Do you really think my comments on 'mindfulness' were inappropriate on this forum?

As a matter of fact, There's a reason I didn't bring up this observation on Off Topic, or Current Events. Although I haven't thought it out thoroughly yet, I've always felt that our having a brain divided into two apparently identical but nevertheless distinct yet connected lobes (hardware) reflected a major feature of our software architecture. This is what philosophers call The Problem of Consciousness; just what is self-awareness? We all have this feeling that there is a "someone" in our brains that monitors and oversees our routine cognitive activities. Freud called it the Superego, Jaynes* came up with the concept of the bicameral mind, claiming it has a fairly recent historical development. We all know we have it, but we can't prove it, or even describe it. And some psychologists even think it is an illusion (the word they use is epiphenomenon). The Problem of Consciousness is a valid scientific question. In fact, it may very well be the only one that really matters.

I must confess I did poke some fun at the trendy, New Age aspects of 'mindfulness', and how it suddenly seems to have become a big deal in pop culture. But I do think something important is going on here, something worthy of the Science forum. I can't fully understand just what consciousness is, something philosophers and psychologists have been wrestling with for centuries. Its a slippery topic. I'm poking fun at the pop psychology, but the issue is real. We're even trying to program it into our computers,
or fearing it might evolve naturally in them. Why not, it did in our heads. And lets face it, our brain is nothing but a computer.

* "The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind", Julian Jaynes