Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T20:23:26.388Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Meta-criteria to formulate criteria of consciousness

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 March 2022

Boris Kotchoubey Open the ORCID record for Boris Kotchoubey [Opens in a new window]
Boris Kotchoubey*
Affiliation:
Institute of Medical Psychology and Behavioral Neurobiology, University of Tübingen, 72076Tübingen, Germany. [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Any neurobiological model claiming explanation of a complex human phenomenon should start with an explicit definition of the explanandum. If a classical intensional definition is impossible, we can use a descriptive definition by listing necessary criteria (e.g., of consciousness). This commentary suggests four meta-criteria that different proposed criteria of consciousness should fulfill: phenomenological consensus, empirical evidence, domain specificity, and non-circularity.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 45 , 2022 , e53
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Baars, B. (1988). A cognitive theory of consciousness. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bechtel, W. (1994). Levels of description and explanation in cognitive science. Minds and Machines, 4, 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, M. G. (1959). Causality and explanation in the logic of Aristotle. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 19(4), 466–485. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2105115?casa_token=HZLTKwPFekwAAAAA%3AarFhtFHNJBYd81n4JHS-qPkYlRkZqsNAe0 jUALy-tW8KcdxYwZw10QPEKfXWSKcaesCJWbcJO63UIExlKxlsrmZNPfCQzvFhw hiBdm_gXoBC4f8MwA&seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contentsCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keil, F. C. (2006). Explanation and understanding. Annual Review of Psychology, 57, 227–254. Doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.57.102904.190100CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kotchoubey, B. (2018). Human consciousness: Where is it from and what is it for. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 567. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00567CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kotchoubey, B., Tretter, F., Braun, H. A., Draguhn, A., Fuchs, T., … Tschacher, W. (2016). Methodological problems on the way to integrative human neuroscience. Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience, 10, 41. doi: 10.3389/fnint.2016.00041CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kotchoubey, B., Vogel, D., Lang, S., & Müller, F. (2014). What kind of consciousness is minimal? Brain Injury, 28, 1156–1163. doi: 10.3109/02699052.2014.920523CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Merker, B. (2013). Cortical gamma oscillations: The key is activation, not cognition. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 37(3), 401–417. doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2013.01.013CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Monroe, A. E., & Malle, B. F. (2010). From uncaused will to conscious choice: The need to study, not speculate about people's folk concept of the free will. Review of Philosophy and Psychology, 1, 211–224. doi: 10.1007/s13164-009-0010-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Palanka, B. J. A., & DeAngelis, G. C. (2005). Does neural synchrony underlie visual feature grouping? Neuron, 46, 333–346. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2005.03.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Panksepp, J. (2005). Affective consciousness: Core emotional feelings in animals and humans. Consciousness and Cognition, 14, 30–80. doi: 10.1016/j.concog.2004.10.004CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rauschecker, J. P. (1998). Cortical processing of complex sounds. Current Opinions in Neurobiology, 8(4), 516–521. doi: 10.1016./s0959-4388(98)80040-8CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Seth, A. K., Baars, B. J., & Edelman, D. B. (2005). Criteria for consciousness in humans and other mammals. Consciousness and Cognition, 14, 119–139. doi: 10.1016/j.concog.2004.08.006CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Seth, A. K., Dienes, Z., Cleeremans, A., Overgaard, M., & Pessoa, L. (2008). Measuring consciousness: Relating behavioral and neurophysiological approaches. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 12, 314–321. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2008.04.008CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shadlen, M. N., & Movshon, J. A. (1999). Synchrony unbound: A critical evaluation of the temporal binding hypothesis. Neuron, 24, 67–77. http://www.neurosciences.us/courses/vision2/V1V2/shadlen99.pdf 10.1016/S0896-6273(00)80822-3CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vonasch, A. J., & Baumeister, R. F. (2013). Implications of free will beliefs for basic theory and societal benefits: Critique and implications for social psychology. British Journal of Social Psychology, 52, 219–227. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8309.2012.02102.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar