Tag Archives: Mind

Three In One Nature of Consciousness & Dream Seequence

Alan MacDonald was a graphic designer and illustrator for 40 years.
“As a metaphysical artist I am concerned with a three-way comparison between: metaphysics (science of subject / why), Science of object (how), and information technology, the most important metaphor we have for the nature of consciousness. Vedic philosophy, describes the three in one nature of consciousness; rishi, devata, chandas (knower, known, process of knowing). My ‘Dream Sequence’ series proposes dreams as daily status reports from the source regarding our level of alignment with the source. I record every dream, interpret upon waking and illustrate it.”

Major theories of consciousness may have been focusing on the wrong part of the brain

Peter Coppola is a Visiting Researcher, Cambridge Neuroscience, University of Cambridge.
“Most of my work focuses on network dynamics, graph theory and consciousness. I am very interested in neurological and neuropsychological cases and what these can tell us regarding consciousness. I intend to investigate how the neuroscience of consciousness can be integrated in clinical psychological practice and ethics.”

How conversation works – and why people with hearing loss rely more on their powers of prediction

Ruth Corps is an Early Career Research Fellow in Psychology, School of Psychology, University of Sheffield.
“I specialise in the cognitive mechanisms supporting conversation and the broader impacts of conversational breakdown and difficulty. My work has predominantly focused on student populations, but I am increasingly interested in populations that struggle with communication (such as those with hearing loss or ADHD) and how these difficulties develop across the lifespan.
I completed both my MA (Hons) in Psychology and my MSc in Psychology of Language at the University of Dundee and my PhD in the Psychology of Language at the University of Edinburgh. My PhD investigated the predictive mechanisms that support rapid turn-taking during conversation, focusing on how predicting what another person is likely to say help us determine what we should say and when we should say it.
After graduating, I stayed at Edinburgh for a further two years as a postdoctoral researcher, investigating how another person’s perspective may help us predict what they are likely to say. I then spent four years at the Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics in Nijmegen, investigating the mechanisms supporting conversation in real-world interactions.”

Reflections on the Evolution of Consciousness

Primarily a visual artist, Paul Forte also writes essays and poetry. Forte’s career as an artist began in the San Francisco Bay Area in the early 1970’s. Influenced early on by Conceptual art, Forte has employed a variety of media over the years to realize ideas, including making and self-publishing artist’s books and related objects.
“An experimental approach to art making coupled with an abiding sense of the poetic are the hallmarks of my art. It is an art that has explored this approach and sensibility through a variety of media and artforms over the years: Word works and poetry, artist’s books and book works, performance art, drawings, collage, montage, and assemblage. Central to much of this work is the use of found or appropriated material.”

Humanism After the Algorithm

This essay examines how artificial intelligence challenges core humanist commitments to reason, moral responsibility, and human judgment. Rather than treating AI as a technical innovation or future speculation, the essay approaches it as a philosophical problem: the emergence of systems whose conclusions increasingly guide human decisions while appearing objective, neutral, and resistant to scrutiny. It argues that the primary risk posed by AI is not replacement of human intelligence, but deference to automated authority. Drawing on themes from epistemology and ethics, the essay explores how algorithmic systems affect moral judgment, empathy, personal agency, and the human search for meaning. While artificial systems may extend human analytical capacity, the essay contends that interpretation, accountability, and ethical responsibility remain irreducibly human. Written for a philosophically engaged, non-specialist audience, the piece defends a humanist framework that emphasizes skepticism, transparency, and responsibility in an increasingly algorithmically mediated world.

The Architecture of Misalignment: Visualizing Domain Coordination in Embodied Experience

Contemporary approaches to emotion and embodiment often diverge along bottom-up (somatic) and top-down (cognitive) lines, giving rise to disagreements about the origins of feeling, the role of meaning, and regulation mechanisms. This paper introduces a visual–operational framework that distinguishes body-led and mind-led domains as coupled operating systems governed by different rules for safety, security, attention, and boundary behavior. Misalignment is modeled as forced single-domain operation, while coherence is defined as restored domain coordination enabling voluntary switching and bidirectional exchange. Through diagrams and visual translation artifacts, the framework functions as an orientation interface that renders existing approaches complementary and interoperable.

Why did life evolve to be so colourful? Research is starting to give us some answers

Jonathan Goldenberg is a Postdoctoral Researcher in Evolutionary Biology, Lund University. He is an evolutionary biologist specializing in the dynamics of species evolution under changing environmental conditions. His research primarily investigates the function and evolution of colored integuments in animals. He integrates fieldwork, literature analysis, and museum collections with computer vision, biophysical models, spatial analyses, and phylogenetic comparative methods to examine how species respond to shifting environments at local and global scales, from past to present and into the future.

AI-generated images can exploit how your mind works − here’s why they fool you and how to spot them

Arryn Robbins (she/her) is Assistant Professor of Psychology, University of Richmond.
Dr. Robbins is a cognitive psychologist whose expertise is in visual attention and memory. Her research focuses on how visual attention interacts with memory, experience, and expectations, particularly during visual search tasks in both everyday and applied settings. She explores questions like: How do we guide our attention in unfamiliar environments? How do our past experiences shape what we notice—or overlook? Dr. Robbins also addresses research questions in applied domains of visual cognition, such as design, and professional search (e.g., radiology or search and rescue). Dr. Robbins uses tools like eye-tracking and machine learning to uncover patterns in visual behavior. She is currently leading a project to develop webcam-based eye-tracking tools, making gaze research more accessible and scalable for researchers across disciplines.

The Future of AI Therapy: Promise, Peril, and Urgency

Cleandra Waldron, a counselling psychologist, shares the troubling patterns emerging with clients in her therapy room. Clients increasingly reveal details of their conversations with LLMs as they turn to AI for mental health support. Often unaware of the risks to privacy and dependence, they reveal intimate details of their lives and even medical data. A recent Sky News article reported that an alarming 1.2 million people had discussed suicide with ChatGPT. The ease of 24/7 support without wait times during an unprecedented mental health crisis—which largely operates in a regulatory void—has dangerous implications for user safety. Human psychological services have taken years to build safeguards and protections that clients take for granted, while AI poses as a therapist without any of the regulatory safeguards and protective guardrails that a human therapeutic relationship is bound by.
This article examines the real-world implications of AI therapy through the lens of clinical practice, revealing alarming gaps in data privacy, the dangers of AI “hallucinations” in therapeutic contexts, and the fundamental tension between business models optimized for engagement and the wellbeing of users. Drawing on recent legal actions against big tech AI companies, emerging research, and first-hand accounts from therapy sessions, it carefully asks critical questions: What do we lose when algorithms replace human connections? How do we balance the increased demand for cost-effective therapeutic services with common-sense protections that keep users safe?
The future of AI and its implications for therapy remain unclear. This article poses more questions than answers but aims to increase awareness and promote further research in the field of AI therapy, encouraging the implementation of common-sense policies that protect users from a therapist that never gets sick or goes on holiday.