The quest to understand where consciousness originates is ongoing, with neuroscientists divided on two primary theories: Integrated Information Theory (IIT) and Global Neuronal Workspace Theory (GNWT). Both approaches differ significantly in their definitions and scientific foundations. Recently, the Cogitate Consortium, comprising 12 laboratories, conducted a major brain-imaging study that yielded inconclusive results, indicating a need for further inquiry. While one theory faced criticism as pseudoscience, the ongoing debate highlights the complexity of studying consciousness, suggesting that insights could arise regardless of which theory prevails.
Unlike other phenomena studied by science, consciousness cannot be observed externally. I observe your behavior. I observe your brain, but I don't ever observe your experience.
To compare them directly, researchers organized a group of 12 laboratories called the Cogitate Consortium to test the theories' predictions against each other in a large brain-imaging study.
The Cogitate results point to a way forward for understanding how consciousness arisesâno matter what theory eventually comes out on top.
Only a few months later, a group of scholars publicly called IIT pseudoscience and attempted to excise it from the field.
Collection
[
|
...
]