The age old question of consciousness begs to understand the foundational mechanisms behind the versatile and deeply misunderstood concept that is conscious. A number of ancient philosophers explored the qualities behind its nature and shaped its question of being to reveal its many aspects and unknown wonder. From Aristotle on the soul, to Gautama on Buddhism, to Descartes on conscientia, it took the exploration of the space by diverse thinkers who took an array of curious approaches to give latter society a functional understanding of its elementary properties and an opportunity to study them in a more objective, empirical matter through neuroscience, cognitive science, and biopsychology studies, experiments, and test. The period from 1780 to 1910 can be considered the Golden Age of consciousness studies, filled with empirical findings. Where those findings are enlightening verse redundant is quite debatable, however what isn’t is the fact in any scientific or curious space, a learner must constantly invoke near accurate and empirically led frameworks of perceiving the subject that has yet to be considered by previous studies. Ned Joel Block, an American philosopher focused on philosophy of mind and who has made important contributions to the understanding of consciousness and the philosophy of cognitive science, managed to do just that.

Block, now a professor of philosophy and psychology at New York University, undertook the study of consciousness with an open mind and a new perception. Through his revision, the researcher deemed there are two elementary properties of consciousness that comprise the sentience we experience life through today. The two properties entitled Phenomenal and Access Consciousness. The questions that sprouted through the discovery of these so-called fragments of consciousness are relatively endless. How do these properties differ? How do they parallel? How do we experience the two? Can we experience one exempt from the other? If so, which property exempt from which? Might one be, for all intensive purposes, dependent on the other? Or are both mutually exclusive? Mutually dependent? Are the properties equally ambiguous and curious in nature? Do we know more about one than another? What are the implications of this discovery in modern day consciousness research? How might Block regard his finding’s effects? This paper gives life to these questions and offers another thinker's approach to understanding Block’s Consciousness.

The Essence of Consciousness: Introduction to Consciousness: Phenomenal and Access Consciousness - 1

To begin philosophizing the answers to the many questions aforementioned, one must first truly understand the nature behind these elementary properties of consciousness, starting with the less complex Phenomenal Consciousness. The standard view of the wonder of consciousness is quite phenomenal itself. It comprises the 'qualia' experience. That is, what it is like to be. Qualia encompasses general experience– what it is to see and smell, laugh and breathe, bore and chore, rest and tire. The first and most introductory sensations of being, that which visually swarm you at first crack of an open eyelid in the morning, audibly swarm you at the edge of 77th and Park Ave, odorously greet you with spices and warmth at the scent of your first home cooked meal since off to college, gustable greet you when you finally tear that meal apart, and tangibly greet you at the feel of the crisp pages of a freshly opened novel.

The true value in Block's distinction of these elementary properties of consciousness is with properly entitled phenomena there can be less misunderstanding of consciousness than one would see in Frued’s earlier perception of conscious and unconscious states. Freud leads a philosophy that aspects of consciousness operate with the experencer’s awareness and others function unconsciously to that awareness. Block figures, with this line of thinking there can very well exist elements of the mind that are unconscious to an experience that might be phenomenal in function. Recall the medical mystery of blindsight, for example. In blindsight, a patient might have a phenomenal consciousness of sight, that is understanding of what it is like to see and perceive alongside all the visual stimuli that comes with it. However, that phenomenal consciousness might go unconscious to that participant due to failures in the functional brain’s ability to properly process and visualize that stimuli. That stimuli, however, did not go unperceived or non-phenomenally processed. That perception might simply have been lost somewhere in translation. When these new variables are introduced to the study of consciousness, one gets a better understanding of the mind’s nature in relation to the functional brain, otherwise known as the infamous mind-body problem. It may very well be that the immaterial mind has recollection of said stimuli whilst the physical brain has functional limitations on transferring that stimuli’s response in a physical manner. Considering the neuroscientific makeup of the brain highlights how first ordered perception permits us to ignore procedural steps in consciousness, getting the notion that a stimulus renders a visual response in the occipital lobe before anywhere else locationally in the brain. However, upon research methods completed in brainwaves and cognitive neuroscience, one learns a visual stimulus activates the amygdala before ever being processed by the occipital lobe. The amygdala plays an important role in memory, learning, and emotion, and is causally speculated to be deeply tied with the immaterial mind, whereas the occipital lobe is quite physical in function.

