Skip to main content

Lund University Publications

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

Quantifying empirical support for theories of consciousness : a tentative methodological framework

Kirkeby-Hinrup, Asger LU (2024) In Frontiers in Psychology 15.
Abstract

Understanding consciousness is central to understanding human nature. We have competing theories of consciousness. In interdisciplinary consciousness studies most believe that consciousness can be naturalized (i.e., consciousness depends in some substantial way on processes in — or states of — the brain). For roughly two decades, proponents of almost every theory have focused on collecting empirical support for their preferred theory, on the tacit assumption that empirical evidence will resolve the debates. Yet, it remains unclear how empirical evidence can do this in practice. Here I address this issue by offering (a sketch of) a methodology to quantify the divergent sets of empirical support proposed in favor of extant theories of... (More)

Understanding consciousness is central to understanding human nature. We have competing theories of consciousness. In interdisciplinary consciousness studies most believe that consciousness can be naturalized (i.e., consciousness depends in some substantial way on processes in — or states of — the brain). For roughly two decades, proponents of almost every theory have focused on collecting empirical support for their preferred theory, on the tacit assumption that empirical evidence will resolve the debates. Yet, it remains unclear how empirical evidence can do this in practice. Here I address this issue by offering (a sketch of) a methodology to quantify the divergent sets of empirical support proposed in favor of extant theories of consciousness. This in turn forms the foundation for a process of inference to the best explanation inspired by Bayesian confirmation theory. In interdisciplinary consciousness studies we are blessed with an abundance of theories, but we have reached a point where, going forward, it would be beneficial to focus on the most promising ones. Methods for assessment and comparison are necessary to identify which those are. While future refinement is likely, the methodology for assessment and comparison proposed here is a first step toward a novel way of approaching this through a quantification of empirical support for theories of consciousness.

(Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
keywords
assessment, Bayesian updating, comparison, consciouness, empirical evidence, inference to the best explanation, theories of consciousness
in
Frontiers in Psychology
volume
15
article number
1341430
publisher
Frontiers Media S. A.
external identifiers
  • scopus:85189501395
  • pmid:38558781
ISSN
1664-1078
DOI
10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1341430
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
f3c5b8a3-cd7e-43ce-8808-a4e359bc9cf7
date added to LUP
2024-04-22 12:51:14
date last changed
2024-04-23 03:00:05
@article{f3c5b8a3-cd7e-43ce-8808-a4e359bc9cf7,
  abstract     = {{<p>Understanding consciousness is central to understanding human nature. We have competing theories of consciousness. In interdisciplinary consciousness studies most believe that consciousness can be naturalized (i.e., consciousness depends in some substantial way on processes in — or states of — the brain). For roughly two decades, proponents of almost every theory have focused on collecting empirical support for their preferred theory, on the tacit assumption that empirical evidence will resolve the debates. Yet, it remains unclear how empirical evidence can do this in practice. Here I address this issue by offering (a sketch of) a methodology to quantify the divergent sets of empirical support proposed in favor of extant theories of consciousness. This in turn forms the foundation for a process of inference to the best explanation inspired by Bayesian confirmation theory. In interdisciplinary consciousness studies we are blessed with an abundance of theories, but we have reached a point where, going forward, it would be beneficial to focus on the most promising ones. Methods for assessment and comparison are necessary to identify which those are. While future refinement is likely, the methodology for assessment and comparison proposed here is a first step toward a novel way of approaching this through a quantification of empirical support for theories of consciousness.</p>}},
  author       = {{Kirkeby-Hinrup, Asger}},
  issn         = {{1664-1078}},
  keywords     = {{assessment; Bayesian updating; comparison; consciouness; empirical evidence; inference to the best explanation; theories of consciousness}},
  language     = {{eng}},
  publisher    = {{Frontiers Media S. A.}},
  series       = {{Frontiers in Psychology}},
  title        = {{Quantifying empirical support for theories of consciousness : a tentative methodological framework}},
  url          = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1341430}},
  doi          = {{10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1341430}},
  volume       = {{15}},
  year         = {{2024}},
}