Experiencing without knowing? Empirical evidence for phenomenal consciousness without access

Amir, Yoni; Assaf, Yaniv; Yovel, Yossi; Mudrik, Liad

doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2023.105529

Cited by 10 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…By virtue of being a 'dishwasher example' (see Kirkeby-Hinrup and Fazekas, 2021, p. 6 for details), previously this would have been classified as 'Coherent but Untestable' . However, a novel study (Amir et al, 2023) operationalized the same effect with results seeming to corroborate the intuition. Consequently, the pneumatic drill effect more properly belongs in the 'Coherent and Testable' category.…”

Section: Arbitrariness In Scoring Ordinals and The Updating Mechanismmentioning

confidence: 67%

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

Kirkeby-Hinrup

2024

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

Section: Arbitrariness In Scoring Ordinals and The Updating Mechanismmentioning

confidence: 67%