So, what is consciousness? What is its relationship to the body? And does it continue after death? These questions are thousands of years old and combined make up what is known as The Hard Problem in philosophy. Its formal name is the Mind-Body Problem.
And a very difficult problem it is indeed. The essence of the problem is graphically illustrated in the above photo. Are you in your brain or more so in the body or both? Is your sense of self-awareness a stable, enduring thing or does it exist moment-by-moment as an ethereal construction of your nervous system much like a flame continues on until the fuel runs out? Like diamond that is also very hard to cut, The Hard Problem has many facets or possible solutions. We will first review The Hard Problem itself, quickly review most of the possible answers currently available, and then settle on a choice between two mutually-opposed positions: Naturalism and Supernaturalism (or, as it is known more officially, Non-Naturalism1). If you believe that consciousness is a result of organic processes, like the exhaust that comes out of your car when the motor is running, then you’re a Naturalist. The other position is that of Non-Naturalism (or Supernaturalism)—which posits that there is an immaterial reality that is co-existent with the material world. If you believe that human consciousness is a different thing altogether from physical objects and that consciousness continues on after the death of the body, then you are a Supernaturalist. Each position leads to very different interpretations about the nature of consciousness (Flanagan & Güzeldere, 1997).
There are actually many answers to The Hard Problem, but none of them completely succeed in definitively answering it. They are all in competition with one another in a waiting and watching game to see when and how the neurosciences finally determine the nature of consciousness. Until that time, there are many suitors offering to be the husband of a woman who as of yet is unmarried. These answers are known as mind-body theories and offer differing ways of understanding the mental and physical aspects of consciousness. They are divided into two major camps: Monism and Dualism2. Monism claims that all things are purely physical in nature (Physicalism) or Mental (Idealism) in that everything is non-physical. Dualistic theories pose that everything is composed of mental and physical substances (Jaworski, 2011).
Naturalism vs. Supernaturalism
Naturalism (monistic materialism) posits that all exists is made of material stuff and there is nothing else except material stuff. This is more broadly known as monism. Monism originated with the ancient Greek philosopher, Democritus, who believes all reality was composed of tiny particles called “atoms” which were indestructible. A more recent advocate of monism and perhaps the one most well known today is Baruch Spinoza (1632-1677), a contemporary of Rene Descartes (1596-1650). He believes that all reality was composed of material substances including God.
Naturalists believe that consciousness is equivalent to related neural processes. This known as neuroreductionism; meaning that all consciousness may be reduced down to neural activities. But there seem to be some features of consciousness that cannot be merely a function of neural networks such as the ability to conceive of an idea, make a choice, or savor the taste of an apple. Neuroreductionism falls short in accounting for these aspects.
Opposed to monism is dualism and persons who adhere to this are known as dualists. These are religious persons, some philosophers, and probably most of the human population who believe that humans are a combination of matter and spirit–the material and the non-material—and that consciousness continues on after death. This philosophical position is known as substance dualism in that matter and spirit are two different substances. Descartes was the most famous substance dualist and, while there are many different types of dualists, we will confine the present discussion to just the Cartesian type. Dualists have several key criticisms of neuroreductionism and monistic materialism. They believe that humans are much more than just their brains. They reason that consciousness emerges out of the interaction of the brain-body-environment, but fail to explain the power of self-agency (Glannon, 2009).
Finally, and just to further confuse an eternally confusing situation, there is another type of Supernaturalism called monistic idealism. This is the belief that all reality is an illusion. It is nothing more than a dream in the mind of God, so to speak. Monistic idealists don’t believe that matter, as we know it, really exists except as an illusion because everything that exists is all a spiritual substance. Their main proponent was Bishop George Berkeley (1685-1753) who believed that all existence was the spirit of God and everything that we experience are just mental ideas.
His view is also known as Immaterialism and, while it is not currently in philosophical vogue, his belief with the fact that all of our reality—including the reality of our bodies—is neurally-transduced; an electrical copy of reality, but the genuine reality itself.
