Ashford 1

Aaron Ashford
Suzanne Thomas
UWRT 1103 035
27 October 2015
Reflection: Overall, I am learning some in the terms of rhetoric from Arthur but a lot more in the
field of psychology I suppose? I would gain more rhetorically if Arthurs writing style and
overall rhetorical skill wasnt so advanced from mine. It isnt impossible to follow but it's tough.

The Poverty of Psychology

Arthur Koestler is a Hungarian-British journalist / novelist / essayist known for his work
called the Darkness at Noon. The subject usually covered by Koestler are fiction, non-fiction,
history, psychology, philosophy, autobiography, politics, parapsychology and science. He was a
very influential writer at his time. The book I am reading by Arthur Koestler is The Ghost in the
Machine which is a book centered around science, psychology and philosophy and was the
influence for work such as The Ghost in the Shell and even a large following in the world of
academia.
The first paragraph is called The Poverty of Psychology which is a deliberate attack on
the house of psychology and the meta followed by the house at the time. Apparently, one
Professor by the name of Watson from John Hopkins University had coined up his own branch of
psychology which threw the concept of having an imagination and more specifically
consciousness out the window and claimed that all human action was merely a response to a
specific stimuli. Watson believing himself to be a realist in the academic world of psychology did
a really good job at doing what Koestler described as flogging a dead horse. in his constant

Ashford 2
attack of orthodox psychology followers when everything they had at the time was already in
ruins. Koestler expresses his disgust of seeing professors such as Watson be almost as highly
regarded as Pavlov in Russia or the father of psychology himself, Sigmund Freud. Koestler also
calls out another psychologist whom he considered to just be another Watsonian behaviorist band
wagoner by describing Professor Skinners work as Skinner did not intend to write a parody. He
means it seriously. which was a sick burn in the world of psychological academia.
With the summary concluded, here are some other quotes that were interesting:

The first is the natural reaction of the defenders of orthodoxy, who believe that they are
in the right and that you are in the wrong-which is only fair and to be expected.

The second category of critics belongs to the opposite camp. They argue that, since the
pillars of the citadel are already cracked and revealing themselves as hollow, one ought to
ignore them and dispense with polemics. Or, to put it more bluntly, why flog a dead
horse?

There has never been a dead horse with such a vicious kick.

Analysis:
The book is a very difficult read. It is very easy to get lost as to where Koestler is going
with something due to his advanced academic vernacular and vocabulary. I am seeing how his
point can connect but the full on connection to my topic has yet to be made. I would have to
complete the book first.
Koestler, Arthur. The Ghost in the Machine. New York: Macmillan, 1968. Print.

Aaron Ashford
Suzanne Thomas

Ashford 3
UWRT 1103 035
30 October 2015
Reflection: I learned about different sources I could use for my topic. I also am now being
exposed to a community I can receive a constant influx of information from the world of science
academia at its earlier convenience. Nothing was really learned in the terms of writing ability
from the article as it as just a scientific article and nothing in need of rhetorical tools other than
just being able to portray what the writer wants to get across to the audience.

Scientists Closing in on the Theory of Consciousness

Tanya Lewis, the author of the article is an experienced staff writer of the LiveScience
website which is a hub for new scientific information to the knowledge hungry. Tanyas writing
of the article is very professional and provides in context citations to sources and makes
references to additionally useful articles from the LiveScience website itself and partnered
websites. Connecting into this community will allow me to delve deeper and easier into my topic
for valuable information.
The first paragraph of the article, excluding the introduction, gives a very brief synopsis
of what science has recently discovered and starts going into the history of the theory of
consciousness. The first person referenced in this topic is 17th century French philosopher Ren
Descartes who is known for his quote cogito ergo sum which translates to I think, therefore, I
am. enforcing the general idea that for one to be able to think is to exist due to the requirement
of one having to be there in order to do the thinking in the first place. Descartes also believed
that the mind and the material body are separate from each other. This theory is explained in the
article and is called mind-body duality. Overall the theory of separate mind and body is

Ashford 4
rejected by scientists but many still do follow claim that the mind is indeed away from the planes
of physical existence. The article then goes into the usefulness of philosophical approaches but
then states how in the end, it doesnt give much in the terms of results in experiment.
The article is decently sized and goes into many different points of view of the matter and
several different examples. It mentions other philosophers, quotes from figures in world of
academia and even dabbles into the existence of machinery having a consciousness and animals
as well! Covering animals was something I had worried about as I had no material to cover it but
this article provides more for me. Going into summary of the article: Its a really useful one with
lots of relevant facts to my topic. There really isnt another way to describe it without
regurgitating the content of the article itself and at that point I might as well just start make a
giant quote with the article copy and pasted inside. Which is a no no. With that done and over
with, here are some important / interesting quotes:

As Koch put it, "You take a piece of the brain and try to press the juice of consciousness
out of [it]." But this is almost impossible, he said.

