Theories on the Landscape: an Orthogonal Approach
Journal of Consciousness Studies February 1, 2026 DOI: 10.53765/20512201.33.1.040 (opens in new tab)
Study at a glance
AI-extracted from the abstract| Characteristics | Theoretical or philosophical paper Peer reviewed |
|---|---|
| Key points | Argues that because falsification and prediction are difficult for phenomenal consciousness, theories should be assessed through two 'orthogonal' approaches: a 'landscape of consciousness' comparison of foundations, arguments, evidence, and prospects, and an exploration of implications for sentience-related questions such as AI consciousness, virtual immortality, free will, meaning, and life after death. The author contends these implications cannot directly confirm or refute a theory but may offer indirect insight, and applies both approaches to superpsychism. |
Abstract
Assessing theories of consciousness is a challenge. Normative scientific methodology, including falsification and prediction, is notoriously difficult when addressing phenomenal consciousness. For example, it is often less than obvious that the claimed predictions of theories reflect the actual essences of those theories. I suggest two 'orthogonal' approaches that, while not dispositive in principle, might be insightful in practice. The first is a comparison with other theories using what I call a 'landscape of consciousness' to discern commonalities and differences in their foundations, arguments, evidence, ways of thinking, and prospects of progress. The second is to explore the implications of theories with respect to big questions of sentience, including AI consciousness, virtual immortality, free will, meaning/purpose, and life after death. Of course, the implications of a theory, no matter what they are, cannot affirm or deny the veracity of that theory directly. However, just perhaps, the implications might offer insights indirectly. I apply both orthogonal approaches to superpsychism.