DOCSLIB.ORG

Most Popular Theories of Consciousness Are Worse Than Wrong They Play to Our Intuitions, but Don’T Actually Explain Anything

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Most Popular Theories of Consciousness Are Worse Than Wrong They Play to Our Intuitions, but Don’T Actually Explain Anything Most Popular Theories of Consciousness Are Worse Than Wrong They play to our intuitions, but don’t actually explain anything. Mario Anzuoni / Reuters MICHAEL GRAZIANO TEXT SIZE MAR 9, 2016 | SCIENCE According to medieval medicine, laziness is caused by a build-up of phlegm in the body. The reason? Phlegm is a viscous substance. Its oozing motion is analogous to a sluggish disposition. The phlegm theory has more problems than just a few factual errors. After all, suppose you had a beaker of phlegm and injected it into a person. What exactly is the mechanism that leads to a lazy personality? The proposal resonates seductively with our intuitions and biases, but it doesn’t explain anything. In the modern age we can chuckle over medieval naiveté, but we often suffer from similar conceptual confusions. We have our share of phlegm theories, which flatter our intuitions while explaining nothing. They’re compelling, they often convince, but at a deeper level they’re empty. One corner of science where phlegm theories proliferate is the cognitive neuroscience of consciousness. The brain is a machine that processes information, yet somehow we also have a conscious experience of at least some of that information. How is that possible? What is subjective experience? It’s one of the most important questions in science, possibly the most important, the deepest way of asking: What are we? Yet many of the current proposals, even some that are deep and subtle, are phlegm theories. The oscillation theory of consciousness became popular in neuroscience in the 1990s and still has its adherents. Here’s a quick summary. The brain is composed of neurons, brain cells that process and transmit information in the form of electrochemical signals. If you measure the activity of a single neuron, in some cases that activity follows an oscillating pattern, rising and falling in a regular rhythm. Maybe consciousness is caused by those neuronal oscillations. Were there no oscillations, the theory goes, information would be processed without any accompanying subjective awareness. When information is treated with neuronal oscillations, then a subjective experience arises. For example, when color information is handled by oscillating neuronal activity, that process gives rise to an inner experience of color. Neuronal oscillations probably do play an important role in the flow of information in the brain, although the exact role is debated. And yet as an explanation of consciousness, it’s a phlegm theory. It appeals to intuition and explains nothing. Most people have a set of intuitions about consciousness. The physical brain somehow plays host to consciousness, but we suspect that consciousness itself isn’t a physical substance. It’s more ethereal, like a kind of energy. In a similar way, a tuning fork is a physical thing, and its vibrations are the energy associated with it. The vibrations aren’t themselves a physical substance. If you don’t think too hard about it, the vibrations relate to the tuning fork like consciousness relates to the brain. That analogy is even built into our language. We talk about our minds being tuned to this or that vibe. The idea that consciousness is an oscillation in the brain flatters our intuitions. It feels right. You see this same trope in science fiction: If you bundle enough information into a computer, creating a big, connected mass of data, it’ll wake up and start to act conscious, like Skynet. But the theory provides no mechanism that connects neuronal oscillations in the brain to a person being able to say, “Hey, I have a conscious experience!” You couldn’t give the theory to an engineer and have her understand, even in the foggiest way, how one thing leads to the other. There is not even an attempt at an explanation. It’s a phlegm theory. It appeals to intuition at a superficial level while providing no scientific explanation for the phenomenon. Another popular explanation of consciousness is the integrated information theory. Actually, there are several different theories that fit into this same general category. They share the underlying idea that consciousness is caused by linking together large amounts of information. It’s one thing to process a few disconnected scraps of information. But when information is connected into vast brain-spanning webs, then, according to the proposal, subjective consciousness emerges. I can’t deny that information is integrated in the brain on a massive scale. Vast networks of information play a role in many brain functions. If you could de- integrate the information in the brain, a lot of basic functions would fail, probably including consciousness. And yet, as a specific explanation of consciousness, this one is definitely a phlegm theory. Again, it flatters intuition. Most people have an intuition about consciousness as an integrated whole. Your various impressions and thoughts are somehow rolled together into a single inner you. That’s the impression we get, anyway. You see this same trope in science fiction: If you bundle enough information into a computer, creating a big enough connected mass of data, it’ll wake up and start to act conscious, like Skynet. This appeal to our latent biases has given the integrated information theory tremendous currency. It’s compelling to many respected figures in the field of neuroscience, and is one of the most popular current theories. And yet it doesn’t actually explain anything. What exactly is the mechanism that leads from integrated information in the brain to a person who ups and claims, “Hey, I have a