"The only thing you know is, 'I am conscious.' Any theory has to start with that," said
Christof Koch, a neuroscientist and the chief scientific officer at the Allen Institute for
Neuroscience in Seattle.

Another promising theory suggests that consciousness works a bit like computer
memory, which can call up and retain an experience even after it has passed.

Bernard Baars, a neuroscientist at the Neurosciences Institute in La Jolla, California,

developed the theory, which is known as the global workspace theory. This idea is based
on an old concept from artificial intelligence called the blackboard, a memory bank that
different computer programs could access.

Ashford 5
Analysis:
The reading level of the article is understandable by me so I have no problems with it. It isnt too
advanced in the terms of vocabulary but some may have trouble. As almost all philosophical
things are, they may conflict with religious beliefs so be forewarned.
Lewis, By. "Scientists Closing in on Theory of Consciousness."LiveScience. TechMedia
Network, 30 July 2014. Web. 30 Oct. 2015.

Aaron Ashford
Suzanne Thomas
UWRT 1103 035
1 November 2015
Reflection: The movie had very good examples of character monologues and pressing
philosophical points of view from the side of just one character. In High school the only form of
monologue we were exposed to was Shakespearean literature.

The Ghost in the Shell

The Ghost in the Shell is a Japanese franchise that includes a manga, animated movie,
and an animated series and at some point a live action movie. The original Ghost in the Shell
piece of media was the manga which was written by Masamune Shirow who claims to have
gained much of the inspiration for the manga from Arthur Koestlers The Ghost in the Machine
which was also what the manga was named after as homage to Arthurs book.
A synopsis of the movie would be that in a world where the lines between human and
machine have blurred in this cyberpunk manifestation of a fictional Japanese city, the

Ashford 6
commanding officer of a group of cybernetically enhanced law enforcers, called Public Security
Section 9, named Major Motoko Kusanagi. The main antagonist of the movie is a
technologically ascended being who now has the ability to move between different robotic
bodies by hacking them even though he is existent only on a cyber plane, meaning he literally
lived online. Eventually, the ascended being is confined to a single robotic body and before
perishing he explains his philosophy and unifies with Motoko while she was on her quest to
discover more about humanity and evolution.
But the ascended being isnt where the brunt of the philosophical side of The Ghost of the
Shell lies. The real philosophical portion of the animated movie lies in Motokos monologues
throughout the movie. Motoko is constantly in question of what it means to exist, to be human
and also to be machine. She questions identity and the presence of a consciousness which is
constantly referred to as a Ghost. This kind of thought process and philosophical questioning
falls hand in hand with Arthur Koestlers philosophical and psychological themes covered in the
book, The Ghost in the Machine. Some quotes from Motokos monologues would be:

When I was a child, my speech, feelings, and thinking were all those of a child. Now
that I am a man, I have no more use for childish ways.

There are countless ingredients that make up the human body and mind, like all the
components that make up me as an individual with my own personality. Sure I have a
face and voice to distinguish myself from others, but my thoughts and memories are
unique only to me, and I carry a sense of my own destiny. Each of those things are just a
small part of it. I collect information to use in my own way. All of that blends to create a
mixture that forms me and gives rise to my conscience. I feel confined, only free to
expand myself within boundaries.

Ashford 7
This is a good piece of script is between Motoko and the ascended being [The Puppet Master].

