I'm arguing against the strength of your statements based on methodologically unsound experiments that do not "very very clearly indicate" anything beyond pose a few questions for which there are several different hypothetical answers. All of which have zero evidence behind them.
Similarly, the initial comment of 'does the brain know what the brain is doing. The answer so far does not seem to be "yes."' is misleadingly suggesting there is a shred of evidence supporting that the answer is 'no' or that the answer is 'not yes'. There are no answers so far, just questions.
If anything, there are more unified consciousness hypotheses than otherwise, although if you refer back to my original reply I did not make this assertion: 'I think the correct statement is "so far the answer is we don't know"'
> It is not "paradoxical" but yes it does conflict with some reported experience.
> Regarding addiction, it is very, very commonly reported that addicts will go into "autopilot" like states while satisfying their addictions and only "emerge" when they have to face consequences of their behaviors. Again, subjectively reported, but so is the experience of unitary consciousness! If we cannot trust one then we shouldn't take it as granted that we can trust the other.
The dopamine reward system understanding (which by the way is probably the most well-validated and widely believed model in neurobiology) provides a rational explanation for addiction.
You haven't explained what is self-contradictory, that a few case reports exist of patients claiming they went in and out of consciousness? That's not a contradiction.
The split brain experiments clearly indicate exactly what I said they clearly indicate. To refresh: "that different parts of the brain can independently conduct behavior and gain knowledge independently of other parts".
From your own linked article: "In short, callosotomy leads to a broad breakdown of functional integration ranging from perception to attention."
If the dopamine reward system is the full answer, then what explains drug addicts anguishing about their addiction while simultaneously actively seeking out their next hit? What part of the brain is producing the anguish if the whole behavior is conclusively described by the dopamine reward system?
Breakdown of functional integration =/= different parts of the brain can independently conduct behavior and gain knowledge.
Still not sure what the contradiction is, is it regret now? Cause that isn’t contradictory.
It’s pretty simple, drugs feel really good when you take them so a single consciousness prioritizes that feeling over long term interests. When one is not taking them and facing the consequences of those decisions they feel bad. To make the bad feelings go away one takes more drugs and the cycle repeats.
Similarly, the initial comment of 'does the brain know what the brain is doing. The answer so far does not seem to be "yes."' is misleadingly suggesting there is a shred of evidence supporting that the answer is 'no' or that the answer is 'not yes'. There are no answers so far, just questions.
If anything, there are more unified consciousness hypotheses than otherwise, although if you refer back to my original reply I did not make this assertion: 'I think the correct statement is "so far the answer is we don't know"'
> It is not "paradoxical" but yes it does conflict with some reported experience.
Rather than belabour the experiment results and implications here is a great peer-reviewed article by experts in the field: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7305066/
> Regarding addiction, it is very, very commonly reported that addicts will go into "autopilot" like states while satisfying their addictions and only "emerge" when they have to face consequences of their behaviors. Again, subjectively reported, but so is the experience of unitary consciousness! If we cannot trust one then we shouldn't take it as granted that we can trust the other.
The dopamine reward system understanding (which by the way is probably the most well-validated and widely believed model in neurobiology) provides a rational explanation for addiction.
You haven't explained what is self-contradictory, that a few case reports exist of patients claiming they went in and out of consciousness? That's not a contradiction.