The metaphor "stream of consciousness" suggests how thoughts seem to flow through the conscious mind. Research studies have shown that humans only experience one mental event at a time as a fast-moving mind-stream.[1][2][3] The term was coined by Alexander Bain in 1855 in the first edition of The Senses and the Intellect, when he wrote, "The concurrence of Sensations in one common stream of consciousness (on the same cerebral highway) enables those of different senses to be associated as readily as the sensations of the same sense" (p. 359). But it is commonly credited to William James (often considered the father of American psychology), who used it in 1890 in his The Principles of Psychology.[4][5] The full range of thoughts—that one can be aware of—can form the content of this "stream".
YouTube Encyclopedic
-
1/5Views:2 934 5541 355 2136 109 4475441 360 786
-
Consciousness: Crash Course Psychology #8
-
What is consciousness? - Michael S. A. Graziano
-
Psychological Research: Crash Course Psychology #2
-
What's Your Function, Stream Of Consciousness? William James, Pragmatism & Functionalism
-
How do you explain consciousness? | David Chalmers
Transcription
Here’s a riddle, my Hobbitses: What’s something we all experience, all the time, that we can’t really measure, and barely have words to define? You can’t hold it in your hand, or take a bite out of it. It isn’t something you learn or practice; it just IS. Consciousness. Every science has certain concepts that are so fundamental, yet abstract, that we have a hard time finding the appropriate words to describe them. Ask a physicist and they’ll tell you energy and space defy simple definitions. Biologists know if something is alive, but have a harder time explaining what life actually is. Ask a psychologist what consciousness is, and you’ll get…you’ll get a slippery answer. For the purposes of this conversation, we’re going to actually loosely define consciousness as our awareness of ourselves and our environment. It’s this awareness that allows us to take in and organize information from many sources and senses, at once. American psychologist William James thought of consciousness as a continuously moving, shifting, and unbroken stream, hence the term “stream of consciousness.” Others think of it as the brain’s roving flashlight, shining down an unbroken beam of light that highlights one thing, and then moves on to the next. The point is, your conscious experience is forever shifting--for example, right now hopefully you’re focused on the words coming out of my mouth, but with a little shift - your mind might wander to how you really should shower today, and your chair is uncomfortable, and you suddenly have to pee, and can you believe what Bernice said?! Do I smell pizza? HEY! EYES HERE! WE’RE LEARNING! Beyond that moment-to-moment shifting, consciousness allows us to contemplate life, think about infinity, and ride a unicycle across a tightrope while juggling melons, at least in theory. Our consciousness helps us plan our futures, consider consequences, and reflect on the past. It is both the most familiar, and the most mysterious part of our lives. It’s kind of like The Force -- but for the little universes inside our heads. [INTRO] Throughout our daily lives we flit back and forth between various states of consciousness, including waking, sleeping, and various altered states. These can occur spontaneously, like dreaming, or be physiologically sparked, like a drug-induced hallucination, or be triggered psychologically, through meditation or hypnosis, for example. We’re going to take the next three episodes to look closely at these different states of consciousness, but let’s start with what it really means to be awake. For centuries, scientists learned what they could about the brain solely through clinical observation. And they learned a lot, for sure, but with today’s technology, we’re actually able to see some of the structures and activity inside a living, working brain - its electrical, metabolic, and magnetic signatures displayed on screens for our wonder and amusement. The field of cognitive neuroscience is the study of how brain activity is linked with our mental processes, including thinking, perception, memory, and language. Like other kinds of neuroscience, it uses neuroimaging technologies to consider links between specific brain states and conscious experiences. And there’s more than one way to scan a brain. Structural imaging shows the brain’s anatomy, and is useful in identifying large-scale tumors, diseases, and injuries. In contrast, functional imaging shows us electromagnetic or metabolic activity in the brain, like blood flow, to let us observe correlations between specific mental functions and activity in particular brain areas. So, yes, neuroimaging has been revolutionizing the field of psychology, much like telescopes and microscopes did for astronomy and biology. But on the other hand, some of this technology is very new, and there’s plenty of disagreement about how to interpret neuroimaging findings. Remember, correlation does not equal causation. So, activity in a certain brain region while having certain kinds of thoughts might be useful to know, but it’s not the end of the conversation. We’ve already talked a lot about how function is often localized in the brain and how everything psychological is simultaneously biological--so it stands to reason our thoughts and emotions could in part be illustrated by a bright flare on a dark screen. We’ve also collected a fair amount of evidence that we don’t just have one layer of consciousness - a single tape playing various tunes - but rather, something more like two layers, each supported by its own personal bio-psycho-social pit crew. I’m talking about one of the dual process models of consciousness--the idea that our conscious, deliberate mind could be saying, look! a squirrel! while our implicit, automatic mind is simultaneously subprocessing like a computer: color: brown, tail: bushy, movement: