Skip to content

NCC research and the problem of consciousness

Michael Pauen

Philosophy and the Mind Sciences December 30, 2021 DOI: 10.33735/phimisci.2021.9188 (opens in new tab)

Study at a glance

AI-extracted from the abstract
Characteristics Theoretical or philosophical paper Peer reviewed
Key points Argues that the Neural Correlates of Consciousness program's assumption of independence between theoretical and empirical questions is mistaken, because the two levels are mutually dependent. Contends that empirical progress in NCC research will go hand in hand with theoretical development, and that such research may contribute to explaining consciousness and possibly to solving the Hard Problem of Consciousness.

Abstract

One of the reasons why the Neural Correlates of Consciousness Program could appear attractive in the 1990s was that it seemed to disentangle theoretical and empirical problems. Theoretical disagreements could thus be sidestepped in order to focus on empirical research regarding the neural substrate of consciousness. One of the further consequences of this dissociation of empirical and theoretical questions was that fundamental questions regarding the Mind Body Problem or the “Hard Problem of Consciousness” could remain unresolved even if the search for the neural correlates had been successful.Drawing on historical examples, a widely held consensus in the philosophy of science, and actual NCC research we argue that there is no such independence. Moreover, as the dependence between the theoretical and the empirical level is mutual, empirical progress will go hand in hand with theoretical development. Thus, contrary to what the original NCC program suggested, we conclude that NCC research may significantly take advantage from and contribute to theoretical progress in our explanation and understanding of consciousness. Eventually, this might even contribute to a solution of the Hard Problem of Consciousness.

Citations in the library

Explore topics