Abstract
AbstractIn consciousness science, theories often differ not only in the account of consciousness they arrive at, but also with respect to how they understand their starting point. Some approaches begin with experimentally gathered data, whereas others begin with phenomenologically gathered data. In this paper, I analyse how the most influential phenomenology-first approach, namely the Integrated Information Theory (IIT) of consciousness, fits its phenomenologically gathered data with explanatory hypotheses. First, I show that experimentally driven approaches hit an explanatory roadblock, since we cannot tell, at the present stage, which model of consciousness is best. Then, I show that IIT’s phenomenology-first approach implies a self-evidencing explanation according to which consciousness can be explained by starting from consciousness itself. I claim that IIT can take advantage of the virtuous circularity of this reasoning, but it also faces a data-fitting issue that is somehow similar to that faced by experiment-driven approaches: we are not given enough information to decide whether the explanatory hypotheses IIT employs to explain its phenomenological data are in fact best. I call this problem “the self-evidencing problem” for IIT, and after introducing it, I propose a possible way for IIT to solve it.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Philosophy,Experimental and Cognitive Psychology
Reference74 articles.
1. Barbosa, L. S., W. Marshall, L. Albantakis, and G. Tononi. 2021. Mechanism Integrated Information. Entropy 23 (3): 362.
2. Barrett, A. B., and P. A. M. Mediano. 2019. The Phi Measure of Integrated Information is not Well-Defined for General Phsyical Systems. Journal of Consciousness Studies 26 (1–2): 11–20.
3. Bayne, T. 2018. On the axiomatic foundations of the integrated information theory of consciousness. Neurosci Conscious 2018 (1): niy007. doi:https://doi.org/10.1093/nc/niy007.
4. Block, N. 1995. On a confusion about a function of consciousness. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 18 (2): 227–247.
5. Block, N. 2007. Consciousness, accessibility, and the mesh between psychology and neuroscience. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 30 (5–6): 481–499. doi:https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X07002786.
Cited by
2 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献