Artificial consciousness and the consciousness-attention dissociation

Artificial Intelligence is at a turning point, with a substantial increase in projects aiming to implement sophisticated forms of human intelligence in machines. This research attempts to model specific forms of intelligence through brute-force search heuristics and also reproduce features of human perception and cognition, including emotions. Such goals have implications for artificial consciousness, with some arguing that it will be achievable once we overcome short-term engineering challenges. We believe, however, that phenomenal consciousness cannot be implemented in machines. This becomes clear when considering emotions and examining the dissociation between consciousness and attention in humans. While we may be able to program ethical behavior based on rules and machine learning, we will never be able to reproduce emotions or empathy by programming such control systems—these will be merely simulations. Arguments in favor of this claim include considerations about evolution, the neuropsychological aspects of emotions, and the dissociation between attention and consciousness found in humans. Ultimately, we are far from achieving artificial consciousness

The Received Method for Ruling Out Brain Areas from Being NCC Undermines Itself

Research into the neural correlates of consciousness (NCC) aims to identify not just those brain areas that are NCC, but also those that are not. In the received method for ruling out a brain area from being an NCC, this is accomplished by showing a brain area’s content to be consistently absent from subjects’ reports about what they are experiencing. This paper points out how this same absence can be used to infer that the brain area’s content is cognitively inaccessible, in which case we would expect its content to be absent from subjects’ reports whether its content is (phenomenally) conscious or not. If so, such reports cannot count as evidence against that brain area being an NCC, and the received method fails. An alternative method (one suggested in Block, 2007) is considered

A new empirical challenge for local theories of consciousness

Local theories of consciousness state that one is conscious of a feature if it is adequately represented and processed in sensory brain areas, given some background conditions. We challenge the core prediction of local theories based on recently discovered long-lasting postdictive effects demonstrating that features can be represented for hundreds of milliseconds in perceptual areas without being consciously perceived. Unlike previous empirical data aimed against local theories, proponents of local theories cannot explain these effects away by conjecturing that subjects are phenomenally conscious of features that they cannot report. Only a strong and counterintuitive version of this claim can account for long-lasting postdictive effects. Although possible, we argue that adopting this strong version of the “overflow hypothesis” would have the effect of nullifying the weight of the evidence taken to support local theories of consciousness in the first place. We also discuss several alternative explanations that proponents of local theories could offer

A Higher-Order Theory of Emotional Consciousness

Emotional states of consciousness, or what are typically called emotional feelings, are traditionally viewed as being innately programed in subcortical areas of the brain, and are often treated as different from cognitive states of consciousness, such as those related to the perception of external stimuli. We argue that conscious experiences, regardless of their content, arise from one system in the brain. On this view, what differs in emotional and non-emotional states is the kind of inputs that are processed by a general cortical network of cognition, a network essential for conscious experiences. Although subcortical circuits are not directly responsible for conscious feelings, they provide non-conscious inputs that coalesce with other kinds of neural signals in the cognitive assembly of conscious emotional experiences. In building the case for this proposal, we defend a modified version of what is known as the higher-order theory of consciousness

Manipulating the Contents of Consciousness

I argue for a manipulationist-mechanistic framework for content-NCC research in the case of visual consciousness (Bechtel 2008; Neisser 2012). Reference to mechanisms is common in the NCC research. Furthermore, recent developments in non-invasive brain stimulation techniques (NIBS) lend support to a manipulationist standpoint. The crucial question is to understand what is changed after manipulation of a brain mechanism. In the second part of the paper I review the literature on intentionalism, and argue that intervention on the neural mechanism is likely to change the intentional content of consciousness. This urges us to shift from content-NCC to what I call “intentional mechanisms”. Such mechanisms, it is argued, should be understood as neural prerequisites of conscious visual experience

Methodological Artefacts in Consciousness Science

Consciousness is scientifically challenging to study because of its subjective aspect. This leads researchers to rely on report-based experimental paradigms in order to discover neural correlates of consciousness (NCCs). I argue that the reliance on reports has biased the search for NCCs, thus creating what I call 'methodological artefacts'. This paper has three main goals: first, describe the measurement problem in consciousness science and argue that this problem led to the emergence of methodological artefacts. Second, provide a critical assessment of the NCCs put forward by the global neuronal workspace theory. Third, provide the means of dissociating genuine NCCs from methodological artefacts

