Skip to content

Three Comments in Case of a Structural Turn in Consciousness Science

Johannes Kleiner

September 4, 2023 preprint DOI: 10.31234/osf.io/qmyv5 (opens in new tab)

Study at a glance

AI-extracted from the abstract
Characteristics Theoretical or philosophical paper
Key points Argues that the growing structural turn in consciousness studies, which replaces verbal or simple formal descriptions with mathematical structures, requires early clarification of three issues: the metaphysical premises of structuralist approaches, overlooked assumptions about isomorphisms, and which structure should be attributed to consciousness itself. The author also contends that a structuralist methodology holds significant promise for consciousness science.

Abstract

Recent activities in virtually all fields engaged in consciousness studies indicate early signs of a structural turn, where verbal descriptions or simple formalisations of conscious experiences are replaced by structural tools, most notably mathematical spaces. My goal here is to offer three comments that, in my opinion, are essential to avoid misunderstandings in these developments early on. These comments concern metaphysical premises of structuralist approaches, overlooked assumptions in regard to isomorphisms, and the question of what structure to consider on the side of consciousness in the first place. I will also explain what, in my opinion, are the great promises of a structuralist methodology and how they might impact consciousness science at large.

Citations in the library

Explore topics