Cited by 12Philosophy and Theoretical ScienceFree Will and AgencyEmbodied and Extended Cognition

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 9 of the 9 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Theories of consciousness and a life worth living

Open access
Mudrik, Liad, Mylopoulos, Myrto, Negro, Niccolo, Schurger, Aaron·2023·Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences

Abstract

What is it that makes a life valuable? A popular view is that life’s moral worth depends in some way on its relationship to consciousness or subjective experience. But a practical application of this view requires the ability to test for consciousness, which is currently lacking. Here, we examine how theories of consciousness (ToCs) can help do so, focusing especially on difficult cases where the answer is not clear (e.g. fetuses, nonhuman animals, unresponsive brain-injured patients, and advanced artificial systems). We consider five major ToCs and what predictions they offer: Integrated information theory, Higher-Order Thought Theory, Recurrent Processing Theory, Global Neuronal Workspace Theory, and Attention Schema Theory. We highlight the important distinction between the capacity and potential for consciousness and use it to explore the limitations in our ability to draw firm conclusions regarding an entity's consciousness on the basis of each theory.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.cobeha.2023.101299

Cites

9 of 9 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 15

  1. Lee, 2019, Is consciousness intrinsically valuable?, Philos Stud, 176, 655, 10.1007/s11098-018-1032-8 · DOI
  2. Shepherd, 2022, Non-human moral status: problems with phenomenal consciousness, AJOB Neurosci, 14, 1
  3. Yaron, 2022, The ConTraSt database for analysing and comparing empirical studies of consciousness theories, Nat Hum Behav, 6, 593, 10.1038/s41562-021-01284-5 · DOI · Paper page
  4. Block, 2002, The harder problem of consciousness, J Philos, 99, 391, 10.2307/3655621 · DOI · Paper page
  5. Bayne, 2020, Consciousness, concepts and natural kinds, Philos Top, 48, 65, 10.5840/philtopics20204814 · DOI
  6. Shevlin, 2021, Non-human consciousness and the specificity problem: a modest theoretical proposal, Mind Lang, 36, 297, 10.1111/mila.12338 · DOI · Paper page
  7. Tononi, 2016, Integrated information theory: from consciousness to its physical substrate, Nat Rev Neurosci, 17, 450, 10.1038/nrn.2016.44 · DOI · Paper page
  8. Brown, 2019, Understanding the higher-order approach to consciousness, Trends Cogn Sci, 23, 754, 10.1016/j.tics.2019.06.009 · DOI · Paper page
  9. Lamme, 2020, Visual functions generating conscious seeing, Front Psychol, 11, 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00083 · DOI · Paper page
  10. Wilterson, 2020, Attention control and the attention schema theory of consciousness, Prog Neurobiol, 195, 10.1016/j.pneurobio.2020.101844 · DOI
  11. Birch, 2020, Global workspace theory and animal consciousness, Philos Top, 48, 21, 10.5840/philtopics20204812 · DOI
  12. Birch, 2022, The search for invertebrate consciousness, Noûs, 56, 133, 10.1111/nous.12351 · DOI · Paper page
  13. Warren, 1989, The moral significance of birth, Hypatia, 4, 46, 10.1111/j.1527-2001.1989.tb00591.x · DOI
  14. Bekinschtein, 2009, Neural signature of the conscious processing of auditory regularities, Proc Natl Acad Sci, 106, 1672, 10.1073/pnas.0809667106 · DOI · Paper page
  15. Butlin, P., Long, R., Elmoznino, E.c., Bengio, Y., Birch, J., Constant, A., Deane, G., Fleming, S.M., Frith, C., Ji, X., Kanai, R., Klein, C., Lindsay, G., Michel, M., Mudrik, L., Peters, M.A.K., Schwitzgebel, E., Simon, J., and VanRullen, R. (2023) Consciousness in Artificial Intelligence: Insights from the Science of Consciousness. arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.08708. · arXiv

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Mudrik, L., Mylopoulos, M., Negro, N., & Schurger, A.
Affiliations
  • Tel Aviv University (IL)
  • Carleton University (CA)
  • Inserm (FR)
Corresponding author
Mudrik, Liad
Venue
Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2023-10
Volume
53
Pages
101299
ISSN
2352-1546 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4386571342
Cited by
12
References
9
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 1
FWCI
0.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Chapman University Digital Commons (Chapman University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
  • John Templeton Foundation (61283)
  • Fetzer Institute (61283)
  • Canadian Institute for Advanced Research
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Philosophy and Theoretical Science
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Free Will and Agency
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Embodied and Extended Cognition
Keywords
theory of consciousness, subjective experience, integrated information theory, higher-order thought theory, recurrent processing theory, global neuronal workspace theory, attention schema theory, fetal consciousness, animal consciousness, brain-damaged patients, artificial consciousness

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review