- If you think about it,
consciousness is really everything. Consciousness is everything we know, everything we experience. But the mystery at the
heart of consciousness is why in this universe
that seems to be teeming with non-conscious matter
somehow gets configured

in such a way where suddenly it's having a felt experience from the inside? Suddenly, there's something that it's like to be that matter. And there's a lot that's
happened in modern neuroscience that suggests that our intuitions

about consciousness are wrong. And so, if it's possible that we've been thinking about
consciousness the wrong way, that it's not something that arises out of complex processing in brains, is it possible that consciousness is a much more basic phenomenon in nature

and is essentially pervading everything? So is much more like gravity, then we can imagine that all
types of processing in nature could include some type
of felt experience. I'm Annaka Harris, and I
write about the science and philosophy of consciousness.

I have a book called
"Conscious: A Brief Guide to the Fundamental Mystery of the Mind." And I have a docuseries
titled "Lights On." There's no perfect definition
for consciousness in the way that I'm using it here, in
the most fundamental sense.

And so it's useful to use
Thomas Nagel's description from his essay "What is
it Like to Be a Bat?" He illustrates a bat that is moving through the world using sonar. So it's making sounds, the sounds are bouncing off
the walls and the trees,

and it gets a picture of its
external world in the same way that we get a picture of the
external world through vision. But you can imagine that the
actual felt experience of that is very different from our
experience of using vision.

So when I use the word "consciousness," I'm not talking about
higher-order thinking or complex thought, or
things that we think of in terms of human consciousness. But when I use the word "consciousness," I'm talking about awareness,
felt experience, sentience

interchangeably, to talk about this more fundamental
sense of consciousness. And this can exist without thought. It could exist in a very simple organism that is not capable of thought. But even in our human experience, we think of a very young
child or an infant,

we know that there's
still felt experiences - feeling pressure against the skin, hearing sounds in the room, the experience of heat or cold. And there's clearly consciousness there, and it doesn't necessarily entail thought. So the study of consciousness has largely,

if not entirely, been
relegated to neuroscience, which makes a lot of sense because we have assumed that the organisms that are conscious are the
ones that are most like us. And we're complex systems. The brain is the most complex
system in the universe,

that we know of. And so we assume that consciousness arises out of that complex processing. But some of these intuitions
that we're relying on to make that assumption
have been overturned by modern neuroscience and have
been shown to be illusions.

So when we're trying to think more clearly and more creatively about consciousness, there are two questions
that I think really get at the heart of where these
intuitions are misleading us. Number one, is there
any evidence we can find

from outside an organism,
or outside a system, that will conclusively tell us that that organism entails
conscious experiences? And the second question is, is consciousness doing something? Does it serve a function? Is it driving our behavior in
the way that we feel it is?

And our intuitive answer
to both of these questions is a resounding yes. But, surprisingly, it's easier to puncture these intuitions,
or to shake them up, than you might think. Number one, if I go pick
up my friend at the airport

who I haven't seen in years, and I see a big smile on her face and she's running toward me, everything I see in her
behavior in that moment are very good clues that she's conscious. But we know it's possible
for there to be no behavior

coming out of a system, nothing
to detect from the outside when there's a full human
conscious experience present. There was a writer for French Elle, his name was Jean-Dominique Bauby, and he had a condition
called locked-in syndrome.

And this occurs when someone
experiences brain damage, either due to a stroke
or to an external injury, and the entire body becomes paralyzed so that someone is no longer able to move any part of their body,
yet they still retain a full conscious experience.

And he was in this state, although he had one point of mobility, he was able to move his left eyelid. And over time, they developed this technique for him spelling out words with certain patterns of blinks. And he ended up writing a beautiful memoir

titled "The Diving Bell and the Butterfly," and it took him 200,000 blinks to write that memoir. It's a great example of a person, an organism, a system in nature that is having such a full conscious experience,

as full as I am having right now with the ability to write and experience the world, but with no ability to move or communicate or exhibit any behavior that would tell us that this person is conscious. And so we can wonder if it's possible

that there are other systems in nature that simply aren't able to communicate or exhibit behavior that convinces us that consciousness is present in them. And our intuition regarding the second question is that, obviously, of course, our conscious experiences are affecting things.

If we encounter a bear or a lion in the wild, the feeling of fear is the thing that gets us to move so quickly out of the way, to act quickly to save our lives. But what we now understand about the brain

is that the experience of feeling fear is actually something that happens at the tail end of a sequence of processing, and that our bodies begin responding and moving to a dangerous situation much more quickly than we become aware of it. This is what neuroscientists refer to as binding processes.

Binding processes take in all of our perceptions, all of the information that comes in through our eyes and ears, through touch, and give us an experience of a present moment. So I often give the example of playing the piano.

