doghouse

Yes, when we are sleeping we are unconscious. That was my point earlier.


If they are aware then they aren’t in a coma. The medical definition of coma is a state of sustained loss of consciousness that cannot be reversed by stimuli, including painful stimuli. That is, a coma implies the absence of both arousal and awareness.


Then you are using the term “coma-like state” to mean a state that appears similar to a coma but is not a coma.


In other words you were temporarily paralyzed. Loss of voluntary motor control does not preclude consciousness. You will notice the defintion of consciousness I used did not mention the ability to interact with the environment. That depends on brain functions distinct from those that regulate consciousness.

There are drugs and diseases that result in total paralysis but no alterations in consciousness. An example is neuromuscular blocking agents, which are often administered to patients for surgery. Another is the medcial condition called "locked-in sydnrome". These result in muscle paralysis but no alterations in consciousness. To a casual observer, this may appear to be a coma, because the patient cannot move or speak or otherwise show any response to the environment. But the casual observer would be wrong. Such a patient is still awake and aware and are therefore not in a coma.


I would argue you have misinterpreted your personal experience and were in fact not in a coma.

Smilin

noted and I agree

Smilin

Okay,
You've defined it quite nicely from a medical viewpoint..
Now let's dive deeper...

Is consciousness (in your opinion) only a human experience,
or is it shared by other life forms?

dk

I submit consciousness describes controlled thought, and awareness describes passive thought. In a sleep state our thoughts are uncontrolled but we are still aware, and many people being aware will walk and talk in their sleep. It appears you were sleeping with your eyes open while driving the car.

Have you ever heard of "blind sight", or people that see sounds, or taste colors. They can illicit visual responses from blind peole. Some people have defective wiring that routes color or overlaps the taste cortex with the visual cortex. None of this address the core issue of consciousness.

Paul2

I would think that not one part of the brain would determin if the subject is concious or not, (concious as in being aware of being aware) i would think that the level of brain development in total would allow for such activity. one of the reasons i think this way is because humans still have the base intelligence otherwise known as instincts. the only difference between us and an animal is that we can ignore those instincts... animal's can't because that's all they have. i think.

Maybe animals are aware of being aware, i don't know as i've never talked with one. But really though, i think that's the dividing factor between us and them.

Nowhere357

As I parse the if-then, I see that the options are actually the same. If I understand your viewpoint correctly, I read the question as: Was I in a different 'level of consciousness'?
If yes, then awareness is not a component of consiousness, if no, then consciousness can occur without awareness.
That's logically equivelent to: If yes, then awareness is not a component of consiousness, if no, then awareness is not a component of consiousness. I think. So, the question's not formulated right.

If I understand what you're getting at, you want to know: where was the "I" during the period while driving with no memory. Yes? For example, is it possible one can be aware during surgery - feeling pain not blocked out locally - but have no "conscious memory" of it? I think it is possible.

I know that one can be aware of a dream, but have no conscious memory of it.

Smilin

Then by your reasoning, animals with higher brain development than humans should be capable of a higher degree of consciousness (if there are degrees of it).

I'm not sure if intelligence and/or instinct dictate consciousness, however I disagree with your statement that humans are capable of ignoring their 'instincts'. Trust me, when you're faced with a 'fight or flight' situation... you will follow your instincts without even thinking.

and one of my questions... do other forms of life experience consciousness?

and concerning communication skills, why should humans be so conceited to think they're the only animals capable of communicating. You've never communicated with an animal? You probably haven't had a close pet then. Heck, I can communicate very well with my house cat.

doghouse

No … and it depends on the specific life form (in my opinion).

I’ll start with mammals because that’s about the only thing I know anything about, and consider the 3 criteria for consciousness: arousal, awareness of environment and awareness of self.

Arousal. Most mammals have daily alternating periods of sleep and wakefulness with very similar electrophysiological activity (EEG recordings, for example) and neuroanatomic structures involved in arousal as people. So I think extrapolating the concepts of arousal to mammals is straightforward.

Awareness of the environment. Mammals have very similar sensory functions as people – vision, hearing, touch, pain, smell, etc. So I think mammals are aware of their environment.

Awareness of self. Mammals are certainly aware of internal stimuli. For example, they possess proprioception (the sense of where their body is in space) and they can suffer from things like abdominal pain. At least some mammals seem to recognize themselves as individuals. For example, pack and herd animals recognize their place in the group’s social hierarchy, and may even set out to improve their standing. And many mammals can learn to recognize themselves in a mirror. So, in my opinion mammals are aware of self. Is this awareness qualitatively the same as for people? Probably not. But then my awareness is probably not the same as another person’s.

So I think mammals are awake and aware. They also can suffer from abnormal states of consciousness, such as coma, stupor, and delirium, similar to people. So they are conscious, in my opinion. Birds too.

At the other end of the spectrum, things like plants, bacteria, viruses, protozoa and nematodes are clearly not conscious because they fail one or more of the above criteria.

I might anticipate your next question is where do you draw the line? As with most things in biology, I suspect the line is wide and fuzzy. Probably somewhere in the Chordata phylum?

Smilin

Okay, your criteria, are those biological, medical, psychological
criteria? Which science are you using, or is that a generally accepted criteria for determining consciousness?


Actually you've addressed where I was heading with my whole notion. If you try and discuss consciousness with a strictly religous crowd, they ignorantly (and arrogantly) assume only humans are capable of possessing 'consciousness'.

I'm simply interested in what defines consciousness, how do we determine if a life form possesses it, and when does it cease to exist.

Your mammal example I agree with totally.

Mad Kally

You don't have a pet you are very close to, do you?

Wait until someone is chasing after you shooting a gun. You won't have any choice to ignore your instincts. The autonomic nervous system takes over (fight or flight). I'd like to see you ignore that instinct. It doesn't need to be so drastic either.

As for comatose states. There are different levels.


Neuro Skills

Glasgow Coma Scale

Eye Opening E

spontaneous 4
to speech 3
to pain 2
no response 1

Best Motor Response M

To Verbal Command:
obeys 6
To Painful Stimulus:
localizes pain 5
flexion-withdrawal 4
flexion-abnormal 3
extension 2
no response 1

Best Verbal Response V

oriented and converses 5
disoriented and converses 4
inappropriate words 3
incomprehensible sounds 2
no response 1

E + M + V = 3 to 15


90% less than or equal to 8 are in coma
Greater than or equal to 9 not in coma
8 is the critical score
Less than or equal to 8 at 6 hours - 50% die
9-11 = moderate severity
Greater than or equal to 12 = minor injury

Coma is defined as: (1) not opening eyes, (2) not obeying commands, and (3) not uttering understandable words.