Skip to content

What is a Pseudoscience of Consciousness? Lessons from Recent Adversarial Collaborations

Hakwan Lau

September 17, 2023 preprint DOI: 10.31234/osf.io/28z3y (opens in new tab)

Study at a glance

AI-extracted from the abstract
Characteristics Commentary
Citations 5
Key points Argues that the problems surrounding the adversarial collaboration on testing theories of consciousness (ARC-Cogitate) are institutional rather than merely scientific, and contends that these issues extend beyond consciousness science to open science, cognitive neuroscience, and neurobiology, potentially harming the broader scientific community if not addressed together.

Abstract

Some colleagues have questioned about our recent joint statement (Fleming et al 2023), so I try to address them here, as well as to provide some background. I also discuss what I think really went wrong with the recent adversarial collaboration on testing theories of consciousness (ARC-Cogitate), which has in part led to the statement. In a previous open review I already discussed the scientific content of their recent preprint. Here I focus on the institutional context, from my own personal perspective, as someone familiar with both the project itself and several other related (ongoing) projects in the field. There are issues that concern more than the subfield of consciousness science alone; advocates of open science, cognitive neuroscience, and theories in neurobiology in general may also benefit from some awareness of these problems, as they may end up spreading to and reflecting badly on the broader scientific community - if we do not make an effort to address them together.

Citations in the library