Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 335

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Some Reflections on Visual Awareness

Open access
Crick, F., Koch, C.·1990·Cold Spring Harbor Symposia on Quantitative Biology
DOI 10.1101/sqb.1990.055.01.089
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Koch 1990) that outlined a sketch of such a theory. Our aim was not to produce as complete a theory of con-sciousness as possible but to indicate promising lines of experimental work, mainly neurobiological, that might lead eventually toward a solution of the problem. We made the plausible assumption that all forms of con-sciousness (e.g., seeing, thinking, and pain) employ, at bottom, rather similar mechanisms and that if one form were understood, it would be much easier to tackle the others. We then made the personal choice of the mam-malian visual system as the most promising one for an experimental ttack. This choice means that fascinating aspects of the subject, such as volition, intentionality, and self-consciousness, to say nothing of the problem of qualia, have had to be left on one side. We have also not dwelt on unusual psychological states, such as hypnosis, dreaming, lucid dreaming, and sleepwalking, to say nothing of meditative states, since we do not see any special advantage in studying them experimentally at this stage. Our method is to combine what is known experimen-tally from both psychological nd neurobiological ex-periments with plausible theoretical arguments of a general nature. We have not so far attempted etailed computer simulations, ince it is unlikely that we under-stand the details of the system well enough for such modeling to provide decisive answers. In the long run, however, modeling is essential, and even at this stage, well-conceived computer simulations should suggest plausible general principles and thus guide the ex-perimental attack on what is obviously a system of enormous complexity and subtlety. In our previous paper (Crick and Koch 1990), we listed a number of topics and assumptions that we did not intend to discuss. This list will not be repeated here in toto except o say that we have assumed the higher mammals have a form of visual awareness fairly similar to ours, so that we can, with discretion, combine ex-perimental results on humans with those from mon-keys, cats, and so on.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1101/sqb.1990.055.01.089

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Crick, F., & Koch, C.
Venue
Cold Spring Harbor Symposia on Quantitative Biology
Publisher
Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory
Published
1990-01-01
Volume
55
Issue
0
Pages
953-962
ISSN
  • 0091-7451 (ISSN-L)
  • 1943-4456
DOI
10.1101/sqb.1990.055.01.089
OpenAlex
W2083113378
Cited by
335
References
0
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
green

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

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.