Skip to content

The Hard Problem, Revisited: Adversarial Collaboration Can’t Overcome Mainstream Consciousness Science’s Axiomatic Assumption that ‘0 = 1’

Nicholas Martin Rosseinsky

preprint DOI: 10.31234/osf.io/6x29u (opens in new tab)

Study at a glance

AI-extracted from the abstract
Characteristics Theoretical or philosophical paper
Topics Philosophy of mind
Key points Argues that consciousness science suffers from a contradictory foundational assumption ('0 = 1') that causes unresolved methodological flaws, and that these flaws impair scientific commentary on AI.

Abstract

Biology and psychology have replication issues. 'Adversarial collaboration', where advocates of competing hypotheses cooperate on experiments, may help resolve these - if sub-optimal design is their source! But in mainstream consciousness science, the real origin of protracted problems is an inherently-contradictory, '0 = 1', assumption, in current field-foundations. Here, a mathematical-system analogy is used to explain serious and unresolved flaws in the basic methodology of current consciousness science, and to explore ways to fix them. Because of perceived links between consciousness and intelligence, these flaws profoundly affect science’s ability to offer coherent societal commentary on continuing developments in AI.

Comparable studies

Other theoretical and historical papers on philosophy of mind, most cited first.

Citations in the library

Explore topics