climbing, distance: 20 meters, association: my sister had a squirrel phobia as a child, implicit bias: I think that squirrels are ruining America. All of which might weigh upon my behavior upon seeing the little guy. By some estimates, all your senses are scooping up nearly 11 million bits of information, EVERY SECOND. And yet, you consciously register only about 40 at time. So how do we keep focused and filter out all the chatter to actually get stuff done? With selective attention, of course! Selective attention is how we focus our consciousness on one particular stimulus or group of stimuli, effectively tuning out the rest. Your consciousness is like a spotlight on a busy stage. There are other things going on around you that your automatic, subprocessor brain is covertly registering. But for those moments when you shine your spotlight, most of the other stimuli fall away. Try it at home! Right now, you’re consciously watching this lesson on consciousness. You probably don’t notice the feel of your socks on your feet, or the tongue that’s inside your mouth, always filling up your mouth with tongue! But as soon as I mention it, the spotlight of your attention turns to them, you feel those socks on your feet, and you’re like wow! It’s weird that there’s a tongue in my mouth! The classic auditory example of selective attention is the cocktail party effect. You could be in a room with 47 people jabbering away, and yet be able to concentrate your hearing on one conversation, tuning out the rest of the voices and background music. But, if the couple next to you were to speak your name, suddenly your cognitive radar would light up and your attention would whip around to the sound of your name, probably trying to figure out if Bernice was talking behind your back again. Bernice!! This roving spotlight of selective attention is pretty handy most of the time, for spies and laypeople alike. But it can also be dangerous, if you’re being dumb, and say, texting and driving. When you shift your primary selective attention from driving to OMG, LOLOLOLOLOL, you also unwittingly activate your selective inattention, which means that you failed to see that cyclist who you almost ran over, which would not only have ruined her life but also yours so DON’T TEXT AND DRIVE! In fact, when your full attention is directed elsewhere, you’d be astounded by the scope of obvious things you fail to notice. It’s called inattentional blindness. You may have even already been subject to one of the most famous experiments of inattentional blindness...the Invisible Gorilla or, sometimes, the Moonwalking bear. Just google either of those things if you want to be tested on your awareness and then come back. Pretty great, right?! Given the prompt to count the number of passes one team makes, your consciousness is focused on following the players and the ball, nothing else. You don’t see the players in black, they’re the distraction... also you certainly don’t see the dancing gorilla...or bear...whichever one. The original version of this experiment found that about 50% of people didn’t notice that there was A GORILLA WALKING THROUGH THE ROOM! THAT is how powerfully selective our attention can be. Something to remember next time you’re behind the wheel. But you know who understands and exploits inattentional blindness better than anyone? Magicians! Except they call it misdirection. Famous modern magician Teller, of Penn and Teller, says “Every time you perform a magic trick you’re engaging in a experimental psychology.” And we can’t help but be rubes. Magicians also prey on our change blindness, the psychological phenomenon in which we fail to notice changes in our environment. And no, I don’t mean climate change. I mean the failure to recognize the difference between what was there a moment ago, versus what is there now. For example, I have changed shirts several times since this lesson started. In a well-known and often-copied experiment, sometimes called the “person swap,” an experimenter will stop someone in a park and ask for directions. And then, during some staged interruption, the original experimenter will leave and be replaced with a totally different person. Half the time, the subject doesn’t even notice. Fun! One of the many perks of studying psychology with me is you learn all kinds of new ways to mess with people! But while change blindness makes for some really cool parlor tricks, this failure to notice certain things can be dangerous -- say, faulty memories lead to false eyewitness testimonies in court, or when friends get deadlocked in a he-said, she-said disagreement. So, my friends, use The Force. But use it wisely. As one of my favorite psychologists once advised: “A Jedi uses the Force for knowledge and defense, never for attack.” Actually, that was Yoda. Anyway, the bottom line is, we are far less aware of what’s going on around us than we think we are. And that’s just when we’re awake! Imagine what might slip your notice when you’re half-asleep, drunk, hypnotized, or hallucinating! That’s what we’re gonna talk about next time. Thanks for watching this episode of Crash Course, if you were selectively conscious of my words, you got introduced the our constant struggle to define consciousness, learned a little bit about neuroimaging and its developing role in psychological science, how our consciousness is split into two pieces, deliberate and automatic, and how the brain can be selectively attentive, selectively inattentive, and blind to changes in some surprisingly major ways. If you’d like to sponsor an episode of Crash Course Psychology, get a copy of one of our Rorschach prints, and even be animated into an upcoming episode, just go to subbable.com/crashcourse, and subscribe. This episode was written by Kathleen Yale, edited by Blake de Pastino, and our consultant, is Dr. Ranjit Bhagwat. Our director and editor is Nicholas Jenkins, the script supervisor is Michael Aranda who’s also our sound designer, and our graphics team is Thought Café.
