The Background Processor: A Falsifiable Hypothesis

Hypothesis:

What Spinoza called 'that part of the mind that is eternal,' Kant called 'transcendental apperception,' Hindu sages call purusha/saksin, ancient Greeks called 'nous,' and scientists in the field of hypnosis call the 'hidden observer' is really a representation or projection of a background processor module operating in parallel with the primary processor module of the cognitive mechanism. Icons and statues in various cultures, such as statues of the seated Buddha, are, unknowingly, representations of this background 'Watcher.' My conjecture is that in mystical union (and probably in trance also) the primary processor shuts down, but the background processor continues to operate. The cessation of operation of the primary processor is accompanied by a cessation of the sense of inner time and the ability to think, imagine, will, and make immediate recall. During the state of mystical union, the background processor, working automatically and nonconsciously, observes the experience of this timeless or eternal state and records the information into long term memory. This observation of the mind/organism occurs without thought going on. Later, when the mystic descends from the state of mystical union or trance and correspondingly the primary processor returns to operation, the mystic can recall and use this information to comprehend the experience.

From a psychological point of view, the background processor itself is nonconscious, but the information it processes and stores in long term memory is preconscious. That is, the information is available to conscious introspection, and when such information becomes conscious it is termed apperceptions. When one reflects on the 'aspectual shape'[1] of these apperceptions, one infers the existence of an automatic, nonconscious, background processor. Chris Brewin[2] has stated that automatic processors of the type I am calling the background processor are more accurate than the conscious processor (or what I am calling the primary processor), because such automatic processors are:

"based on the full array of sensory input, plus related material in memory, whereas because of processing limitations, the conscious representation would be based on a smaller amount of information. .... Furthermore, social pressures may operate to influence the conscious interpretations that people form of their experience."

The above hypothesis may be falsifiable:

Since some yogis or other mystics can go into trance at will, neuroimagining techniques (PET, fMRI, or other) may be able to be used to study their nervous system during the experience. The location of the brain's timing mechanism is now known. So, when the trance occurs, neuroimaging techniques should show that the location of the neural correlates of the timing mechanism suddenly becomes inactive. The location of remaining neural activity during the trance should indicate the location of the neural correlates of the background processor. If the neuroimaging techniques show no activity whatsoever during the trance, the hypothesis is falsified. This falsifiability strategy, of course, assumes that mystical union and trance both have the cessation of the primary processor feature in common.

References

[1] Searle, J. R. (1992). The rediscovery of the mind. MIT Press.
[2] Brewin, C. (1989). 'Cognitive change process in psychotherapy.' Psychological Review, 96,No.3. p382.

Return to homepage.