It almost goes without saying this, but much of our present day science appears to be a mild to strong reaction against 19th century science claims which at one time were considered to be almost sacrosanct. If Newton's clock work materialist world held sway over the hearts and minds of that era, today that materialist interpretation is fighting, arguably, trench a warfare battle against the science of Quantum Mechanics (QM) including recently, quantum consciousness (e.g., Orch-OR) and quantum biology. This is just one example. There are others such battles as how the sun operates and how the universe came into existence.
Signs of such a battle go back to the beginning of the 20th century and maybe earlier. Max Planck, a German theoretical physicist who is credited with originating quantum theory; who is an important vanguard in this battle, was once asked by a reporter if he thought that consciousness could be explained in terms of matter and its laws, to which he replied:
"Consciousness I regard as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness. We cannot get behind consciousness. Everything that we talk about, everything that we regard as existing postulates consciousness" (J. W. N. Sullivan, "Interview with Max Planck," Observer, January 25, 1931).
This is not what some neuroscientists wish to hear who are fighting for Newton's clock work world that is heavily espoused to a materialistic philosophy in its various disguises and developments all intended and designed to "get behind consciousness". The most notable example of this was when Carl Sagan said in his book, Cosmos, "The cerebral cortex, where matter is transformed into consciousness, is the point of embarkation for all our cosmic voyages." Yes, for Sagan, the brain was behind it all; at least that is what he believed. And many still believe this to be a fact, even today. I know, I drink coffee with their graduate students now and then!
I can say with certainty, these apostles who spread the word of Newton's world are not going to go down without a vicious intellectual fight to their imaginary hilts. Having said this, here is what concerns me. Too many of these defenders of materialism have come to Buddhism, believing I suspect, that the Buddha was a materialist with his theory of no-soul. But the only person who preached such a theory as no-soul when the Buddha was still alive was Ajita Kesakambali who taught a form of materialism who believed we are composed of matter, and that there is no soul. The Buddha rejected his philosophy.
Many of those new to Buddhism are persuaded that modern science with its fMRI instrument have proven already that consciousness comes from the brain—just look at those MRI pictures which show the brain creating states of consciousness! They believe that mind or consciousness cannot be fundamental (but it is) which if it were would make matter a derivation or the same, a dependent origination of mind. Perish the thought!