<p>Wikipedia's answer is a better answer than I could offer as to what the higher self is, because that's all you've used to define it, and as Wikipedia says, it's "a term associated with multiple belief systems," and probably differs rather widely across the gamut. Regardless of how odd some of those beliefs might get, it probably <em>shouldn't</em> be synonymous with the prefrontal neocortex or basal ganglia, each of which has multiple functions that couldn't simply be equated to what most people mean when they say "higher self."</p>

<p>In one aspect at least, there may be some overlap between the "higher self" concept and the prefrontal cortex. To whatever extent "higher self" means "self-awareness," the prefrontal cortex is probably involved in that...<a href="http://www.mpg.de/5925490/meta-consciousness-brain" rel="nofollow noreferrer">This article</a> offers an interesting image from magnetic resonance tomography, and these quotes [emphasis added]:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>A specific cortical network consisting of the <strong>right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex</strong>, the <strong>frontopolar regions</strong> and the <strong>precuneus</strong> is...associated with self-reflective functions...</p>
  
  <p>By comparing the activity of the brain during...lucid periods with the activity measured immediately before in a normal dream, the scientists were able to identify the characteristic brain activities of lucid awareness.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>So note that this is self-awareness in the context of dreaming. The original article (<a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3369221/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Dresler et al., 2012</a>) is free, and mentions an interesting method for distinguishing lucid from normal dreaming, BTW. As for consciousness in general, we have some pretty interesting questions with richly informative answers here already, including:</p>

<ul>
<li><a href="https://cogsci.stackexchange.com/q/987/4086">What are current neuronal explanations and models of &#39;consciousness&#39;?</a></li>
<li><a href="https://cogsci.stackexchange.com/q/1117/4086">Is there a region of cortex which over a period of development becomes the seat of self?</a></li>
<li><a href="https://cogsci.stackexchange.com/q/96/4086">Research suggesting conscious control over brain region activation?</a></li>
<li><a href="https://cogsci.stackexchange.com/q/40/4086">If someone becomes a split-brain patient, which side will &quot;maintain&quot; the continuity in their consciousness?</a></li>
</ul>

<p>And as for the subconscious, Wikipedia again gives a pretty decent answer. Since the term is frequently misattributed to psychoanalysis, and may be most popular in pseudoscientific contexts, I prefer to point you directly to the section on <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subconscious#The_subconscious_and_psychoanalysis" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Freud's answer</a> and advocate his general practice of avoiding the term altogether (except for the sake of criticizing it). Freud used "<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preconscious" rel="nofollow noreferrer">preconscious</a>" and "unconscious" in distinct ways that cognitive psychology has adopted somewhat as well, so those terms are generally much more useful and well-defined scientifically...though that's not saying all that much. However, thanks to @ArtemKaznatcheev, we also have a question here that says a little more: <a href="https://cogsci.stackexchange.com/q/992/4086">Subconscious vs Unconscious</a></p>

<p><strong>Reference</strong></p>

<p>Dresler, M., Wehrle, R., Spoormaker, V. I., Koch, S. P., Holsboer, F., Steiger, A., Obrig, H., Sämann, P. G., &amp; Czisch, M. (2012). Neural correlates of dream lucidity obtained from contrasting lucid versus non-lucid REM sleep: A combined EEG/fMRI case study. <em>Sleep, 35</em>(7), 1017-1020. Available online, URL: <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3369221/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3369221/</a>. Retrieved January 25, 2014.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-01-26T09:23:39.080Z
I generally do, but I think he's right on this one! There are worse theorists more worth avoiding out there...
Nick Stauner
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-01-26T06:49:52.360Z
2014-01-27T07:11:55.850Z
2017-04-13T12:56:16.467Z
Nick Stauner
<p>Some religious or philosophical systems hold that there is an immaterial divine component to human existence, like the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soul" rel="nofollow">Soul</a> or the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higher_self" rel="nofollow">Higher Self</a>.</p>

<p>Is there any kind of scientific evidence that such a supernatural essence of the person exists, and if so, can it be located in a specific part of the brain?</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-01-26T04:27:32.817Z
"People sometimes say" - which people?
Chuck Sherrington
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-01-26T08:41:36.297Z
@caseyr547 This is a scientific site.  Diluting the actual science with nonsense is not productive in the long run.
Chuck Sherrington
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-01-26T08:55:24.923Z
@caseyr547 If it's a religion question, would you say it's appropriate for a cognitive *sciences* site?  You don't seem to get that.
Chuck Sherrington
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-01-26T08:58:39.647Z
This question appears to be off-topic because it is not about the cognitive sciences.
Chuck Sherrington
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-01-26T09:34:53.683Z
I still have that question flagged as primarily opinion-based...Dualism might be a cognitive question of sorts, but it's not a very scientific question. Regardless, it's no exemplar to say the least. Nor is this question about [Gnosticism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnosticism), which is itself not cognitive, scientific, nor synonymous with "higher self." IMO, the saving grace of this question is its attempt to relate these concepts to neuropsychology and cognitive structural theory...albeit in a rather misguided way. I've tried to address this, and would welcome other answers/comments.
Nick Stauner
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-01-26T09:41:57.457Z
...and with the newest edit, I've chosen to vote on this as too broad. "Unclear what you're asking" would've worked too, because the belief in question hasn't been defined sufficiently, but this is especially true if we're to also consider the question of why people hold their various beliefs in various "higher selves"...
Nick Stauner
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-01-26T13:37:51.163Z
The "soul" may be a separate concept from the "higher self", and may not be of interest to the OPer...Also, this is now looking even more duplicative of [the other question](http://cogsci.stackexchange.com/q/5194/4086)...
Nick Stauner
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-01-26T13:58:27.017Z
In theory many things are vague. What is people? What is government? What is moral? Doesn't mean science can't answer that. We know that morality homunculus resides somewhere on the brain.
user4951
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-01-26T22:52:41.777Z
There are much better definitions for each of those (except "morality homunculus") than for "higher self," which may not exist at all, depending on how **you** define it. **You** have the option to be more specific.
Nick Stauner
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-11-14T18:18:37.200Z
The question is more suitable at [New Age](http://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/79948/new-age) sites.
kenorb
<consciousness>
What is our higher self?
user4951
# What is our higher self?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2014-01-26)

Some religious or philosophical systems hold that there is an immaterial divine component to human existence, like the [Soul](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soul) or the [Higher Self](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higher_self).