Puppet Master: I refer to myself as an intelligent life form because I am sentient and I
am able to recognize my own existence, but in my present state I am still incomplete. I
lack the most basic processes inherent in all living organisms: reproducing and dying.
Major Motoko Kusanagi: But you can copy yourself.
Puppet Master: A copy is just an identical image. There is the possibility that a single
virus could destroy an entire set of systems and copies do not give rise to variety and
originality. Life perpetuates itself through diversity and this includes the ability to
sacrifice itself when necessary. Cells repeat the process of degeneration and regeneration
until one day they die, obliterating an entire set of memory and information. Only genes
remain. Why continually repeat this cycle? Simply to survive by avoiding the weaknesses
of an unchanging system.

Analysis:
The movie is a bit hard to grasp onto at times for most people, looking up breakdowns of
the monologue or re-reading it several times is required in order to understand what Motoko and
the ascended being are even talking about. I didnt need much of a breakdown as I had someone
to talk to about the themes in the movie who also helped me break up any confusion that I had.
Ghost in the Shell. Dir. Masamune Shirow. Bandai Entertainment, 2002. Film.

Aaron Ashford
Suzanne Thomas
UWRT 1103 035
4 November 2015

Ashford 8

Reflection: Dan Dennett's argument is valid and makes a lot of sense but doesnt fit in with my
topic very well. This video provides some things for me to use but in the end was not what I was
expecting. I was hoping to have an opposing point of view for my topic but I guess when it comes
to philosophical theory on consciousness, there too much conflicting and harmonizing to find
anything specific enough.
The Illusion of Consciousness
This source is from the Ted Talks website, featuring guest speaker Dan Dennett a
philosophy professor and cognitive scientist. The media type is a video and in the twenty one
minute long video, Dan presents the the case that a consciousness is just an illusion but also your
consciousness makes you think that itself is an illusion. As contradictory or obscene as that may
sound, it has a certain aspect of legitimate truth behind it, as showcased in the video.
Dan Dennett makes references to his fellow philosophers and other friends in the world
of academia when presenting his case. He even includes several exercises for the audience to
take a part in as an example of how our mind just fills in the blanks. Dans argument is that
your consciousness is merely filling in the blanks of what it means to have a consciousness, as it
is something we have yet to understand. Some interesting quotes would be:

Everyone is an expert on consciousness.

One hundred trillion cellular robots.

You are not in control of your own consciousness as you think you are.

Analysis:
The video wasnt hard to grasp onto. Den Dennett does a good job of making his case
presentable to all audiences regardless of experience in the field of cognitive science. I can use
some bits of this source for presenting my topic but not too much. I would not want to bend Den

Ashford 9
Dennett's information into something that brandishes him as a watsonian behaviorism band
wagoner.
Dannet, Dan. "The Illusion of Consciousness." Ted Talks. Web. 5 Nov. 2015.

Aaron Ashford
Suzanne Thomas
UWRT 1103 035
4 November 2015
Reflection: I had a very hard time getting anything out of the article that was legible to me. If
anything, this article was just to fill the quota of scientific articles Mrs. Thomas had asked for. I
am hoping Mrs. Thomas accepts my previous source of The Ghost in the Machine as a scientific
and peer reviewed piece.
Consciousness
This is a peer reviewed scientific article by a member of the American Academy and
professor at the Salk Institute for Biological Studies by the name of Terrence J. Sejnowski. This
article is more of a career breakdown of another academic figurehead named Francis Crick and a
result presentation article. Overall, the article isnt trying to press a thesis, merely inform the
reader.
The article is a more biological point of view of consciousness. Sejnowski gives the first
two pages as an introduction to Crick and explains what Crick has done in the terms of discovery
when researching consciousness biologically. The entire article is very advanced and gives
examples of experiments Crick and his party performed while researching and also shows

Ashford 10
diagrams from these experiments. If you wanted to know what it all meant, I couldnt tell you, as
the article is too advanced for me. Some interesting quotes would be:

Using experimental evidence, researchers have developed the particularly appealing

hypothesis that we only become consciously aware of something when the level of brain
activity in the front of the cortex, which is important for planning and making decisions,
reaches a threshold level and ignites feedback pathways.

The difference between the expected and received reward is signaled by a transient
increase in the ring rate of dopamine neurons in the midbrain, which regulates synaptic
plasticity and influences how decisions and plans are made at an unconscious level.

As you can tell by the quotes, this is very advanced.