Buddhism
Early Buddhist scriptures describe the "stream of consciousness" (Pali; viññāna-sota) where it is referred to as the Mind Stream.[6][7][8] The practice of mindfulness, which is about being aware moment-to-moment of one's subjective conscious experience[9] aid one to directly experience the "stream of consciousness" and to gradually cultivate self-knowledge and wisdom.[6] Buddhist teachings describe the continuous flow of the "stream of mental and material events" that include sensory experiences (i.e., seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, touch sensations, or a thought relating to the past, present or the future) as well as various mental events that get generated, namely, feelings, perceptions and intentions/behaviour.[10] These mental events are also described as being influenced by other factors such as attachments and past conditioning.[6] Further, the moment-by-moment manifestation of the "stream of consciousness" is described as being affected by physical laws, biological laws, psychological laws, volitional laws, and universal laws.[10]
Proponents
In his lectures circa 1838–1839 Sir William Hamilton, 9th Baronet described "thought" as "a series of acts indissolubly connected"; this comes about because of what he asserted was a fourth "law of thought" known as the "law of reason and consequent":
- "The logical significance of the law of Reason and Consequent lies in this, – That in virtue of it, thought is constituted into a series of acts all indissolubly connected; each necessarily inferring the other" (Hamilton 1860:61-62).[11]
In this context the words "necessarily infer" are synonymous with "imply".[12] In further discussion Hamilton identified "the law" with modus ponens;[13] thus the act of "necessarily infer" detaches the consequent for purposes of becoming the (next) antecedent in a "chain" of connected inferences.
William James[4][14] asserts the notion as follows:
- "Consciousness, then, does not appear to itself chopped up in bits. Such words as 'chain' or 'train' do not describe it fitly as it presents itself in the first instance. It is nothing jointed; it flows. A 'river' or a 'stream' are the metaphors by which it is most naturally described. In talking of it hereafter let us call it the stream of thought, of consciousness, or of subjective life. (James 1890:239)
He was enormously skeptical about using introspection as a technique to understand the stream of consciousness. "The attempt at introspective analysis in these cases is in fact like seizing a spinning top to catch its motion, or trying to turn up the gas quickly enough to see how the darkness looks."[15] However, the epistemological separation of two levels of analyses appears to be important in order to systematically understand the "stream of consciousness."[10]
Bernard Baars has developed Global Workspace Theory[16] which bears some resemblance to stream of consciousness.
Conceptually understanding what is meant by the "present moment," "the past" and "the future" can aid one to systematically understand the "stream of consciousness."[6]
Criticism
Susan Blackmore challenged the concept of stream of consciousness. "When I say that consciousness is an illusion I do not mean that consciousness does not exist. I mean that consciousness is not what it appears to be. If it seems to be a continuous stream of rich and detailed experiences, happening one after the other to a conscious person, this is the illusion." However, she also says that a good way to observe the "stream of consciousness" may be to calm the mind in meditation. The criticism is based on the stream of perception data from the senses rather than about consciousness itself. Also, it is not explained the reason why some things are conscious at all.[17] Suggestions have also been made regarding the importance of separating "two levels of analyses" when attempting to understand the "stream of consciousness".[10]
Baars is in agreement with these points. The continuity of the "stream of consciousness" may in fact be illusory, just as the continuity of a movie is illusory. Nevertheless, the seriality of mutually incompatible conscious events is well supported by objective research over some two centuries of experimental work. A simple illustration would be to try to be conscious of two interpretations of an ambiguous figure or word at the same time. When timing is precisely controlled, as in the case of the audio and video tracks of the same movie, seriality appears to be compulsory for potentially conscious events presented within the same 100 ms interval.[citation needed]
J. W. Dalton has criticized the global workspace theory on the grounds that it provides, at best, an account of the cognitive function of consciousness, and fails even to address the deeper problem of its nature, of what consciousness is, and of how any mental process whatsoever can be conscious: the so-called "hard problem of consciousness".[18] A. C. Elitzur has argued, however, "While this hypothesis does not address the 'hard problem', namely, the very nature of consciousness, it constrains any theory that attempts to do so and provides important insights into the relation between consciousness and cognition.", as much as any consciousness theory is constrained by the natural brain perception limitations.[19]
New work by Richard Robinson shows promise in establishing the brain functions involved in this model and may help shed light on how we understand signs or symbols and reference these to our semiotic registers.[20]
Literary technique
In literature, stream of consciousness writing is a literary device which seeks to portray an individual's point of view by giving the written equivalent of the character's thought processes, either in a loose interior monologue, or in connection to his or her sensory reactions to external occurrences. Stream-of-consciousness as a narrative device is strongly associated with the modernist movement. The term was first applied in a literary context, transferred from psychology, in The Egoist, April 1918, by May Sinclair, in relation to the early volumes of Dorothy Richardson's novel sequence Pilgrimage.[21] Amongst other modernist novelists who used it are James Joyce in Ulysses (1922) and William Faulkner in The Sound and the Fury (1929).[22]
See also
- Edmund Husserl
- Free recall
- Mindstream
- Phenomenology (psychology)
- Qualia
- Samyama
- Teletransportation paradox
- Train of thought
References
- ^ Potter MC, Wyble B, Hagmann CE, McCourt ES (2014). "Detecting meaning in RSVP at 13 ms per picture". Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics. 76 (2): 270–9. doi:10.3758/s13414-013-0605-z. hdl:1721.1/107157. PMID 24374558. S2CID 180862.
