]

@zarkoff45 Wrong, not even one brain function has been replicated. There are zero theories on how the brain works.

[zarkoff45]

@cmpresents "...not even one brain function has been replicated."

Then what are they doing at project Blue Brain?

Google: "Replicated Brain Closer To Thought", "Blue Brain"

"There are zero theories on how the brain works."

Then why are there books like "Brains: How They Work and What that Tells Us About Who We Are" by Dale Purves? Or books like "Creating Mind: How the Brain Works" by John E. Dowling? Or what about books by Antonio Damasio?

[TutorialClarity]

@Paradoxical003

look into neuroplasticity, and the "separation between mind and brain". The mind forms the structure of the brain constantly, and the brain(being electrochemical reactions of the central nervous system) thus shapes the mind.

The ultimate answer is that the brain itself is what gives us our consciousness. This is because: without any aspect, or with the loss of small individual aspects of the brain, our consciousness itself is lost.

[zarkoff45]

"hes talking about some dualism"

Trying to resurrect dualism is part of the war on neuroscience.

[zarkoff45]

"are you waging war against neuroscience, ..."

No.

And you're the only one who has complained about feeling mislead so far.

[moyga]

Well your sample size isn't very large.

I'm not complaining, I'm just giving you some constructive criticism. I think its fair to say that your videos intent and purpose would be clearer if you renamed the series "debunking the war on neuroscience" or something along those lines, but meh. What the video is about becomes clear by watching the video, but I still think the title is potentially misleading.

[Wollff85]

"I could be in a hospital for the insane thinking I was writing intellectual comments on youtube..."

Reading the comment sections would lead me to the conclusion that probably everyone writing comments on youtube is. Probably including me, making it okay to write some more comments.

[SkepticsUniverse]

Another great video, Zarkoff!

[damaxman]

I must fully admit, I am vastly out of my league here, but this perticular topic is immensely fascinating. Especially since I'm a student in robotics technology.

[dewinthemorning]

A hard hitting, backed by science video, that deals dexterously with the likes of Dr. Chopra. Thanks. Such videos are sorely needed.

I have Minsky's book, haven't read it yet. It will be interesting.

[anubis2814]

Yay for emergence! Because of this you made this video and I can comment on it.

[00Alderamin]

5 stard just because of the intro "get ready for some bullshit "

[PinkProgram]

My wireless nervous system might confuse the issue here... Each platform can think on its own but wirelessly interact with each other in a meta-conscious state. Each additonal platform is just a vehicle for the core processes. Not that confusing when I'm in my first body but I'm sure somebody is going to ask one of me which of me I am ^_^ Which would be like asking which hand I'm using... Maybe I should number myself :3 though I'm not numbering the prototype because thats the initial spark ^_^

[landfillpoet]

I wholeheartedly agree that consciousness is emergent from the complexity of the brain. Emergence of complex forms is something that we can see in most complex, dynamical systems.

You may have already read them, but I recommend Elman et al's Neuroconstructivism and Gerald Edelman's Neural Darwinism - both present interesting theories on consciousness and embodied, embedded cognition.

[BuBBaGump014]

The only problem I have with the term "AI" is that it skews the idea that somehow our intelligence is the REAL intelligence and anything else would be less. But at the same time, it might be justified. A robot made with silicone may not be function exactly like a human. It might be that neural tissue (or even glial cells, who knows) is necessary for "intelligence". Then question then becomes: is a robot made of neural tissue a human if we build it piece by piece? Why not? It happens in the womb.

[darkmiles22]

Is a built human the same as a born human? Yes, just like in vitro babies are the same are naturally fertilized babies. Problem solved. Next?

[Wollff85]

It's a question of definitions.

The A in AI can either mean "not quite real", or simply "built".

Whether the definition of "not quite real" makes sense, depends on what we mean with intelligence.

Two possibilities:

Intelligent is whatever does intelligent things: It's a kind of behavior. The term AI doesn't make sense.

Intelligence is is how humans do intelligent intelligent things: It's a special process. AI makes sense.

[dethdakiller0]

Good fucking job zarkoff45, watching this broke my mind :(

[CousinoMacul]

This is a really good series so far.

[FraggedMind]

All I have to say is "JOHNNY 5!"

[zarkoff45]

The robot you think is like Johnny 5 is probably COG, the MIT robot Rodney Brooks was working on.

[showABCshow]

good stuff, I love your series on these.

[GuineaPigDan]

Interesting. Can't wait for part four.

Anyway, I did find out a little bit more about the Catholic concept of the soul since your last video. I saw a preist in the Catholic Answers forums describe it as the "life principle," which sounded more New Age than Christian to me. The Catholic Encyclopedia article on the soul clarified this vauge term by explaning the soul is like a life force of some kind. This may explain why my Confirmation teacher taught me that without the soul, the body dies.

[TheStarTux]

Keep up the good work Zarkoff!! Swarm intelligence seems to work for some minds better than for others :-)

[bdf2718]

Sacks' book is a great read. And a powerful argument against dualism. Damage the car and, astoundingly, you damage the driver.

What colour is an orange? Grey.

There is no soul.

The guy with Korsakoff's syndrome scared me though. How would I ever know? I could be in a hospital for the insane thinking I was writing intellectual comments on youtube...