Description Describe one theory that tries to explain the unity of consciousnes …

Description Describe one theory that tries to explain the unity of consciousness and one theory that tries to explain it away. Which do you prefer? Why? Reply to peers: Post 1 Good day all, One theory that tries to explain the unity of consciousness is the Causal Theory- global workplace theory. This theory explains that our consciousness plays a significant role in the things that our brain processes; our consciousness causes our brains to be selective in the things that we choose to process or notice, internalize, analyze and interpret. In other words, it provides our brains with a summary of the atmosphere or environment that surrounds us and the things that are highlighted in our conscious workplace become the dominant content in our minds that serve as the driving force to our decisions. Of all the information our brains acquire from the environment around us, consciousness reserves the ‘power’ to choose what event/information will encompass our conscious state. On the other hand, no causal theories dismiss the idea of consciousness and that it can be cause of an event. In particular, the High Order thought theory suggests that a person is in a conscious mental state if they can associate it with an inner sense (sense organ). For example, as we learn and gain new knowledge in school, there are times when we are asked by our professors to utilize this knowledge to apply to something else, like using sound technique with an instrument to make music. The high order thought theory implies that consciousness is not the cause for the reason we partake in actions but more the high order thoughts that cause us to the actions that we do once we are stimulated by the environment. In learning the differences between these theories, I prefer the global workplace theory because I see how it relates to my own way of thinking and processing information. The first way in which I see how the global workplace theory places a major role in my decision making is at work, many times during the day I receive stock piles of paper work to complete and as I lay the documents out to scan through them, I instantly pull the first document that I deem the most important and then my brain becomes completely consumed with all the necessary requirements for this one document to be process, all else is secondary until I am complete. This not only applies to my life but I think that is how society has trained us to operate in the world in order to get things done in a timely and orderly fashion, as we go throughout our daily lives we prioritize and tackle different tasks how we see fit and how it suits our lives best. Prakash, R., Prakash, O., Prakash, S., Abhishek, P., & Gandotra, S. (2008). Global workspace model of consciousness and its electromagnetic correlates. Annals of Indian Academy of Neurology, 11(3), 146–153. DOI.10.4103/0972-2327.42933 Post 2 Many knowledge theories affirm the unity of consciousness; one of them is dualism. Based on the substance dualist principles, what Popper and Eccles defined as “dualist interactionism” emerged, which states that consciousness is merely unitary. Each person has their consciousness and the physical part of the brain as different factors. This theory is based on how consciousness works due to the orders of a conscious mind that operates under experiences and learning, and not through the neural stimuli of the brain (Balckmore & Troscianko, 2018). However, they also argue that the mind plays an essential role in being conscious. For many, the failure of their theory is the lack of a logical explanation of how the interaction they mention between the mind and brain happens. If they are two different parts that work separately, how can they affirm that, in the end, they work together affecting and impacting one another? On the other hand, Semir Zeki’s theory of micro consciousness argues the opposite. This theory consists of the disunity of consciousness since it defends that there are many consciences. However, it does not refer to cases of multiple personalities, but that consciousness has various fields by which it processes (Balckmore & Troscianko, 2018). For example, when we analyze the characteristics of an object, our visual system observes various factors such as depth, orientation, figure, and each of these factors are processed individually. Therefore, the theory states that each cortical system has a separate consciousness. Given those as mentioned above, I prefer the arguments of the theory of micro consciousness. Not only does it sound more logical than the theory of substance dualists, but it also has no plot gaps. I believe that our brain and consciousness are much more complicated than merely recognizing a situation or an object through learning and the brain. Many factors influence the process of being aware, and I think it is essential to take them into account. Finally, I believe the argument of this theory is quite valid, and I consider that visual perception and its hierarchical levels work. In some way, our brain and mind work separately so that as a result, we can identify the object or whatever it is that our eyes are observing and analyzing consciousness. References: Blackmore, S. J., & Troscianko, E. (2018). Consciousness: an introduction (3rd ed.). Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge