A call for comparing theories of consciousness and data sharing.
Sarah L Eagleman, David M Eagleman, Vinod Menon, Kimford J Meador
The Behavioral and brain sciences March 23, 2022 DOI: 10.1017/s0140525x21001941 (opens in new tab) via PubMed
Summary
AI-generated from the abstractA commentary on critiques of the integrated information theory of consciousness acknowledges that some arguments have merit but argues that discarding the theory entirely is premature. The authors expect advances in the empirical study of consciousness in coming years and assert that theories should be ruled in or out only after independent testing with shared data. They propose future research directions.
Study at a glance
| Characteristics | Commentary Peer reviewed |
|---|---|
| Key finding | Argues that criticisms of integrated information theory have some merit but that discarding the theory is premature, and proposes future research directions. |
Abstract
Merker, Williford, and Rudrauf make several arguments against the integrated information theory of consciousness; whereas some have merit, their conclusion that the theory should be discarded is premature. Coming years promise advances in the empirical study of consciousness, and only after theories are independently tested with shared data can they be ruled in or out. We propose future research directions.