A general theory of consciousness III: The human catastrophe

References

• Peper A. A general theory of consciousness I: consciousness and adaptation. Commun Integr Biol. 2020;13(1):6–11. doi: 10.1080/19420889.2020.1713967
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Peper A. A general theory of consciousness II: the language problem. Commun Integr Biol. 2022;15(1):182–189. doi: 10.1080/19420889.2022.2101194
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Chalmers DJ. How can we construct a science of consciousness? Ann NY Acad Sci. 2013;1303(1):25–35. doi: 10.1111/nyas.12166
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• De Brigard F, Prinz J. Attention and consciousness. WIRES Cognitive Science. 2010;1(1):51–59. doi: 10.1002/wcs.27
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dehaene S, Lau H, Kouider S. What is consciousness, and could machines have it? Robotic, AI, Humanity: Sci, Ethic Policy. 2021;43–56.
   Google Scholar
• Hilgard ER. Consciousness in contemporary psychology. Annu Rev Psychol. 1980;31(1):1–28. doi: 10.1146/annurev.ps.31.020180.000245
   Google Scholar
• Posner MI. Attention: the mechanisms of consciousness. Proc Natl Acad Sci, USA. 1994;91(16):7398–7403. doi: 10.1073/pnas.91.16.7398
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenthal DM. Consciousness and its function. Neuropsychologia. 2008;46(3):829–840. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2007.11.012
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tononi G. Consciousness and complexity. Sci. 1998;282(5395):1846–1851. doi: 10.1126/science.282.5395.1846
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seth AK, Dienes Z, Cleeremans A, et al. Measuring consciousness: relating behavioural and neurophysiological approaches. Trends Cogn Sci. 2008;12(8):314–321. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2008.04.008
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zeki S. The disunity of consciousness. Trends Cogn Sci. 2003;7(5):214–218. doi: 10.1016/S1364-6613(03)00081-0
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baluška S, Mancuso S. Deep evolutionary origins of neurobiology. Commun Integr Biol. 2009;2(1):1–2. doi: 10.4161/cib.2.1.7620
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Baluška F, Reber A. Sentience and consciousness in single cells: how the first minds emerged in unicellular species. BioEssays. 2019;41(3). doi: 10.1002/bies.201800229
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baluška F, Miller WB, Reber AS. Cellular and evolutionary perspectives on organismal cognition: from unicellular to multicellular organisms. Biol J Linn Soc. 2023;139(4):503–513. doi: 10.1093/biolinnean/blac005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peper A, Grimbergen CA, Spaan JAE, et al. A mathematical model of the hsp70 regulation in the cell. Int J Hypertherm. 1998;14(1):97–124. doi: 10.3109/02656739809018218
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reber AS, Baluska F, Miller WB Jr. All living organisms are sentient. Animal Sentience. 2022;6(31):3. doi: 10.51291/2377-7478.1700
   Google Scholar
• Anderson ML. On the grounds of (X)grounded cognition. In: Gomila T, Calvo P, editors. Handbook of cognitive science. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier; 2008. p. 423–435.
   Google Scholar
• Barsalou LW. Cognitive and neural contributions to understanding the conceptual system. Curr Dir Psychol Sci. 2008;17(2):91–95. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8721.2008.00555.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Black JB. An embodied/grounded cognition perspective on educational technology. New Sci Learning: Cognit, Comput Collaborat Educat. 2010:45–52.
   Google Scholar
• Crick F, Koch C. Towards a neurobiological theory of consciousness. Sem Neurosci. 1990;2:263–275.
   Google Scholar
• Mahon BZ, Caramazza A. A critical look at the embodied cognition hypothesis and a new proposal for grounding conceptual content. J Physiol Paris. 2008;102(1–3):59–70. doi: 10.1016/j.jphysparis.2008.03.004
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pecher D, Zwaan RA, editors. Grounding cognition: the role of perception and action in memory, language, and thinking. UK: Cambridge University Press; 2005.
   Google Scholar
• Grandin T. Thinking in pictures. New York (NY): Vintage Press Random House; 1995.
   Google Scholar
• Grandin T. Visual thinking: the hidden gifts of people who think in pictures, patterns, and abstractions. USA: Penguin; 2023.
   Google Scholar
• Alderson-Day B, Fernyhough C. Inner speech: development, cognitive functions, phenomenology, and neurobiology. Psychol Bull. 2015;141(5):931. doi: 10.1037/bul0000021
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davis PE, Meins E, Fernyhough C. Individual differences in children’s private speech: the role of imaginary companions. J Exp Child Psychol. 2013;116(3):561–571. doi: 10.1016/j.jecp.2013.06.010
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davis PE. How imaginary friends from our childhood can continue to affect us as adults. USA: The Conversation; 2019.
