Consciousness and the Social Brain

theory is correct, then awareness is a description, a representation, constructed in the brain. The thing being represented is attention. But attention is the process of enhancing representations in the brain. We have a strange loop—a snake eating its own tail, or a hand drawing itself, so to speak. (Hofstadter coined the term “strange loop” in his 1979 book
Godel, Escher, Bach
27 and suggested that some type of strange loop might be at the root of consciousness.) In the present theory, awareness is a representation of the process that enhances representations. If that account is correct, then being aware of something and attending to it feed each other. The two are in a positive feedback loop: they are like two mirrors facing each other. Boost one and you boost the other. Damage one and you deflate the other. Attention cannot work fully without awareness, nor awareness without attention.
    Thus far, in summarizing the theory, I have tended to emphasize the distinction between awareness and attention. Attention is an active process, a data-handling style that boosts this or that chunk of information in the brain. In contrast, awareness is a description, a chunk of information, a reflection of the ongoing state of attention. Yet because of the strange loop between awareness and attention, the functions of the two are blurred together. Awareness becomes just as much of an active controller as attention. Awareness helps direct signals in the brain, enhancing some, suppressing others, guiding choices and actions.
    The idea of a description that also acts is not new. One common example is the phrase, “I pronounce you husband and wife.” The words describe a state of marriage but also cause the state to be true. Another example is the mission statement of a company. It is a description of what the company does, but by providing a handy, memorable slogan, the words also help make the companydo it. A third example might be writing a description in your diary of how you feel. The description itself shapes and alters how you feel. Here I am suggesting that the attention schema is a case of a description that helps make it so. Not only does the attention schema provide the brain with a descriptive model of attention, but the description itself must help to direct attention and thereby to direct behavior.
    A long-standing question about consciousness is whether it is passive or active. Does it merely observe, or does it also cause? One of the more colorful metaphors on the topic was suggested by the philosopher Haidt. 28 The unconscious machinery of the brain is so vast that it is like an elephant. Perhaps consciousness is a little boy sitting on the elephant’s head. The boy naïvely imagines that he is in control of the elephant, but he merely watches what the elephant chooses to do. He is a passive observer with a delusion of control. Alternatively, perhaps consciousness has the reins and is at least partially in control of the elephant. Is awareness solely a passive observer or also an active participant? The present theory comes down on the side of an active participant. Awareness is not merely watching, but plays a role in directing brain function.
    Hopefully, this chapter has given a general sense of the theory that awareness is an attention schema, of where that theory is coming from and what it is trying to accomplish. I do not expect such a cursory overview to be convincing, but at least it can set out the basic ideas. In the remainder of the book I will begin all over again, this time introducing the theory more systematically and with greater attention to detail. The first half of the book focuses on describing the theory itself. The second half of the book focuses on the relationship to previous scientific theories of consciousness and to experimental evidence from neuroscience.
    At the end of the book I take up what might be called mystical or spiritual questions. Even if consciousness is not eternal ectoplasm, but instead information instantiated in the brain, it is nonetheless all the spirit we have. We should treat the spirit with some respect.The phenomenon can be explored not only from the point of view of mechanism but also from the point of view of human culture and psychological need. A mechanistic theory of consciousness, far from literalizing the world and shriveling spirituality, might actually lead to greater insight and greater satisfaction in spiritual experience.

3
Awareness as