Is there any kind of scientific evidence that such a supernatural essence of the person exists, and if so, can it be located in a specific part of the brain?

**Tags:** consciousness

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: "People sometimes say" - which people?  
> **username_1**: @caseyr547 This is a scientific site.  Diluting the actual science with nonsense is not productive in the long run.  
> **username_1**: @caseyr547 If it's a religion question, would you say it's appropriate for a cognitive *sciences* site?  You don't seem to get that.  
> **username_1**: This question appears to be off-topic because it is not about the cognitive sciences.  
> **username_2**: I still have that question flagged as primarily opinion-based...Dualism might be a cognitive question of sorts, but it's not a very scientific question. Regardless, it's no exemplar to say the least. Nor is this question about [Gnosticism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnosticism), which is itself not cognitive, scientific, nor synonymous with "higher self." IMO, the saving grace of this question is its attempt to relate these concepts to neuropsychology and cognitive structural theory...albeit in a rather misguided way. I've tried to address this, and would welcome other answers/comments.  
> **username_2**: ...and with the newest edit, I've chosen to vote on this as too broad. "Unclear what you're asking" would've worked too, because the belief in question hasn't been defined sufficiently, but this is especially true if we're to also consider the question of why people hold their various beliefs in various "higher selves"...  
> **username_2**: The "soul" may be a separate concept from the "higher self", and may not be of interest to the OPer...Also, this is now looking even more duplicative of [the other question](http://cogsci.stackexchange.com/q/5194/4086)...  
> **username_0**: In theory many things are vague. What is people? What is government? What is moral? Doesn't mean science can't answer that. We know that morality homunculus resides somewhere on the brain.  
> **username_2**: There are much better definitions for each of those (except "morality homunculus") than for "higher self," which may not exist at all, depending on how **you** define it. **You** have the option to be more specific.  
> **username_3**: The question is more suitable at [New Age](http://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/79948/new-age) sites.  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_2 on 2014-01-26. Score: 2 | Accepted answer

Wikipedia's answer is a better answer than I could offer as to what the higher self is, because that's all you've used to define it, and as Wikipedia says, it's "a term associated with multiple belief systems," and probably differs rather widely across the gamut. Regardless of how odd some of those beliefs might get, it probably *shouldn't* be synonymous with the prefrontal neocortex or basal ganglia, each of which has multiple functions that couldn't simply be equated to what most people mean when they say "higher self."

In one aspect at least, there may be some overlap between the "higher self" concept and the prefrontal cortex. To whatever extent "higher self" means "self-awareness," the prefrontal cortex is probably involved in that...[This article](http://www.mpg.de/5925490/meta-consciousness-brain) offers an interesting image from magnetic resonance tomography, and these quotes [emphasis added]:

> A specific cortical network consisting of the **right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex**, the **frontopolar regions** and the **precuneus** is...associated with self-reflective functions...
>
> By comparing the activity of the brain during...lucid periods with the activity measured immediately before in a normal dream, the scientists were able to identify the characteristic brain activities of lucid awareness.

So note that this is self-awareness in the context of dreaming. The original article ([Dresler et al., 2012](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3369221/)) is free, and mentions an interesting method for distinguishing lucid from normal dreaming, BTW. As for consciousness in general, we have some pretty interesting questions with richly informative answers here already, including:

* [What are current neuronal explanations and models of 'consciousness'?](https://cogsci.stackexchange.com/q/987/4086)
* [Is there a region of cortex which over a period of development becomes the seat of self?](https://cogsci.stackexchange.com/q/1117/4086)
* [Research suggesting conscious control over brain region activation?](https://cogsci.stackexchange.com/q/96/4086)
* [If someone becomes a split-brain patient, which side will "maintain" the continuity in their consciousness?](https://cogsci.stackexchange.com/q/40/4086)

And as for the subconscious, Wikipedia again gives a pretty decent answer. Since the term is frequently misattributed to psychoanalysis, and may be most popular in pseudoscientific contexts, I prefer to point you directly to the section on [Freud's answer](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subconscious#The_subconscious_and_psychoanalysis) and advocate his general practice of avoiding the term altogether (except for the sake of criticizing it). Freud used "[preconscious](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preconscious)" and "unconscious" in distinct ways that cognitive psychology has adopted somewhat as well, so those terms are generally much more useful and well-defined scientifically...though that's not saying all that much. However, thanks to @ArtemKaznatcheev, we also have a question here that says a little more: [Subconscious vs Unconscious](https://cogsci.stackexchange.com/q/992/4086)

**Reference**

Dresler, M., Wehrle, R., Spoormaker, V. I., Koch, S. P., Holsboer, F., Steiger, A., Obrig, H., Sämann, P. G., & Czisch, M. (2012). Neural correlates of dream lucidity obtained from contrasting lucid versus non-lucid REM sleep: A combined EEG/fMRI case study. *Sleep, 35*(7), 1017-1020. Available online, URL: <http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3369221/>. Retrieved January 25, 2014.

> **Comments:**
> **username_2**: I generally do, but I think he's right on this one! There are worse theorists more worth avoiding out there...  

---

