Ševčenko's law describing historians as dogs pissing at high frequency and accuracy on similar sets of trees despite the entire forest of general historical coverage available. Pointing to the enormity of trees not receiving mans best friend’s attention. If you replace historians with philosophers Ševčenko's law can be applied with the same message he created for historians. Now this does not mean this article on consciousness, which is a tree in the forest of "science/philosophy"is well watered to the delight of many dogs including me.

I appreciate and understand the pull of mathematics to solidify the science behind the tree of consciousness. Mathematics is a fantastic tool, very accurate, yet still an approximation to the reality we experience...through consciousness. Let's be real we all experience what ever this tinny word means. Tinny only due to what it attempts to define. Consciousness in this sense is like Gravity...we have a word that describes something mathematics has not totally defined. Yet, gravity is directly, intimately intertwined with giant bodies out in space and Consciousness is not. Consciousness is responsible for all the definitions and perceptions we can word on page. Consciousness created mathematics and all we discuss here on s/consciousness.

While reading this article I'm using all the linguistically separated parts of my brain that, which Tononi uses to understand how each part of the brain does its sharing of information. Question for Tononi: What do the micro tubules in our brain have to do with your theory. There are structure in our brain which travers multiple linguistically separated parts of our brain. Some believe these structures are involve in this sharing of information and is directly related to Dr. Tononi's theory presented. I am disappointed these micro structures where never mentioned in this article.

IMO, I am of the thoughts these days that we tap into consciousness. It is not found in any system within our body. It is an emergent characteristic of being alive. If one reads this article with this tapping in idea in the back of their mind. The meaning of his theory changes and may indicate we will not find consciousness...within the body.

Science: We are a system of embedded systems and personality is an emergent characteristic. Our eyes function upon a quantum particle labeled photon. Our eyes are quantum machinery and the brain behind it is a quantum computer. All my senses and I am sure we have more than the traditional 5 create what I experience as consciousness (it is not in my brain). Ancient Egyptians believed we had over 266 senses...not to indicate I believe the same thing, but why does modern science limit things to 5, they don't even know how to describe consciousness yet how could they know there are only five senses from which we derive consciousness? What the fuck is intuition, but integration of information by senses. Therefore, is it possible to increase abilities of intuition?

We talk of Gut Feelings and low and behold there is a ganglion mass behind your digestive track, which is rather large and some call it the second little brain. Consciousness, what ever it is becomes limited when you only see it as attached to the nervous system. Einstein said to repeat the same thing over and over is the first sign of insanity. Ševčenko's law says there are more trees to examine than the one we have been pissing on for centuries of study of the word consciousness. Maybe, just maybe we have learned all we can by thinking of consciousness as being in the brain. Where is your mind is it not of consciousness and how does this relate to "brain"? Brain is an organ and we can touch it. Mind and consciousness are not touchable and very difficult to scale and measure.

I see all main areas of human study are in the throws of a paradigm shift. The cutting edge of physics and philosophy of the mind are in need of a new focus of dog spray.

Under the metaphor of trees: If we limit Ševčenko's law to one tree then we have been studying only one part, section or branch of a tree. Maybe it is time to go out on an unexplored branch or root to stimulate new discussion. There are so many trees the historians do not study. Lettuce not repeat the same thing over and over, because Einstein and dog piss. Shit this guy knew he was not totally correct with his General Relativity as he raised his glass to toast his Noble prize. Then he went back to the laboratory to unifying things.

Dissecting the parts of the brain to understand its total functioning is ok. Yet, at some point we are required to look at the whole, entire systems of systems embedded in a total system...and then there's environment.