The Essence of Consciousness: Phenomenal Consciousness - 2

Since Phenomenal Consciousness has successfully been explained and its limitations in the functional mind explored, its mate, Access Consciousness, can be examined accordingly. Access Consciousness, the more complex elementary property of consciousness, has a layer of reflective depth that goes unfamiliar to Phenomenal Consciousness. To experience Consciousness through Access is to reason and reflect on an externally or internally rooted stimuli. That is a stimulus provided by the external world– sound, sight, taste, touch, smell– or the internal world– thoughts, thoughtful words, thoughtful sounds, ideas, and concepts that have arisen internal to the being in question and likely originates in the immaterial space of the mind as opposed to the physical space of the outer world, even if the stimuli is a remembrance of an outer world experience. This concept of second level cognition, that is reasoning and rational control of action, brings into light the questions of a plethora of deeply metaphysical philosophical phenomena and ongoing topics of discussion. These being free will, disciplined action, intentional thought, positive thinking, rational control, morality, identity theory, narrative consciousness, the ‘hard’ and ‘easy’ problem of Chalmers, and many and much more. There is a reason why these concepts cannot be viewed phenomenally and are strictly brought to life when one introduces the concept of introspection, even in regards to external causes. This layer of introspection is what gives Access Consciousness its representative nature.

Defined by Block as a consuming system whereas phenomenal is a productive, automatic system of consciousness, Access Consciousness is far more the iterative and free formed property of consciousness. If Phenomenal Consciousness encompasses the ‘what is’ of experience, Access Consciousness entitles the ‘how’ and ‘why’ of experience. ‘How’ startling the morning alarm was, ‘Why’ each cab is beeping yet stationary, ‘How’ tasty the rice and stew smells, ‘Why’ smelling stew is only a mere shadow of the joy taste stew gives, and ‘How’ wonderful that the feel of fresh pages is always the same. This is the aspect of consciousness that diversifies organisms as one may experience the same stimuli phenomenally, but have particularly unique Access processing of the stimuli. It wouldn’t be a stretch to say this could very well be the property that gives all of nature its individualism. Block mentions a difference between these two notions of consciousness, phenomenology and accessibility on the content of the relevant conscious experiences. Access-conscious mental states make a person conscious of something— representational content. The senses produce perceptual representations that are broadcast—in the sense of made available—to consuming systems such as systems of perceptual categorization, reasoning, planning, evaluation of alternatives, decision making, voluntary direction of attention, memory, reporting, and more generally rational control of action.

The Essence of Consciousness: Access Consciousness - 3

The previously stated descriptions of the properties of consciousness almost allude to the occurrence of an organism being phenomenal-conscious without the second layer of awareness making them conscious of the stimuli. That is to say without access-consciousness. But can one property truly exist without the other? Block is not the only thinker that has theorized in this regard, as there has long been conversation concerning the aforementioned mind and body problem. That is the question of how does mindful consciousness and the physical representation that is the brain relate? It is a profoundly dumbing, unresolved question. However, there have been adopted many theories that aim to solve the mystery of consciousness.

To begin, there is Substance Dualism introduced by Rene Descartes. This thinking suggests that the mind and body are fundamentally distinct substances, and thus they may exist separately. Questions arose in regards to the dual substance interaction that would be necessary for beings to experience joint forms of consciousness. Idealism arose with an ideology that only the mind is real and fundamental and the physical is a mere representation of certain mental experiences. While this view is often riddled improbable, I feel it's the closest to accurate of all. Next, what I perceive the least probable, Materialism and/or Physicalism. The theory suggests only the physical is real and implies the mind is causally impotent. While it is the most popular theory due to its thinking the mind can be reduced and explained in physical terms, it does just that. Reduce the divinity within the curious properties of the mind for human comprehension. While it solves the ‘easy’ problem of where the brain and body relate on a physical locational scale, it has problems explaining the explanatory gap that is true consciousness known as Chalmers ‘Hard’ Problem. Finally, there exists dual aspect monism, which carries the view that both mind and body are real and fundamental, thus they exist in all things. Reality must include the two, and further the mind might be fundamental, but not universal. While I agree with many aspects of this theory, I feel it simply reiterates the principles of idealism in a more digestible manner. This is beneficial however because it introduces the concept of isolating each variable and takes a deep understanding of how they do not function the same. Individual minds, or I would stretch to say, access-conscious minds and experiences are not universal in the way that physical and phenomenal experiences are. There holds a physical truth and remembrance to each being who takes shape organically. The question arises at which, the mind/body arose first?

In the same breath, can one exist without the other? I argue that Access came before Phenomenal consciousness and a being can be at either end of the spectrum, experiencing stimuli phenomenally with limited access or accessibly with little phenomenology, when one merges the thinking of Block’s Access Theory and Idealism.

