In humanity’s quest to understand consciousness, much work has been done at the biological and neural levels [1], some also in understanding cognitive higher consciousness [2], and a bit on the contribution and importance of value [3]. But as we have seen, all of this has not led to an understanding of fundamental consciousness. We know a good deal about how the networks of neurons in our heads calculate and process information, shedding light on how we think. This does not tell us how we feel. A mind is thinking plus, especially, feeling. In this article we consider basic mechanisms, the missing explanatory glue from the physical world to value and consciousness. We thus lay out the Sentonic Theory of Fundamental Consciousness (STFC), and end with the topic of sites in the brain where these phenomena may take place.

No abstract

Consciousness and the human mind have been pondered for centuries [1,2]. Today the most fundamental, likely outlines of the explanation of consciousness are known, and from this landscape we are well-positioned to fill in the basket of specific theories that will include the correct one. However, many errors in thinking and assumptions have accumulated, and even gained fashion, that obscure our progress. It is time to eliminate these, which we do herein by enumerating the complementary true assertions. Following that we mention four principles for choosing direction for further work. We conclude with a framework for further progress.

Consciousness research is a field beset with mystery and many conflicting theories. Each set of hypotheses and arguments in the present situationnecessitate first identifying, conveying, and digesting entire platforms of presumptions and definitions from which to reason and work forward.There has emerged no standard, useful structure for work and discourse; prevalent large theories are deeply flawed and/or overly non-committal,typically from first assumptions. What is more reliable is limited in scope and reach.While much work has been done by many this has not led to an understanding of fundamental consciousness. We know a good deal about how thenetworks of neurons in our heads calculate and process information, shedding light on how we think. This does not tell us how we feel. A mind isthinking plus, especially, feeling.Therefore, we define a reference Architecture for consciousness to assist further research and discussion and we explain the motivations for itsform. We present a set of postulates and basic hypotheses. We explain metatheory of consciousness, implied by and supported by the postulates,hypotheses, and architecture. We further start to dig into a theory within the various individual layers of the architecture. Throughout we makea limited set of commitments to what is probably true yet often unrecognized, with brief explanation in the text and references to the longerarguments, while leaving open for variation aspects that are not realistically constrainable at this time.In the course of this article we consider basic mechanisms, the missing explanatory glue from the physical world to value and consciousness. Wethus lay out the Sentonic Theory of Fundamental Consciousness (STFC) as principles of operation of the bottom half of the Architecture in real brains. (PDF) Consciousness, the Full Stack: Four-Layer Architecture=Language on Mind on STFC: Part 1 of 4. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/364708467_Consciousness_the_Full_Stack_Four-Layer_ArchitectureLanguage_on_Mind_on_STFC_Part_1_of_4 [accessed Oct 25 2022].

Consciousness and the human mind have been pondered for centuries [1,2]. Today the most fundamental, likely outlines of the explanation of consciousness are known, and from this landscape we are well-positioned to fill in the basket of specific theories that will include the correct one. However, many errors in thinking and assumptions have accumulated, and even gained fashion, that obscure our progress. It is time to eliminate these, which we do herein by enumerating the complementary true assertions. Following that we mention four principles for choosing direction for further work. We conclude with a framework for further progress.