A Further Review of ‘Orch OR’ Theory: The Universe in Consciousness
June 1, 2015 DOI: 10.14704/nq.2015.13.2.834 (opens in new tab) via Semantic Scholar
Summary
AI-generated from the abstractA critique argues that Hameroff and Penrose's 'Orch OR' theory of consciousness is fundamentally limited because it adopts an ultra-reductive approach that ignores the holistic view of consciousness as primary, which has been the most historically enduring perspective. The critique notes that the 2014 review omitted recent theories of an ontologically real nonlocal information field, which represent a major step toward the holistic view. The authors reconsider reductive assumptions about physicalism, quantum wavefunction reduction, the mind/brain relationship, panpsychism, and the structure of the universe from a holistic standpoint.
Study at a glance
| Characteristics | Theoretical or philosophical paper |
|---|---|
| Keywords | Psychology Philosophy |
| Key finding | Argues that Hameroff and Penrose's ultra-reductive approach makes the nature of consciousness unknowable and that their review omitted the holistic view and recent theories of a nonlocal information field. |
Abstract
According to Hameroff and Penrose’s 2014 review of their ‘Orch OR’ theory, “The nature of consciousness, the mechanism by which it occurs in the brain, and its ultimate place… are unknown.” We propose that these issues are unknowable in their ultra-reductive approach. Their review completely left out the holistic view of consciousness as primary, even though it has been the most enduring view throughout history. Also, their review overlooked recent theories of an ontologically real nonlocal information field, a major step toward the holistic view. Reductive assumptions about physicalism, quantum wavefunction reduction, the mind/brain relationship, panpsychism, and the structure of the universe are reconsidered in light of the holistic view.