Brain Research

Somebody’s observations on that what occurs in his own head can be “objective” or “subjective”.

“Objective”

sticking to the facts; not influenced by own feelings or prejudices;
not “subjective”.

“Subjective”

belonging to one individual subject; relating to, departing from,
belonging to the contemplating “I” only.

Relentless striving for objectivity, while:

• building a theory
• scrutinizing that theory, and
• testing that what that theory predicts via measurements......

was the key to the spectacular achievements of physicists during the last centuries.

In an almost pathological urge to reap similar achievements, neuroscientists:

• banned the idea that somebody’s observations on that what occurs in his own head can be objective, and
• adopted the idea that objective information on that what happens in the head of a person can only be achieved via measurements..... with “machines”.

Somebody's observations on that what happens in his own head can be objective however.

Seeing these facts, it is most likely that:

• very many observations on the functioning of the human brain have been made over the course of the last decades, and
• that the results of these observations have not reached (or been acknowledged by) the community of neuroscientists.

This might explain why no theory seems to exist about what happens in the brain of a human being.

History

In the mid 1980’s Benjamin Libet designed an experiment in which:

• a test person was asked to push a button, and
• in which something of that what happened in the head of that test-person was measured in the form of an electro encephalogram ( “machine”….!)

Such a test person was told to be free to choose the point in time at which he wanted to push that button.

Furthermore he was asked to indicate the point in time at which he became aware of his urge/ intention to push that button.

The following was recorded:

• The time passed between:

  • the point in time at which the test-person became aware of his urge/ intention to push the button, and
  • the point in time at which the button pushing was realised

  used to be about 0.2 seconds.

• The time passed between:

  • the point in time at which his brain activities, involving the button pushing, started according to the electro encephalogram (EEC), and
  • the point in time at which the button pushing was realised

  used to be on average 0.5 seconds.

This means that brain activities to prepare for this button pushing were measured to start 0.3 seconds before the test person became aware of his urge/ intent to push that button.

This leads to the conclusion that the decision of that test person to push that button could:

• either have been taken during the 0.3 seconds before he became aware of his urge/ intent to push that button,
• or could have been taken during the 0.2 seconds after he became aware of his urge/ intent to push that button

Not Libet, but several other neuroscientists:

• decided that the decision to push the button was taken before the test person became aware of his urge/ intent to push that button,
• concluded from this that such a thing as “Free Will” does not exist, and
• wrote bestsellers with titles like “Free Will does not exist”.

Future

Now, 20 years after the experiments of Benjamin Libet with the “machine” EEC and 10 years after similar experiments by John-Dylan Haynes with the “machine” fMRI, prominent neuroscientists admit that they can’t distinguish between:

• brain activities “preparing for” a physical action of a test person, and
• other brain activities of that test person

on their fMRI “machines”.

It would therefore be helpful for neuroscientists to know my answers to the questions:

• What is the description of the “Phenomenon Objective”?
• Which role does the Phenomenon Objective play in the functioning of the human (animal) brain?
• What is the phenomenon “consciousness”?
• Which role does the phenomenon “consciousness” play in the functioning of the human (animal) brain?
• What is the phenomenon “paying attention to something”?
• Which role does the phenomenon “paying attention to something” play in the functioning of the human (animal) brain?

These answers are likely to:

• enable neuroscientists to understand what they see on their “machines”, and/ or
• tell them what they should see on their machines, and/ or
• tell them what kind of machine should be developed for them to be able to see what they should see - but don’t see on their machines these days.