If you press down on a piano key, you'll have the experience of feeling the key move down at the same moment that you see the key move down and in the same moment that you hear the tone. When, in actuality, all of these signals

move through the world at different amounts of time to get to your brain. They each take different amounts of time to be processed by the brain. The brain is taking in all of these inputs that are taking different amounts of time to reach the brain

and be processed by the brain, and then deliver them to your conscious experience as one single moment. And so those intuitions that consciousness is driving that type of behavior, we now know to be incorrect. So if the intuitions that led us to assume

that consciousness arises out of complex processing, namely in brains, are misleading us, we really have only two options for a starting place. Some of these systems are conscious, that consciousness arises out of complex processing. Or all of these systems are conscious

that consciousness is fundamental. What would that mean, and what kinds of questions would we ask, and how could we even study something like this scientifically? We might wonder if experiences can be shared between systems. If you think about Albert Einstein and the fact that he had intuitions for space-time

that no other human being had, and it took him more than a decade to explain this intuition
through mathematics and language, and to be able to communicate
what he was talking about to other scientists, let alone start to make scientific progress with it.

Is there some future science
where you might be able to actually share that intuition? We might wonder which types
of systems entail suffering. In terms of ethics, this is something we obviously care a lot about. We know now that when
dogs cry out in pain, 

they're feeling something
very similar to what we feel. And so it'd be interesting
to learn what other types of systems might experience
pain or suffering. Recently, when I was doing plant research, I went for a jog on this hiking trail, 

and I actually ran this
little thought experiment for myself, imagining that
all the plants along the trail were not plants but were
some type of creature feeling the world,
moving through the world. And just that little
exercise gave me a sense 

of how different we
might feel in the world if we understood that there
were many more conscious systems around us than we realized. - [Announcer] Want to dive deeper? Become a Big Think member and join our members-only community. Watch videos early and
unlock full interviews.

Science is shattering our intuitions about consciousness | Annaka Harris

Big Think is the leading source of expert-driven, actionable, educational content -- with thousands of videos, featuring experts ranging from Bill Clinton to Bill Nye, we help you get smarter, faster. Get actionable lessons from the world’s greatest thinkers & doers. Our experts are either disrupting or leading their respective fields. We aim to help you explore the big ideas and core skills that define knowledge in the 21st century, so you can apply them to the questions and challenges in your own life. Other Frequent contributors include Michio Kaku & Neil DeGrasse Tyson.

Head to bigthink.com for a multitude of articles just as informative and satisfying as our videos. New articles posted daily on a range of intellectual topics. ​Join Big Think+ to gain access to an immense library of content. It features insight from many of the most celebrated and intelligent individuals in the world today.

   - Subscribe for daily videos.
   - Business inquiries and fan suggestions welcome.

Big Think

의식의 근본적인 신비와 그 잠재적 만연성.

의식은 우리가 알고 경험하는 모든 것이지만, 겉으로 보기에 무의식적인 우주에서 의식의 기원은 미스터리입니다.

현대 신경과학은 의식에 대한 우리의 직관에 도전하며 의식이 이전에 생각했던 것보다 더 근본적인 것일 수 있음을 시사합니다.

중력과 마찬가지로 의식이 만물에 퍼져 있는 기본 현상일 가능성을 탐구합니다.

아나카 해리스와 의식의 과학과 철학에 대한 그녀의 연구를 소개합니다.

'의식'이라는 용어가 반드시 고차원적 사고가 아닌 인식, 느낌, 지각을 의미한다는 점을 명확히 설명합니다.

의식과 그 연구에 대한 도전적인 가정.

의식은 단순한 유기체에서도 생각 없이도 존재할 수 있는 인식, 느낌, 지각으로 정의됩니다.

의식에 대한 연구는 의식이 있는 유기체가 인간처럼 복잡하다는 가정 때문에 대부분 신경과학의 영역으로 밀려났습니다.

현대 신경과학은 복잡한 처리 과정에서 발생하는 의식에 대한 일부 직관을 착각으로 밝혀냈습니다.

두 가지 중요한 질문이 제기됩니다: 유기체에 의식의 외부 증거가 있는가, 그리고 의식은 어떤 기능을 하는가?

관찰 가능한 행동과 의식의 기능에 대한 직관적인 가정에 반박합니다.

행동이 의식을 나타내는 경우가 많지만, 락인 증후군의 경우 겉으로 드러나는 행동 없이도 완전한 의식적 경험이 존재할 수 있음을 보여줍니다.

거의 전신 마비 상태에서도 회고록을 쓴 장 도미니크 보비의 사례는 이 점을 잘 보여줍니다.

의식적인 경험이 행동을 이끈다는 직관도 도전받게 되는데, 우리 몸은 종종 의식적으로 두려움을 느끼기 전에 위험에 반응합니다.

신경과학에 따르면 공포감은 신체가 이미 위협에 반응하기 시작한 후에 발생하며, 이는 뇌의 결합 과정을 강조합니다.

의식의 본질에 대한 대안적 관점을 탐구합니다.

의식이 일부 시스템의 복잡한 처리에서 발생하거나 모든 시스템의 기본이 되는 두 가지 옵션이 제시됩니다.

시스템 간 경험 공유의 가능성과 어떤 시스템이 고통을 겪는지 이해하는 윤리적 함의에 대해 논의합니다.

인간과 비슷한 고통을 경험하는 개의 예를 들어 다른 시스템의 통증과 고통에 대한 의문을 제기합니다.

식물을 지각 있는 존재로 상상하는 사고 실험은 우리가 더 많은 의식 체계를 인식할 경우 세상에 대한 인식이 어떻게 달라질 수 있는지를 보여줍니다.

Science is shattering our intuitions about consciousness | Annaka Harris

Science is shattering our intuitions about consciousness | Annaka Harris

스크립트