Document Type
Response or Comment
Publication Date
11-29-2020
Abstract
In consciousness research, we have a very large number of theories, which exceeds by far the number of theories in other fields. We recently presented a set of criteria for evaluating and comparing theories of consciousness, and then applied the criteria to a number of different theories. Our publication sparked strong responses as evident by the many comments published in Cognitive Neuroscience (this issue). Overall, there seems to be consensus that a theory of consciousness (ToC) needs to have an unconscious alternative, but other criteria sparked controversy. The hottest debate is to what extent consciousness needs to work with purely 1st person data, containing information not available in 3rd person reports. We would like to thank all the commentators for their lively input and we look forward to continued dialog as theories evolve and compete.
Recommended Citation
Doerig, A., Schurger, A., & Herzog, M. H. (2021). Response to commentaries on ‘hard criteria for empirical theories of consciousness’. Cognitive Neuroscience, 12(2), 99-101. https://doi.org/10.1080/17588928.2020.1853086
Copyright
Taylor & Francis
Included in
Cognition and Perception Commons, Cognitive Psychology Commons, Other Psychology Commons
Comments
This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published in Cognitive Neuroscience, volume 12, issue 2, in 2021, available online at https://doi.org/10.1080/17588928.2020.1853086. It may differ slightly from the final version of record.