CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 114Philosophy and Theoretical ScienceBiofield Effects and BiophysicsParanormal Experiences and Beliefs

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 27 of the 28 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

‘Funda-mentality’: is the conscious mind subtly linked to a basic level of the universe?

Hameroff, S·1998·Trends in Cognitive Sciences
DOI 10.1016/s1364-6613(98)01157-7
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Age-old battle lines over the puzzling nature of mental experience are shaping a modern resurgence in the study of consciousness. On one side are the long-dominant `physicalists' who view consciousness as an emergent property of the brain's neural networks. On the alternative, rebellious side are those who see a necessary added ingredient: proto-conscious experience intrinsic to reality, perhaps understandable through modern physics (panpsychists, pan-experientialists, `funda-mentalists'). It is argued here that the physicalist premise alone is unable to solve completely the difficult issues of consciousness and that to do so will require supplemental panpsychist/pan-experiential philosophy expressed in modern physics. In one scheme proto-conscious experience is a basic property of physical reality accessible to a quantum process associated with brain activity. The proposed process is Roger Penrose's `objective reduction' (OR), a self-organizing `collapse' of the quantum wave function related to instability at the most basic level of space-time geometry. In the Penrose-Hameroff model of `orchestrated objective reduction' (Orch OR), OR quantum computation occurs in cytoskeletal microtubules within the brain's neurons. The basic thesis is that consciousness involves brain activities coupled to self-organizing ripples in fundamental reality.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s1364-6613(98)01157-7

Cites

27 of 27 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 114

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Hameroff, S.
Affiliations
University of Arizona (US)
Corresponding author
Hameroff, S
ORCID
Hameroff, S
Venue
Trends in Cognitive Sciences
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1998-04-01
Volume
2
Issue
4
Pages
119-124
ISSN
1364-6613 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/s1364-6613(98)01157-7
OpenAlex
W2048734865
Cited by
114
References
28
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 3 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 4 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 2
FWCI
4.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Trends in Cognitive Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • CogPrints (University of Southampton) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Philosophy and Theoretical Science
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Complementary and alternative medicine › Biofield Effects and Biophysics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Paranormal Experiences and Beliefs
Keywords
consciousness, panpsychism, fundamentalism, physicalism, emergent consciousness, quantum consciousness, objective reduction, Orchestrated Objective Reduction, microtubules, quantum computing

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review