Analysis:
The entire article is too high level in vernacular and vocabulary for me to to fully
understand. I did give it a really good attempt but couldnt gain too much from the advanced
intellect of the speaker. Not much was gained nor is useable in my topic.
Sejnowski, Terrence J. "Login to Atkins Library - J. Murrey Atkins Library - UNC Charlotte."
Login to Atkins Library - J. Murrey Atkins Library - UNC Charlotte. The MIT Press.
Web. 5 Nov. 2015.

Aaron Ashford
Suzanne Thomas
UWRT 1103 035
5 November 2015

Ashford 11
Reflection: This article is a short and compact rundown of what has recently been unveiled. I
have added some words from the article to my vocabulary for future usage and gained a little in
the terms of writing skill.

What Happens to Consciousness When We Die?

This source is an online article written by Michael Shermer, a relatively new writer for
Scientific American. Looking into his history of over twenty six articles pertaining to science,
philosophy and humanitarian issues, all related to common events, Id say he is a credible writer.
In this article, Shermer isnt trying to press a point, merely delving into the recently found
connections or information pertaining to the existence of a consciousness and providing
examples of how these came to be determined.
The article is very well written and speaks in an obviously educated tone, Shermer does a
good job of presenting an experiment then breaking it down for interpretation or merely just
stating the results and connecting it to our question. The question of whether or not a
consciousness exists. Like other articles, this one also dabbles into the possibility of a
consciousness existing on a different plane from the material world, but also goes into that
consciousness influencing the materials themselves. Some interesting quotes would be:

Consciousness is first; matter and fields depend on it for their very existence.

Consciousness is fundamental to the cosmos and gives rise to particles and fields.

Because we know for a fact that measurable consciousness dies when the brain dies,
until proved otherwise, the default hypothesis must be that brains cause consciousness. I
am, therefore I think.

Analysis:

Ashford 12
The article is a bit difficult to read but not hard to interpret. Shermer does his job as an
article writer and puts it into terminology that is still eligible for an average American.
Shermer, Michael. "What Happens to Consciousness When We Die."Scientific American Globa
RSS. 1 July 2012. Web. 5 Nov. 2015.

Aaron Ashford
Suzanne Thomas
UWRT 1103 035
5 November 2015

Reflection: The article is just as useful as the first. I gained some writing knowledge for how to
properly present quotes and other various experiments together like Lewis did. A lot of what
Lewis wrote involved quotes and I will try and emulate that a little.
Will We Ever Understand Consciousness? Scientists & Philosophers Debate.
This is another article written by Tanya Lewis, a known writer for the scientific website
known as Live Science. As stated in an earlier bibliography, Lewis is credible for the topic of
consciousness, its philosophy and science. The article mainly focuses on what is a consciousness
and not so much what weve learned about it, unless you consider what historical philosophers
Lewis references as what we have learned and not just a good starting point in the world of
science.
The article is shorter than the previously mentioned article Lewis has written, Lewis does
a good job of explaining what a consciousness is as if explaining to someone who has never even
heard the word before. After an explanation of consciousness and dabbling into the history of

Ashford 13
philosophy, Lewis then goes into how to search for answers. Lewis starts showcasing some
experiments done that have yielded valuable information in the research of consciousness. The
article then concludes with a quote from a neurologist by the name of Mlanie Boly, and some
stories of normal people and some of their experiences when it came to looking into
consciousness. The article is dense of useful information regarding to my topic. Some interesting
quotes would be:

"I think it's so inspiring to be in [this] great time where so many things are happening, so
much knowledge is gained, and later on, we hope to be able to address such deep
questions for human life," Boly said.

McGinn himself believes that no matter how much scientists study the brain, the mind is
fundamentally incapable of comprehending itself.

Panelist Nicholas Schiff, a neurologist at Weill Cornell Medical College in New York,
talked about his work with people recovering from a coma, at the border between
consciousness and unconsciousness. "Consciousness is a very graded phenomena," Schiff
said. When a person wakes up, for example, he or she is not fully conscious, but gains
awareness gradually.

Analysis:
The article is short but not at all hard to read, almost anyone can read this article and gain
good information from it. It is pretty applicable to my question as it would be a good source for
introduction to the definition of consciousness and may fly alongside or against my usage of the
oxford dictionary definition of what it means to be human.
Lewis, Tanya. "Will We Ever Understand Consciousness? Scientists & Philosophers Debate."
LiveScience. TechMedia Network, 31 May 2013. Web. 5 Nov. 2015.