The Essence of Consciousness: One without Other - 4

In light of my previous argument, I find it important to preface that I find it less important to theorize over the different ways one form of consciousness can live without the other. In my view, any organism has the potential to go either way. What I do think is important to emphasize is that to truly be living one must still be in the realm of both. To be is to be exponential in nature. Even if a being has a fraction of a fraction of presence of access consciousness and is near fully existing within the physical and phenomenological realm, their fraction access-consciousness exist all the same and if ever expanded on will remember its minimization. Vise versa, as if a being is living fully in the access-conscious, their physical reality is minimized, however there are less dire consequences to the lack of physical experience once a thinker has true perspective. Think the effect of losing vision– the emotional blow of losing the ability to see a loved one or a sunrise might sting more than the mere visual limitation. The reflection on that physical is where the true pain, or joy, in anything is sourced. And isn’t it quite divine, the concept of a being having range to this emotional landscape without physical prompt from the external world? Visualize a tree, no physical organs that can functionalize processes like sight or verbal reasoning. However, the organisms are forever connected to the very grounding that is our physical earth. The chemicals that they output humans ingest for inhalation and the excess that humans exhale is the properties in which trees ingest. They don’t call attention to themselves, speak, call on, judge, or control life, but they are observant of it and ever present within it. They exist as very access-conscious beings with a lackluster physical appearance to some.

I like to consider beings on the deeply accessible end as soulful beings and that on the deeply phonological end, soulless beings. While this sounds like the demonization of the physical landscape, it's more so an admittance of the slower frequency that is found within the physical world. In the same way one cannot perceive the speed of light, it is intensely difficult to understand the word from an external view instead of beginning to understand the internal landscape of an individual mind. Furthermore, there is deep purpose in the negative and lower frequencies of existence as there cannot be light without darkness and oftentime the dark is where the many efficient processes take place. This is all to say Access Consciousness is far more ambiguous in nature than Phenomenal Consciousness.

The circular question that is true consciousness has arisen again, in the form of how to tackle the ambiguity that is Access Consciousness. Reference again the merging of Access Theory and Idealism, only the immaterial mind is foundational and the physical landscape, while real, is a projection of mental processes. What controls how much of access is projected to the physical is an organism's choice and will to see.

The Essence of Consciousness: Access is Ambiguous - 5

Is this to say there may be ‘real things’ we choose not to see? That some of the things we do see aren’t entirely real but willfully brought into the physical as the immaterial mind is a space of generation and imagination. That one may be able to guide their physical representations of truth by monitoring their chosen internal truth? It is known that thought drives action. What exactly does this mean to the approach of studying consciousness and answering the age old mystery? How can this perspective be taken advantage of to facilitate some much needed wellness?

I think when research in consciousness begins to regard things from inside-out as opposed to outside-in, there will be real progress made in understanding what exactly is the pure energy that is fueling all life– that is human souls, animalistic souls, nature, chemicals, and wider iotas of existence. Ultimately, the answers are found within. We know, we’ve simply forgotten. I supposed I understand why consciousness research has been done in the circular way for so long as it's easy to begin the search in what some presume is the only form of universal consciousness, that is the physical experience of consciousness that everyone around us– in sight, in this version of the world, can claim equal experiences in, but when one does deep analyzation they begin to realize that however individual our immaterial mind of access conscious reasoning is, the root of what is pushing our lust for life is that same derivative of pure energy. This is the reason that mental help resources reiterate the phrase ‘You are not alone.’ This is the reason a whole theater will have the same heart wrenching reaction to the puppy dying in a horror movie. This is why strangers can become friends, to lovers, to enemies, to strangers all over again. This is why there are tales as old as time. It’s amazing how much we know about the unknown, that we simply haven’t realized, or are bound to realize over and over again.

At the end of the day, the understanding of consciousness cannot be regarded without the understanding of the laws of space and time, and the matter within them. I am no physicist or mathematician, but I lean on the notion that time is simultaneous and to exist is to encompass all of time and space. It’s why we love truly in forever and always. That everything is more or less connected and there simply exist layers of being. Derivatives of things. And one can allow themselves, or a derivative of themselves, to be bound to a particular vessel of space, a body and a setting, in a particular fragment of time. And the others whose souls call to do the same will exist in their own individual bubble of space and time, that has been done before and will be done again. What changes is how much an organism, an example of life, chooses to remember. What is utmost importance is awareness in the where and when of one’s current being. Understanding that to be where we are is to be surrounded by unconsciousness, which is inherently dangerous. And our physical reality is representing as much and communicating that spiritual truth.

The Essence of Consciousness: Implications on Study of Consciousness - 6

Bibliography

Block, Ned, Paradox and cross purposes in recent work on Consciousness, 2001

Block, Ned, Concepts Of Consciousness, Functions, and Representation: Collected Papers, Volume 1

Chalmers, David Some Contemporary Theories of Consciousness: The Hard Problem of Consciousness

Snodgrass, John PSYCH447 Special Topics In Consciousness: Lecture 2 Recording/Slides

Snodgrass, John PSYCH447 Special Topics In Consciousness: Lecture 3 Recording/Slides

Snodgrass, John PSYCH447 Special Topics In Consciousness: Lecture 4 Recording/Slides