conscious experience of all that integrated information!” There isn't one. If you point a wavelength detector at the sky, it will compute that the sky is blue. If you build a machine that integrates the blueness of the sky with a lot of other information – the fact that the blue stuff is a sky, that it’s above the earth, that it extends so far here and so far there – if the machine integrates a massive amount of information about that sky – what makes the machine claim that it has a subjective awareness of blue? Why doesn’t it just have a bunch of integrated information, without the subjective awareness? The integration theory doesn’t even try to explain. It flatters our intuitions while explaining nothing. Some scholars retreat to the position that consciousness must be a primary property of information that cannot be explained. If information is present, so is a primordial, conscious experience of it. The more information that is integrated together, the richer the conscious experience. This type of thinking leads straight to a mystical theory called panpsychism, the claim that everything in the universe is conscious, each in its own way, since everything contains at least some information. Rocks, trees, rivers, stars. This theory is the ultimate in phlegm theories. It has enormous intuitive appeal to people who are prone to project consciousness onto the objects around them, but it explains absolutely nothing. One must simply accept consciousness as an elemental property and abandon all hope of understanding it. When I talk to other scientists about the study of consciousness, very often the first thing I’m asked to explain is why the topic is worth scientific attention. I argue that it’s not just a topic for philosophers or poets, and it’s not just a matter of opinion or belief. We can actually build rational theories of consciousness, theories that have explanatory power and that can be tested experimentally. And it’s crucial knowledge. Consciousness has a specific, practical impact on brain function. If you want to understand how the brain works, you need to understand that part of the machine. No neuroscientist, and no expert in artificial intelligence, should scoff at consciousness. Here’s how we can construct theories that do a better job of explaining, even if they appeal less to our biases and intuitions. The brain is an information- processing machine. It takes in data, transforms it, and uses it to help guide behavior. When that machine ups and says, “Hey, I have a conscious experience of myself and the things around me,” that assertion is based on data computed in the brain. As scientists we can ask a series of basic questions. How did the machine arrive at that self-description? What’s the specific, adaptive use of that self-description? What networks in the brain compute that type of information? These are all scientifically approachable questions. And we are beginning to see specific, testable theories that can answer them. The theories that show the most promise are sometimes called metacognitive theories. They are theories of how the brain computes information about itself and its own processes. The brain constructs packets of information, virtual models, that describe things in the world. Anything useful to monitor and predict, the brain can construct a model of it. These simulations change continuously as new information comes in, and they’re used to guide ongoing behavior. For example, the visual system constructs rich, detailed models of the objects in the visual world—a desk, a car, another person. But the brain doesn’t just model concrete objects in the external world. It also models its own internal processes. It constructs simulations of its own cognition. And those simulations are never accurate. They contain incomplete, sometimes surreal information. The brain constructs a distorted, cartoon sketch of itself and its world. And this is why we’re so certain that we have a kind of magic feeling inside us. A theory doesn’t have to be emotionally satisfying to be true. This type of theory can explain some things and not others.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Eliminativist Approach to Consciousness Position Paper
    The Eliminativist Approach to Consciousness Position paper This essay explains my version of an eliminativist approach to understanding conscious- ness. It suggests that we stop thinking in terms of "conscious" and "unconscious" and in- stead look at physical systems for what they are and what they can do. This perspective dis- solves some biases in our usual perspective and shows us that the world is not composed of conscious minds moving through unconscious matter, but rather, the world is a unified whole, with some sub-processes being more fancy and self-reflective than others. I think eliminativism should be combined with more intuitive understandings of consciousness to ensure that its moral applications stay on the right track. 12 December 2015 Position paper by the Eective Altruism Foundation. Preferred citation: Tomasik, B. (2006). The Eliminativist Approach to Consciousness. Position paper by the Eective Altruism Foundation (2): 1-9. First published 12 December 2015. www.longtermrisk.org www.ea-stiung.org Contents Introduction.............................1 Motivating eliminativism....................2 Thinking physically........................3 Eliminativist sentience valuation..............3 Living in zombieland.......................4 Why this discussion matters..................4 Does eliminativism eliminate empathy?.........5 The subjective and objective need each other.....5 Eliminativism and panpsychism...............6 Denying consciousness altogether.............6 Does eliminativism explain phenomenology?......7 Bibliography............................9
    [Show full text]
  • How Can We Solve the Meta-Problem of Consciousness?
