Subjective experience has often taken center stage in debates between competing conceptual theories of the mind. This is also a central object of concern in the empirical domain, and especially in the search for the neural correlates of consciousness (NCCs). By now, most of the competing conceptual theories of consciousness have become aligned with distinct hypotheses about the NCCs. These hypotheses are usually distinguished by reference to their proposed location of the NCCs. This difference in hypothesized location of the NCCs has tempted participants in these debates to infer that evidence indicating the location of the NCCs in one or the other brain region can be taken as direct evidence for or against a given conceptual theory of consciousness. We argue that this is an overestimation of the work finding the NCCs can do for us, and that there are principled reasons to resist this kind of inference. To show this we point out the lack of both an isomorphism and a homomorphism between the conceptual frameworks in which most theories are cached, and the kind of data we can get from neuroimaging. The upshot is that neural activation profiles are insufficient to distinguish between competing theories in the conceptual domain. We suggest two ways to go about ameliorating this issue.
Beeckmans, J. (2007). Can higher-order representation theories pass scientific muster? Journal of Consciousness Studies, 14(9-1), 90–111.
Block, N. (2019). What is wrong with the no-report paradigm and how to fix it. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 23(12), 1003–1013. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2019.10.001
Boly, M., Massimini, M., Tsuchiya, N., Postle, B. R., Koch, C., & Tononi, G. (2017). Are the neural correlates of consciousness in the front or in the back of the cerebral cortex? Clinical and neuroimaging evidence. Journal of Neuroscience, 37(40), 9603–9613. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3218-16.2017
Brown, R. (2012). The brain and its states. In S. Edelman, T. Fekete, & N. Zach (Eds.), Being in time: Dynamical models of phenomenal experience (Vol. 88, pp. 211–238). https://doi.org/10.1075/aicr.88.10bro
Brown, R., Lau, H., & LeDoux, J. E. (2019). Understanding the higher-order approach to consciousness. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 23(9), 754–768. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2019.06.009
Carandini, M. (2012). From circuits to behavior: A bridge too far? Nature Neuroscience, 15(4), 507–509. https://doi.org/10.1038/nn.3043
Churchland, P. M. (1981). Eliminative materialism and the propositional attitudes. Journal of Philosophy, 78(2), 67–90. https://doi.org/10.2307/2025900
Crouzet, S. M., Kovalenko, L. Y., Del Pin, S. H., Overgaard, M., & Busch, N. A. (2017). Early visual processing allows for selective behavior, shifts of attention, and conscious visual experience in spite of masking. Consciousness and Cognition, 54, 89–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2017.01.021
Crouzet, S. M., Overgaard, M., & Busch, N. A. (2014). The fastest saccadic responses escape visual masking. PloS One, 9(2), e87418. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0087418
Da Costa, N., & French, S. (1990). The model-theoretic approach in the philosophy of science. Philosophy of Science, 57(2), 248–265. https://doi.org/10.1086/289546
Fink, S. B. (2016). A deeper look at the “neural correlate of consciousness.” Frontiers in Psychology, 7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01044
Fleming, S. M., & Dolan, R. J. (2012). The neural basis of metacognitive ability. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 367(1594), 1338–1349. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2011.0417
Frässle, S., Sommer, J., Jansen, A., Naber, M., & Einhäuser, W. (2014). Binocular rivalry: Frontal activity relates to introspection and action but not to perception. Journal of Neuroscience, 34(5), 1738–1747. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4403-13.2014
Frith, C. D., & Frith, U. (2006). The neural basis of mentalizing. Neuron, 50(4), 531–534. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2006.05.001
Genon, S., Reid, A., Langner, R., Amunts, K., & Eickhoff, S. B. (2018). How to characterize the function of a brain region. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 22(4), 350–364. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2018.01.010
Glock, H. (1997). Kant and Wittgenstein: Philosophy, necessity and representation. International Journal of Philosophical Studies, 5(2), 285–305. https://doi.org/10.1080/09672559708570857
Kirkeby-Hinrup, A. (2020). A higher-order faculty and beyond. In Overgaard, Morten and Mogensen, Jesper and Kirkeby-Hinrup, Asger (Ed.), Beyond the neural correlates of consciousness (pp. 131–152). Psychology Press, Routledge.