Unfortunately, the idea that consciousness is a neural representation of sensory stimuli is very useful in explaining the mechanics of the appearance of consciousness, but can say very little really about where that experience comes from and where it will eventually go in the end.
The problem with both the Naturalists and the Non-Naturalists is that neither one can explain how consciousness comes about and how it can operate a physical body. The Naturalists offer the future promise of solving the problem while the Supernaturalists offer only a present and future unsolvable mystery. The Immaterialists believe they have solved the problem since all reality is the consciousness of God of which we are all but an infinitesimal manifestation. How consciousness and matter interact remains unknown, although advances are being made in the neurosciences. Descartes, himself a Supernaturalist, believed the solution was that the mind (soul) interacts with the body at the site of the pineal gland. If one thinks about Cartesian dualism to any extent, one eventually comes to the conclusion that it’s not a very good theory because it doesn’t explain how mental states are effected/affected by physical ones or how physical states are effected/affected by mental ones. This problem is known as the Explanatory Gap3 and several theories have been posed over the years to bridge this gap, so to speak (Levine, 1983).
If one believes in the materialist position then one ascribes to the Naturalist philosophy that there is no mind-soul per se; just side-effect of matter operating within the laws of physics. On the other hand, if you believe in a mind-soul, then you are in the philosophical camp of the Supernaturalists and are most likely a Cartesian dualist. What one believes about the nature of consciousness affects how they view themselves as conscious beings and, assuming their profession involves working with the human body, then how they approach their daily work as well.
Closing Thoughts
Why should holistic therapists be interested in this problem? After all, they are more allied to the medical sciences than religion or philosophy… or are they? The former may be true, but it is argued here that holistic therapists occupy an in-between zone between science and art. Many holistic therapists also practice different spiritual disciplines or study various psychospiritual techniques for self-improvement. Anyone who works as intimately with the body as do health professionals, particularly manual therapists, necessarily realizes (sooner or later) that they are part-healer, part-scientist, and part-shaman depending on the patient’s needs. Holistic thinking necessarily means gravitating toward the more spiritual and philosophical aspects of the human experience. From a somatopsychic perspective, to effect a change in the body is to effect a change in consciousness and vice versa. The body is either the soul or it is not, but either way, it makes no difference in the art of healing. Scientific method and spiritual thought are not always mutually exclusive, but often mutually enhancing.
Even though we have learned a great deal about the neural mechanics of body consciousness, we are left stuck in the Explanatory Gap of not knowing how consciousness arises or what it is or how it animates the body. One way of transcending the gap, at least for a little while, is to focus on body consciousness as a living experience. Conscious embodiment is the essence of being in the here-and-now and while it may not bring us an answer to The Hard Problem it gives the promise of living in joy. And, in the grand scheme of things, which one is ultimately more important?
Paul Shane, Ph.D., LMT
Director, Academic Content
Footnotes
1 I will use the term, Supernaturalism, in this lecture because it just pleases me to do so.
2 There are several answers that fall outside of Monism and Dualism such as Instrumentalism, Mental Pessimism, and Hylopmorphism. See Jaworski (2011).
3 Also known as the Cartesian Gap or Cartesian Divide.
References
Block, N., Flanagan, O., & Güzeldere, G. (Eds.) (1997). The Nature of Consciousness: Philosophical Debates. Boston, MA: The MIT Press.
Glannon, W. (2009). Our brains are not us. Bioethics 23(6), p. 321-329.
Jaworski, W. (2011). Philosophy of Mind: A Comprehensive Introduction. Chichester, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.
Knaup, M. (2018). Unity of Body and Soul or Mind-Bring-Being: Towards a Paradigm Shift in Modern Concepts of Personhood. Stuttgart, Germany: J.B. Metzler Verlag.
Levine, J. (1983). Materialism and qualia: The explanatory gap. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 64, p. 257-272.
Revised on 10-24-24.