    How Can We Solve the Meta-Problem of Consciousness? David J. Chalmers I am grateful to the authors of the 39 commentaries on my article “The Meta-Problem of Consciousness”. I learned a great deal from reading them and from thinking about how to reply.1 The commentaries divide fairly nearly into about three groups. About half of them discuss po- tential solutions to the meta-problem. About a quarter of them discuss the question of whether in- tuitions about consciousness are universal, widespred, or culturally local. About a quarter discuss illusionism about consciousness and especially debunking arguments that move from a solution to the meta-problem to illusionism. Some commentaries fit into more than one group and some do not fit perfectly into any, but with some stretching this provides a natural way to divide them. As a result, I have divided my reply into three parts, each of which can stand alone. This first part is “How can We Solve the Meta-Problem of Conscousness?”. The other two parts are “Is the Hard Problem of Consciousness Universal?” and “Debunking Arguments for Illusionism about Consciousness”. How can we solve the meta-problem? As a reminder, the meta-problem is the problem of explaining our problem intuitions about consciousness, including the intuition that consciousness poses a hard problem and related explanatory and metaphysical intuitions, among others. One constraint is to explain the intuitions in topic-neutral terms (for example, physical, computational, structural, or evolutionary term) that do not make explicit appeal to consciousness in the explana- tion. In the target article, I canvassed about 15 potential solutions to the meta-problem.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 CURRICULUM VITAE MICHAEL GRAZIANO Last Updated May 2019
    CURRICULUM VITAE MICHAEL GRAZIANO Last updated May 2019 Department of Psychology Peretsman-Scully Hall Princeton University Princeton, N.J. 08544-1010 Tel: (609) 258-7555 email: [email protected] DEGREES AND POSITIONS 2017- Full Professor, Dept. of Psychology and Neuroscience, Princeton University. 2007-2017 Associate Professor, Dept. of Psychology, Princeton University. 2001-2007 Assistant Professor, Dept. of Psychology, Princeton University. 1998-2001 Research Staff, Princeton University. 1996-1998 Post-Doctoral Fellow, Princeton University. 1996 PhD in Neuroscience, Princeton University. 1991-1996 Graduate student, Dept. of Psychology, Princeton University. 1989-1991 Graduate student, Dept. of Brain and Cognitive Sciences, MIT. 1989 BA, Princeton University. INVITED LECTURES 2019 TEDx Cornell 2019 Colloquium speaker, Taipei, National University of Taiwan 2019 Invited Speaker, NIH, Conference on Consciousness and Attention 2018 Invited Speaker, Max Planck Symposium on Consciousness, Berlin 2018 Keynote Speaker, European Society for Philosophy and Psychology, Rejika, Croatia 2018 Invited Speaker, Trinity College, Doublin 2018 Invited Speaker Chile Science Festival, 2017 Keynote speaker, Designed Mind Conference, Edinburgh. 2016 Colloquium speaker, Montreal 2016 Invited speaker, Neurocom summer school, Leipzig. 2016 Keynote speaker, ASSC, Buenos Aires. 2016 Colloquium speaker, George Washington University. 2016 Colloquium speaker, University College London. 2015 Invited Speaker, Accessibility and Consciousness Conference, Paris. 2015
    [Show full text]
  • Metaphilosophy of Consciousness Studies
    Part Three Metaphilosophy of Consciousness Studies Bloomsbury companion to the philosophy of consciousness.indb 185 24-08-2017 15:48:52 Bloomsbury companion to the philosophy of consciousness.indb 186 24-08-2017 15:48:52 11 Understanding Consciousness by Building It Michael Graziano and Taylor W. Webb 1 Introduction In this chapter we consider how to build a machine that has subjective awareness. The design is based on the recently proposed attention schema theory (Graziano 2013, 2014; Graziano and Kastner 2011; Graziano and Webb 2014; Kelly et al. 2014; Webb and Graziano 2015; Webb, Kean and Graziano 2016). This hypothetical building project serves as a way to introduce the theory in a step-by-step manner and contrast it with other brain-based theories of consciousness. At the same time, this chapter is more than a thought experiment. We suggest that the machine could actually be built and we encourage artificial intelligence experts to try. Figure 11.1 frames the challenge. The machine has eyes that take in visual input (an apple in this example) and pass information to a computer brain. Our task is to build the machine such that it has a subjective visual awareness of the apple in the same sense that humans describe subjective visual awareness. Exactly what is meant by subjective awareness is not a priori clear. Most people have an intuitive notion that is probably not easily put into words. One goal of this building project is to see if a clearer definition of subjective awareness emerges from the constrained process of trying to build it.