   Google Scholar
• Vygotsky LS, Luria AR. Tool and symbol in child development. In: Van der Veer R, and Valsiner J, editors. The Vygotsky reader. Cambridge (MA): Blackwell; 1930. p. 99–174.
   Google Scholar
• Louwerse MM. Symbol interdependency in symbolic and embodied cognition. Top Cogn Sci. 2011;3(2):273–302. doi: 10.1111/j.1756-8765.2010.01106.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fitch WT. The evolution of speech: a comparative review. Trends Cogn Sci. 2000;4(7):258–267. doi: 10.1016/S1364-6613(00)01494-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hauser, Hauser MD, Yang C, Berwick RC. The mystery of language evolution. Front Psychol. 2014;5. Article 401. May 2014. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00401
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jackendoff R. How did language begin. Linguist Soc Amer. 2006;8:16.
   Google Scholar
• Logan RK. The extended mind model of the origin of language and culture. In: Evolutionary epistemology, language and culture. Dordrecht: Springer; 2006. p. 149–167.
   Google Scholar
• Macuch Silva V, Holler J, Ozyurek A, et al. Multimodality and the origin of a novel communication system in face-to-face interaction. R Soc Open Sci. 2020;7(1):182056. doi: 10.1098/rsos.182056
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Avital E, Jablonka E. Animal traditions: behavioural inheritance in evolution. UK: Cambridge University Press; 2000.
   Google Scholar
• Goodwyn E. Approaching archetypes: reconsidering innateness. J Analytical Psychol. 2010;55(4):502–521. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-5922.2010.01862.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kandel ER. Cellular basis of behavior: an introduction to behavioral neurobiology. San Francisco: W.H. Freeman; 1976.
   Google Scholar
• Kruglanski AW, Gigerenzer G. Intuitive and deliberate judgments are based on common principles. Psychol Rev. 2011;118(1):97–109. doi: 10.1037/a0020762
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ramsey G. What is animal culture?.Routledge companion to the philosophy of animal minds. Routledge: Routledge; 2017. p. 345–353.
   Google Scholar
• Stevens A. Archetype revisited: an updated natural history of the self. UK: Routledge; 2015.
   Google Scholar
• van den Berghe PL. Book review: culture in nature: are we alone? Evolut Psychol. 2006;4(1):147470490600400. doi: 10.1177/147470490600400134
   Google Scholar
• Wine JJ. The structural basis of an innate behavioural pattern. J Exp Biol. 1984;112(1):283–319. doi: 10.1242/jeb.112.1.283
   Google Scholar
• Rieffe C, Ketelaar L, Wiefferink CH. Assessing empathy in young children: construction and validation of an empathy questionnaire (EmQue). Pers Individ Dif. 2010;49(5):362–367. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2010.03.046
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cuff BM, Brown SJ, Taylor L, et al. Empathy: a review of the concept. Emotion Rev. 2016;8(2):144–153. doi: 10.1177/1754073914558466
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bär S. The nature and characteristics of the gods in classical mythology. Symbolae Philologorum Posnaniensium Graecae et Latinae. 2020;30(1):7–46. doi: 10.14746/sppgl.2020.XXX.1
   Google Scholar
• Bowie F. Anthropology of religion. USA: The Wiley Blackwell Companion to the Study of Religion; 2021. p. 1–24.
   Google Scholar
• Durkheim E. The elementary forms of the religius life. London: G. Allen & Unwin; 1915.
   Google Scholar
• Peregrine P. The birth of the gods revisited: a partial replication of Guy Swanson’s (1960) cross cultural study of religion. Cross-Cultural Res. 1996;30(1):84–112. doi: 10.1177/106939719603000104
   Google Scholar
• Agai JM. An archaeological study of the origins of the afterlife beliefs from early to modern humans in africa. J Cult. 2022;2(2):15.
   Google Scholar
• Pereira V, Faísca L, de Sá-Saraiva R. Immortality of the soul as an intuitive idea: towards a psychological explanation of the origins of afterlife beliefs. J Cognit Cult. 2012;12(1–2):101–127. doi: 10.1163/156853712X633956
   Google Scholar
• Weidner D. Life after life: a figure of thought in Walter Benjamin. J Cultural Religious Theory (Fall 2020). 2012;19(3):464.
   Google Scholar
• Kyrtatas D. The origins of Christian hell. Numen. 2009;56(2–3):282–297. doi: 10.1163/156852709X405017
   Google Scholar
• De Waal FB. Natural normativity: the ‘is’ and ‘ought’ of animal behavior. Behaviour. 2014;151(2–3):185–204. doi: 10.1163/1568539X-00003146
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baumard N. Has punishment played a role in the evolution of cooperation? A critical review. Mind Soc. 2010;9(2):171–192. doi: 10.1007/s11299-010-0079-9
   Google Scholar
• Chaniotis A. Under the watchful eyes of the gods: aspects of divine justice in Hellenistic and Roman Asia Minor. In: Colvin S, editor. The Greco-Roman East: Politics, Culture, Society 1–43. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 2004.
