Control of Action and Philosophy Behind the Mind

Hello, my name is Lane M. Lasarsky and I am currently enrolled at Loyola University of Chicago. It has been of philosophical discussion whether or not the body is a puppet of the mind. Obviously without the nervous system the mammalian would cease to exist, but how fast do we truly become aware of our conscious decision? What specifically determines consciousness is still a debate for the arts. However, science has come up with an ample amount of evidence in hopes of making this debate more salient. The researchers of this field of study created a research group to test the hypothesis of whether or not consciousness is too late in order to be aware of the predetermined action set forth by the inner workings of the mind. As stated by lead researcher named Guggisberg, “Participants report being conscious of their decisions only at the time of final intention formation, just before the primary motor cortex starts executing the chosen action.” (2014). This is indicative, with statistical significance that the pre motor cortex, through the observance of fMRI, does in fact play a deterministic role in the outcome of motor reflex and decision making.

 

This article is reflective on a seminar discussion I attended this semester at Loyola University Chicago. Led by professor Vukov on relating this philosophical debate to the arrival of awareness prior to deterministic on set of neural circuitry. His postulations and presentation are aligned with this current medical article, providing evidence that awareness followings a curved process as where the neural circuitry follows a binary reaction. It takes time to process these binary functions, but we eventually gain awareness as to the decision that has been determined. This concept is related to what the researchers call the “Libet Clock”. However, the researches state that the Libet Clock is a problematic model and rather than stages of gained awareness, it is gradual on set of awareness. Guggisberg states “However, as shown above, the decision for a movement does not abruptly appear in a binary manner, but is gradually constructed. Hence, the Libet paradigm imposes a translation of the continuous tendency to opt for a movement to a binary measure" (2014).(2014).

(Fig 4.)

(Figure 4., Guggisberg et al. 2014) This is the representation of what the researchers are alluding to as the Libet Clock. This model requires the transformation of the uninterrupted experience of consciousness to a binary set time, in so this may cause unwarranted interruptions within the intention onset. The representation is here to demonstrate how our neural circuitry does in fact fire much sooner than us becoming aware of the possible outcomes and decisions we may think we made.

 

In the scheme of neuroscience, this debate is the perfect example of the beauty this field provides with the melting pot of a spectrum of programs. It is relevant to the understanding of judgment and decision making through the tools of science and the philosophy. We are all who we are in the end and are made up of the decision that we make. The brain behind those eyes does in fact determine the person of character you will become. Just remember always think before you act.

Works Cited

 

Guggisberg, A. G., & Mottaz, A. (2013). Timing and awareness of movement decisions: does consciousness really come too late? Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 7, 385. http://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2013.00385

 

Soon, C. S., Brass, M., Heinze, H., & Haynes, J. (2008). Unconscious determinants of free decisions in the human brain. Nature Neuroscience,11(5), 543-545. doi:10.1038/nn.2112