The Study of Consciousness Is Mired in Complexities and Difficulties: Can They Be Resolved?
Qeios September 29, 2024 DOI: 10.32388/sv6z7v.3 (opens in new tab)
Study at a glance
AI-extracted from the abstract| Characteristics | Theoretical or philosophical paper Peer reviewed |
|---|---|
| Topics | Philosophy of mind |
| Keywords | Consciousness Cognitive psychology Cognitive science |
| Key points | Argues that terminological confusion and lack of operational definitions impede progress in consciousness research, and proposes greater semantic clarity and a process-oriented view of consciousness. |
Abstract
This paper explores several etymological, semantic, sociolinguistic, and methodological issues that have, in my opinion, impeded the progress of consciousness research and discourse; and I offer some suggestions that are hopefully worthy of consideration and further discussion. I review the historical and extant conflation of terms in the literature; a plethora of published definitions and types of consciousness; and I call for greater “semantic lucidity”. I critique the rationale underpinning the search for the neural correlates of consciousness; advocate for greater adherence to the requirements of an operational definition in research; and discuss the notion of consciousness as a ‘process’ versus the premise of consciousness as a tangible ‘thing’ that can somehow be found in a particular locus within the material substrate of the nervous system.