Koch, C., Massimini, M., Boly, M., & Tononi, G. (2016). Neural correlates of consciousness: Progress and problems. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 17, 307. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn.2016.22
Koivisto, M., & Revonsuo, A. (2010). Event-related brain potential correlates of visual awareness. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 34(6), 922–934. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2009.12.002
Kozuch, B. (2014). Prefrontal lesion evidence against higher-order theories of consciousness. Philosophical Studies, 167(3), 721–746. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-013-0123-9
Kriegel, U. (2007). A cross-order integration hypothesis for the neural correlate of consciousness. Consciousness and Cognition, 16(4), 897–912. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2007.02.001
Lamme, V. A. F. (2006). Towards a true neural stance on consciousness. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10(11), 494–501. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2006.09.001
Lamme, V. A. F. (2018). Challenges for theories of consciousness: Seeing or knowing, the missing ingredient and how to deal with panpsychism. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 373(1755). https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2017.0344
Lau, H. (2007). A higher order bayesian decision theory of consciousness. Progress in Brain Research, 168, 35–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0079-6123(07)68004-2
Lau, H. (2011). Theoretical motivations for investigating the neural correlates of consciousness. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 2(1), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcs.93
Lau, H., & Brown, R. (2019). The emperor’s new phenomenology? The empirical case for conscious experiences without first-order representations. In A. Pautz & D. Stoljar (Eds.), Blockheads! Essays on Ned Block’s philosophy of mind and consciousness (pp. 171–197). MIT Press.
Lau, H., & Rosenthal, D. (2011). Empirical support for higher-order theories of conscious awareness. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 15(8), 365–373. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2011.05.009
Michel, M., & Morales, J. (2020). Minority reports: Consciousness and the prefrontal cortex. Mind & Language, 493–513. https://doi.org/10.1111/mila.12264
Mogensen, J., & Overgaard, M. (2018). Reorganization of the connectivity between elementary functions as a common mechanism of phenomenal consciousness and working memory: From functions to strategies. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 373(1755), 20170346. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2017.0346
Morales, J., & Lau, H. (forthcoming). The neural correlates of consciousness. In U. Kriegel (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of the Philosophy of Consciousness. Oxford University Press.
Naccache, L. (2018). Why and how access consciousness can account for phenomenal consciousness. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 373(1755), 20170357. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2017.0357
Nagel, T. (1974). What is it like to be a bat. Philosophical Review, 83(4), 435–450. https://doi.org/10.2307/2183914
Odegaard, B., Knight, R. T., & Lau, H. (2017). Should a few null findings falsify prefrontal theories of conscious perception? Journal of Neuroscience, 37(40), 9593–9602. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3217-16.2017
Overgaard, M. (2015). Behavioral methods in consciousness research. Oxford University Press.
Overgaard, M. (2017). The status and future of consciousness research. Frontiers in Psychology, 8(1719). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01719
Overgaard, M. (2018). Phenomenal consciousness and cognitive access. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 373(1755), 20170353. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2017.0353
Overgaard, M., & Fazekas, P. (2016). Can no-report paradigms extract true correlates of consciousness? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 105(20(4)), 241–242. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2016.01.004
Overgaard, M., & Mogensen, J. (2011). A framework for the study of multiple realizations: The importance of levels of analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 2, 79. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00079
Pessoa, L., Thompson, E., & Noë, A. (1998). Finding out about filling-in: A guide to perceptual completion for visual science and the philosophy of perception. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 21(6), 723–748. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0140525x98001757
Peters, M. A., Kentridge, R. W., Phillips, I., & Block, N. (2017). Does unconscious perception really exist? Continuing the ASSC20 debate. Neuroscience of Consciousness, 3(1). https://doi.org/10.1093/nc/nix015
Pinto, Y., Vandenbroucke, A. R., Otten, M., Sligte, I. G., Seth, A. K., & Lamme, V. A. (2017). Conscious visual memory with minimal attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 146(2), 214–226. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000255
Railo, H., Revonsuo, A., & Koivisto, M. (2015). Behavioral and electrophysiological evidence for fast emergence of visual consciousness. Neuroscience of Consciousness, 2015(1). https://doi.org/10.1093/nc/niv004
Sebastián, M. Á. (2014). Not a HOT dream. In R. Brown (Ed.), Consciousness inside and out: Phenomenology, neuroscience, and the nature of experience (Vol. 6, pp. 415–432). Springer Netherlands.
Timmermans, B., & Cleeremans, A. (2015). How can we measure awareness? An overview of current methods. In M. Overgaard (Ed.), Behavioral methods in consciousness research (pp. 21–46). Oxford University Press.
Tononi, G., Boly, M., Massimini, M., & Koch, C. (2016). Integrated information theory: From consciousness to its physical substrate. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 17(7), 450–461. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn.2016.44
Weisberg, J. (2014). Sweet dreams are made of this? A HOT response to Sebastián. In R. Brown (Ed.), Consciousness inside and out: Phenomenology, neuroscience, and the nature of experience (Vol. 6, pp. 433–443). Springer Netherlands.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2021 Morten S. Overgaard, Asger Kirkeby-Hinrup