- ^ Raymond JE, Shapiro KL, Arnell KM (1992). "Temporary suppression of visual processing in an RSVP task: an attentional blink?". Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance. 18 (3): 849–60. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.18.3.849. PMID 1500880.
- ^ Shapiro KL, Arnell KA, Raymond JE (Nov 1997). "The attentional blink". Trends in Cognitive Sciences. 1 (8): 291–296. doi:10.1016/S1364-6613(97)01094-2. PMID 21223931. S2CID 203066948.
- ^ a b James, William (1890). The principles of psychology. New York: Henry Holt.
- ^ James, William (13 July 2012) [1890]. The Principles of Psychology. Vol. 1 (reprint, revised ed.). New York: Dover Publications. ISBN 9780486123493. Retrieved 20 October 2023.
- ^ a b c d Karunamuni N, Weerasekera R (Jun 2017). "Theoretical Foundations to Guide Mindfulness Meditation: A Path to Wisdom". Current Psychology. 38 (3): 627–646. doi:10.1007/s12144-017-9631-7. S2CID 149024504.
- ^ Dan Lusthaus, Buddhist Phenomenology: A Philosophical Investigation of Yogācāra Buddhism and the Ch'eng Wei-shih Lun. Routledge 2002, page 193.
- ^ Specifically, in the Digha Nikaya. See Steven Collins, Selfless Persons; Imagery and Thought in Theravāda Buddhism. Cambridge University Press, 1982, page 257.
- ^ (Kabat-Zinn, 1994, p. 4)" - Mindfulness Training as a Clinical Intervention: A Conceptual and Empirical Review, by Ruth A. Baer, available at http://www.wisebrain.org/papers/MindfulnessPsyTx.pdf
- ^ a b c d Karunamuni ND (May 2015). "The Five-Aggregate Model of the Mind". SAGE Open. 5 (2): 215824401558386. doi:10.1177/2158244015583860.
- ^ Sir William Hamilton, 9th Baronet, (Henry L. Mansel and John Veitch, ed.), 1860 Lectures on Metaphysics and Logic, in Two Volumes. Vol. II. Logic, Boston: Gould and Lincoln. Downloaded via googlebooks.
- ^ To imply is "to involve or indicate by inference, association or necessary consequence rather than by direct statement", the contemporary use of 'infer' is slightly different. Webster's states that Sir Thomas More (1533) was the first to use the two words "in a sense close in meaning", and "Both of these uses of infer coexisted without comment until sometime around the end of World War I". cf Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary, Merriam-Webster Inc, Springfield, MA, ISBN 0-87779-508-8.
- ^ Hamilton 1860:241-242
- ^ First usage of the phrase was probably James (1890); for example, Merriam-Webster's 9th Collegiate dictionary cites 1890 as the first usage. But James was not necessarily the first to assert the concept. Furthermore, whereas James uses the phrase "the stream of thought" throughout his 1890 (he dedicates an entire chapter IX to "The Stream of Thought"), in the 689 pages of text he offers just nine instances of "stream of consciousness", in particular in consideration of the "soul".
- ^ James, William (1890), The Principles of Psychology. ed. George A. Miller, Harvard University Press, 1983, ISBN 0-674-70625-0
- ^ Baars, Bernard (1997), In the Theater of Consciousness New York: Oxford University Press
- ^ "There is no stream of consciousness". 2002-03-25. Retrieved 2007-11-05.
- ^ Dalton, J. W. The unfinished theatre, JCS, 4 (4), 1997, pp. 316-18
- ^ Elitzur, A. C. Why don't we know what Mary knows? Baars' reversing the problem of qualia. JCS, 4 (4), 1997, pp.319-24
- ^ Robinson, Richard (2009). "Exploring the "Global Workspace" of Consciousness". PLOS Biology. 7 (3): e1000066. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1000066. PMC 2656553. PMID 20076729.
- ^ Wilson, Leigh, 2001. May Sinclair The Literary Encyclopedia
- ^ Oxford Dictionary of Literary Terms, p.212.
This page was last edited on 14 March 2024, at 17:48