   Google Scholar
• Cushman F. Punishment in humans: from intuitions to institutions. Philos Compass. 2015;10(2):117–133. doi: 10.1111/phc3.12192
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duff RA. Penance, punishment and the limits of community. Punishment Soc. 2003;5(3):295–312. doi: 10.1177/1462474503005003004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garland D. Sociological perspectives on punishment. Crime and Justice. 1991;14:115–165. doi: 10.1086/449185
   Google Scholar
• Ignatieff M. State, civil society, and total institutions: a critique of recent social histories of punishment. Crime and Justice. 1981;3:153–192. doi: 10.1086/449079
   Google Scholar
• Steffen L. Religion and violence in christian traditions. In: Juergensmeyer M, Kitts M, Jerryson M, editors. The oxford handbook of religion and violence. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2013. p. 109–39.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson D, Krüger O. The good of wrath: supernatural punishment and the evolution of cooperation. Polit Theol. 2004;5(2):159–176. doi: 10.1558/poth.2004.5.2.159
   Google Scholar
• Johnson DDP. God’s punishment and public goods: a test of the supernatural punishment hypothesis in 186 world cultures. Hum Nature. 2005;16(4):410–446. doi: 10.1007/s12110-005-1017-0
   Google Scholar
• Saleam J, Moustafa AA. The influence of divine rewards and punishments on religious prosociality. Front Psychol. 2016;7:11–49. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01149
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baumeister RF. Free will in scientific psychology. Perspectives Psychol Sci. 2008;3(1):14–19. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-6916.2008.00057.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Libet B. Do we have free will? J Conscious Stud. 1999;6(8–9):47–57.
   Google Scholar
• Roskies A. Neuroscientific challenges to free will and responsibility. Trends Cogn Sci. 2006;10(9):419–423. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2006.07.011
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Soon CS, Brass M, Heinze HJ, et al. Unconscious determinants of free decisions in the human brain. Nat Neurosci. 2008;11(5):543–545. doi: 10.1038/nn.2112
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Daston L, Galison P. The image of objectivity. Represent. 1992;40:81–128. doi: 10.2307/2928741
   Google Scholar
• Gallagher S. Philosophical conceptions of the self: implications for cognitive science. Trends Cogn Sci. 2000;4(1):14–21. doi: 10.1016/S1364-6613(99)01417-5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gellner E. Plough, sword, and book: the structure of human history. USA: University of Chicago Press; 1989.
   Google Scholar
• Irvine L. A model of animal selfhood: expanding interactionist possibilities. Symbolic Interact. 2004;27(1):3–21. doi: 10.1525/si.2004.27.1.3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peper A. A theory of drug tolerance and dependence I: a conceptual analysis. J Theor Biol. 2004a;229(4):477–490. doi: 10.1016/j.jtbi.2004.04.010
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peper A. A theory of drug tolerance and dependence II: the mathematical model. J Theor Biol. 2004b;229(4):491–500. doi: 10.1016/j.jtbi.2004.04.009
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peper A. Intermittent adaptation; a mathematical model of drug tolerance, dependence and addiction. In: Gutkin B, and Ahmed SH, editors. Computational neuroscience of drug addiction, springer series in computational neuroscience. New York: Springer; 2011. p. 19–56.
   Google Scholar
• Flack JC, De Waal FB. Any animal whatever’. Darwinian building blocks of morality in monkeys and apes. J Conscious Stud. 2000;7(12):1–29.
   Google Scholar
• De Waal FB, Gavrilets S. Monogamy with a purpose. Proc Natl Acad Sci, USA. 2013;110(38):15167–15168. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1315839110
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fletcher GJ, Simpson JA, Campbell L, et al. Pair-bonding, romantic love, and evolution. Perspect Psychol Sci. 2015;10(1):20–36. doi: 10.1177/1745691614561683
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Reno PL, Meindl RS, McCollum MA, et al. Sexual dimorphism in Australopithecus afarensis was similar to that of modern humans. Proc Natl Acad Sci, USA. 2003;100(16):9404–9409. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1133180100
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schacht R, Kramer KL. Are we monogamous? A review of the evolution of pair bonding in humans and its contemporary variation crossculturally. Front Ecol Evol. 2019;7. doi: 10.3389/fevo.2019.00230
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tuniz C, Vipraio PT. Humans: an unauthorized biography. USA: Springer; 2016.
   Google Scholar