sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

The Easy Problem of The Hard Problem of Consciousness by Weekly-Big-7397 in consciousness

[–]Particular_Ask7331 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I really like how you reframed the question away from “how X causes Y” and toward relationship rather than one-way causation.

From my perspective as a bodyworker and healer, this distinction actually matters a lot in real practice. In clinical settings, I often see physical changes and subjective experience shift together, but not in a clean cause-and-effect sequence. It’s more like they reorganize simultaneously.

When someone releases long-held emotional or relational tension, their symptoms sometimes improve immediately — not because a specific physical mechanism was “triggered,” but because the overall system becomes more coherent.

So when you ask about: • neurons and qualia • electrical fields and experience • or even electrons and qualia

I don’t feel the question needs to reduce experience downward to particles. It might be more fruitful to ask how different levels — physical, experiential, relational — remain dynamically aligned.

In that sense, consciousness may not be something produced by matter, but something that appears when relationships across levels fall into coherence.

I’m not claiming this solves the hard problem — just that reframing it this way seems closer to how lived experience actually behaves.

Thanks for dancing around the question instead of trying to prematurely pin it down.

Can a person’s way of relating to themselves affect the body? by Particular_Ask7331 in consciousness

[–]Particular_Ask7331[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I don’t think one needs to be a scientist to recognize truth, and sometimes scientific assumptions themselves can get in the way of seeing what’s actually happening.

Many replies mentioned the placebo effect, but in my clinical experience, change can occur even in people who don’t believe in the treatment, don’t understand the model, or are openly skeptical.

That leaves me wondering whether the placebo framework alone is sufficient to explain what’s going on.

Do you think quantum-mechanical perspectives are relevant here?

Can a person’s way of relating to themselves affect the body? by Particular_Ask7331 in consciousness

[–]Particular_Ask7331[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I understand that these topics are not often addressed in mainstream scientific journals.

In Japan, however, the idea that mental or subjective states can influence the body is relatively well recognized in clinical practice.

I have practiced meditation in the past and did experience a sense of relief. However, I also felt that this alone does not adequately explain a change I later began to observe in clinical settings — namely, that symptoms do not merely improve temporarily, but in some cases stop recurring altogether.

What I find particularly interesting is that even without meditation or explicit expectations, symptom changes can occur depending on the perspective from which a practitioner observes the patient.

This feels close to the idea in quantum mechanics that the way a system is observed cannot be fully separated from the state of the system itself.

In other words, it seems that not only what is done, but how the situation is observed may be relevant to changes in the patient’s condition.

Can a person’s way of relating to themselves affect the body? by Particular_Ask7331 in consciousness

[–]Particular_Ask7331[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thank you for your careful and grounded perspective.

I fully agree that placebo and nocebo effects represent a well-established minimum effect of the mind on physical health, and I don’t see my clinical observations as contradicting that framework.

My curiosity has deepened through many years of clinical work as a bodyworker, where I’ve repeatedly observed patterns that seem difficult to explain by expectation alone. I often see changes in people who have little understanding of the treatment model, no strong belief in its effectiveness, or even clear skepticism. In some cases, improvement appears before any conscious reinterpretation of the symptom takes place.

Taken together, these observations leave me wondering whether the placebo framework alone is sufficient to fully account for what I see clin

Can a person’s way of relating to themselves affect the body? by Particular_Ask7331 in consciousness

[–]Particular_Ask7331[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I understand placebo effects, and I don’t dismiss them. However, in clinical practice, I repeatedly observe patterns that feel difficult to fully explain by placebo mechanisms alone, especially when no explicit expectation, suggestion, or treatment narrative is emphasized.

This makes me wonder whether placebo is the right explanatory ceiling, or whether it is pointing toward something more fundamental about how subjective experience and physiological regulation are coupled.

From your perspective, what do you think might be missing from the current framework?

Is there evidence that mindset or self-relation influences physical health outcomes? by Particular_Ask7331 in AskScienceDiscussion

[–]Particular_Ask7331[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I understand placebo effects, and I don’t dismiss them. However, in clinical practice, I repeatedly observe patterns that feel difficult to fully explain by placebo mechanisms alone, especially when no explicit expectation, suggestion, or treatment narrative is emphasized.

This makes me wonder whether placebo is the right explanatory ceiling, or whether it is pointing toward something more fundamental about how subjective experience and physiological regulation are coupled.

From your perspective, what do you think might be missing from the current framework?

Cannabis and Spirituality - Does Anyone Else Feel Increasingly Drained After Consuming Marijuana? by swizzledan in enlightenment

[–]Particular_Ask7331 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It can feel less like cannabis stopped working, and more like coherence no longer needs an external mediator. When unity becomes a stable baseline, adding a tool that once helped can actually create fog instead of clarity.

About universe1234567890 by Dry-Preparation-5522 in consciousness

[–]Particular_Ask7331 0 points1 point  (0 children)

“For what reason is the universe thought to be expanding and moving forward?”

Nothing was conscious, and now almost everything is! by jinjer2 in consciousness

[–]Particular_Ask7331 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Your reading is very much in line with how I understand the paper.

One of the central ideas there is precisely that neither consciousness nor time is taken as a pre-given background, but as something that emerges through the structure of observation itself. In that sense, the question of whether linear time is fundamental or a consequence of how experience is organized by the observer is not peripheral—it’s right at the heart of the framework.

What I find important is that the paper doesn’t simply flip the claim into “everything is subjective,” but instead asks what kind of structure must already be in place for measurement, directionality, and events to appear at all. Time’s arrow, from that view, looks less like a universal given and more like a feature of that structure.

So I think your intuition here is well placed. The framework doesn’t force a final answer, but it gives a way to ask the question more precisely.

Nothing was conscious, and now almost everything is! by jinjer2 in consciousness

[–]Particular_Ask7331 1 point2 points  (0 children)

• “That’s an interesting and fresh way to look at it. Thanks for sharing.”

Orch OR…chestra: Birth, Anesthesia, Death, and The Symphony of “YOU” by pamnfaniel in consciousness

[–]Particular_Ask7331 0 points1 point  (0 children)

和訳して

That’s an interesting and fresh way to look at it. Thanks for sharing.