Bonkerism: a NEW Science of Consciousness?
PsyArXiv March 15, 2024 preprint DOI: 10.31234/osf.io/5e3uz (opens in new tab)
Study at a glance
AI-extracted from the abstract| Characteristics | Commentary |
|---|---|
| Key points | Argues that the debate over whether integrated information theory is pseudoscience reflects a deeper philosophical divide within the science of consciousness, and proposes shifting attention from the theory itself to that underlying disagreement. |
Abstract
Here I respond to Anil Seth’s recent article on the Worth of Wild Ideas (2023). The debate on whether the integrated information theory (IIT) of consciousness is pseudoscience continues, involving many authors on both sides. Here, instead of focusing on the theory, I highlight a deeper philosophical divide within the science of consciousness.
Citations in the library
Cites 9
- Where is the ‘posterior hot zone’? Open Review of Cogitate et al (2023): “An Adversarial Collaboration to Critically Evaluate Theories of Consciousness” August 18, 2023
- What is a Pseudoscience of Consciousness? Lessons from Recent Adversarial Collaborations September 17, 2023
- Communicating and conducting modern consciousness science July 7, 2023
- A reply to Dr. Erik Hoel’s post regarding the overpromotion of IIT October 10, 2023
- The Integrated Information Theory of Consciousness as Pseudoscience PsyArXiv September 16, 2023
and 4 more in the library