Alterations in The States and Contents of Consciousness: Empirical and Theoretical Aspects

The main purpose of the present doctoral thesis is to investigate subjective experiences and cognitive processes in four different types of altered states of consciousness: naturally occurring dreaming, cognitively induced hypnosis, pharmacologically induced sedation, and pathological psychosis. Both empirical and theoretical research is carried out, resulting in four empirical and four theoretical studies. The thesis begins with a review of the main concepts used in consciousness research, the most influential philosophical and neurobiological theories of subjective experience, the classification of altered states of consciousness, and the main empirical methods used to study consciousness alterations. Next, findings of the original studies are discussed, as follows. Phenomenal consciousness is found to be dissociable from responsiveness, as subjective experiences do occur in unresponsive states, including anaesthetic-induced sedation and natural sleep, as demonstrated by post-awakening subjective reports. Two new tools for the content analysis of subjective experiences and dreams are presented, focusing on the diversity, complexity and dynamics of phenomenal consciousness. In addition, a new experimental paradigm of serial awakenings from non-rapid eye movement sleep is introduced, which enables more rapid sampling of dream reports than has been available in previous studies. It is also suggested that lucid dreaming can be studied using transcranial brain stimulation techniques and systematic analysis of pre-lucid dreaming. For blind judges, dreams of psychotic patients appear to be indistinguishable from waking mentation reports collected from the same patients, which indicates a close resemblance of these states of mind. However, despite phenomenological similarities, dreaming should not be treated as a uniform research model of psychotic or intact consciousness. Contrary to this, there seems to be a multiplicity of routes of how different states of consciousness can be associated. For instance, seemingly identical time perception distortions in different alterations of consciousness may have diverse underlying causes for these distortions. It is also shown that altered states do not necessarily exhibit impaired cognitive processing compared to a baseline waking state of consciousness: a case study of time perception in a hypnotic virtuoso indicates a more consistent perceptual timing under hypnosis than in a waking state. The thesis ends with a brief discussion of the most promising new perspectives for the study of alterations of consciousness.Siirretty Doriast

Can Science Explain Consciousness?

For diverse reasons, the problem of phenomenal consciousness is persistently challenging. Mental terms are characteristically ambiguous, researchers have philosophical biases, secondary qualities are excluded from objective description, and philosophers love to argue. Adhering to a regime of efficient causes and third-person descriptions, science as it has been defined has no place for subjectivity or teleology. A solution to the “hard problem” of consciousness will require a radical approach: to take the point of view of the cognitive system itself. To facilitate this approach, a concept of agency is introduced along with a different understanding of intentionality. Following this approach reveals that the autopoietic cognitive system constructs phenomenality through acts of fiat, which underlie perceptual completion effects and “filling in”—and, by implication, phenomenology in general. It creates phenomenality much as we create meaning in language, through the use of symbols that it assigns meaning in the context of an embodied evolutionary history that is the source of valuation upon which meaning depends. Phenomenality is a virtual representation to itself by an executive agent (the conscious self) tasked with monitoring the state of the organism and its environment, planning future action, and coordinating various sub- agencies. Consciousness is not epiphenomenal, but serves a function for higher organisms that is distinct from that of unconscious processing. While a strictly scientific solution to the hard problem is not possible for a science that excludes the subjectivity it seeks to explain, there is hope to at least psychologically bridge the explanatory gulf between mind and matter, and perhaps hope for a broader definition of science

How the Brain Makes Up the Mind: a heuristic approach to the hard problem of consciousness

A solution to the “hard problem” requires taking the point of view of the organism and its sub- agents. The organism constructs phenomenality through acts of fiat, much as we create meaning in language, through the use of symbols that are assigned meaning in the context of an embodied evolutionary history. Phenomenality is a virtual representation, made to itself by an executive agent (the conscious self), which is tasked with monitoring the state of the organism and its environment, planning future action, and coordinating various sub-agencies. Consciousness is not epiphenomenal and serves a function for higher organisms that is distinct from unconscious processing. While a strictly scientific solution to the hard problem is not possible for a science that excludes the subjectivity it seeks to explain, there is hope to at least informally bridge the explanatory gulf between mind and matter