    [Show full text]
  • ID Lecture 10 Mind Issues 2014
    Intelligent Design vs. Evolution Defending God’s Creation Matthew 7:12 12 "So whatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets” Sexual Dimorphism • Sexual dimorphism is a phenotypic difference between males and females of the same species. Examples of such differences include differences in morphology, ornamentation, and behavior. Peacock’s Tail • “The peacock has a very ornate plumage which it uses to attract peahens. The peacock will use its ornate plumage to court a mate.” from Wikipedia ! • “One of the most ostentatiously adorned creatures on Earth, the peacock uses its brilliant plumage to entice females.” from National Geographic website Peacock’s Tail • “It is hard to see a peacock’s tail as something other than an impediment to his survival” from PBS series Evolution ! • Limits peacocks to short bursts of flight • Easily spotted by predators and humans Sexual Selection • Proposed by Charles Darwin • Powerful Driving force behind evolution • But why sexual reproduction at all? – Genetic Variability Theory – Research on certain minnows in Mexico • Reproduce sexually and asexually • resistance to parasites • Drought contradicted findings Sexual Selection • “Some believe it all got started billions of years ago, with two single-celled creatures sharing a chance encounter in the primordial night. They meet, and genes are exchanged. … The moment is brief, but it leaves them a little bit stronger, a little more likely to survive and reproduce.” from PBS series Evolution • “Sexual selection is often powerful enough to produce features that are harmful to the individual's survival. For example, extravagant and colorful tail feathers or fins are likely to attract predators as well as interested members of the opposite sex." from Understanding Evolution for Teachers web resource • We found no evidence that peahens expressed any preference for peacocks with more elaborate trains (i.e.
    [Show full text]
  • ARE WE REALLY CONSCIOUS?” by Michael C
    “ARE WE REALLY CONSCIOUS?” By Michael C. Graziano New York Times, October 10, 2014 http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/12/opinion/sunday/are-we-really- conscious.html?smid=nytcore-ipad-share&smprod=nytcore-ipad&_r=0 OF the three most fundamental scientific questions about the human condition, two have been answered. First, what is our relationship to the rest of the universe? Copernicus answered that one. We’re not at the center. We’re a speck in a large place. Second, what is our relationship to the diversity of life? Darwin answered that one. Biologically speaking, we’re not a special act of creation. We’re a twig on the tree of evolution. Third, what is the relationship between our minds and the physical world? Here, we don’t have a settled answer. We know something about the body and brain, but what about the subjective life inside? Consider that a computer, if hooked up to a camera, can process information about the wavelength of light and determine that grass is green. But we humans also experience the greenness. We have an awareness of information we process. What is this mysterious aspect of ourselves? Many theories have been proposed, but none has passed scientific muster. I believe a major change in our perspective on consciousness may be necessary, a shift from a credulous and egocentric viewpoint to a skeptical and slightly disconcerting one: namely, that we don’t actually have inner feelings in the way most of us think we do. Imagine a group of scholars in the early 17th century, debating the process that purifies white light and rids it of all colors.
    [Show full text]
  • A Defense of a Sentiocentric Approach to Environmental Ethics
    University of Tennessee, Knoxville TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Doctoral Dissertations Graduate School 8-2012 Minding Nature: A Defense of a Sentiocentric Approach to Environmental Ethics Joel P. MacClellan University of Tennessee, Knoxville, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_graddiss Part of the Ethics and Political Philosophy Commons Recommended Citation MacClellan, Joel P., "Minding Nature: A Defense of a Sentiocentric Approach to Environmental Ethics. " PhD diss., University of Tennessee, 2012. https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_graddiss/1433 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Doctoral Dissertations by an authorized administrator of TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a dissertation written by Joel P. MacClellan entitled "Minding Nature: A Defense of a Sentiocentric Approach to Environmental Ethics." I have examined the final electronic copy of this dissertation for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the equirr ements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, with a major in Philosophy. John Nolt, Major Professor We have read this dissertation and recommend its acceptance: Jon Garthoff, David Reidy, Dan Simberloff Accepted for the Council: Carolyn R. Hodges Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School (Original signatures are on file with official studentecor r ds.) MINDING NATURE: A DEFENSE OF A SENTIOCENTRIC APPROACH TO ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS A Dissertation Presented for the Doctor of Philosophy Degree The University of Tennessee, Knoxville Joel Patrick MacClellan August 2012 ii The sedge is wither’d from the lake, And no birds sing.
    [Show full text]
  • The Grateful Un-Dead? Philosophical and Social Implications of Mind-Uploading
    1 July 23, 2020 The grateful Un-dead? Philosophical and Social Implications of Mind-Uploading Ivan William Kelly Professor Emeritus, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK, Canada Email address: [email protected] Abstract: The popular belief that our mind either depends on or (in stronger terms) is identical with brain functions and processes, along with the belief that advances in technological in virtual reality and computability will continue, has contributed to the contention that one-day (perhaps this century) it may be possible to transfer one’s mind (or a simulated copy) into another body (physical or virtual). This is called mind-uploading or whole brain emulation. This paper serves as an introduction to the area and some of the major issues that arise from the notion of mind- uploading. The topic of mind/brain uploading is, at present, both a philosophical and scientific minefield. This paper ties together several thoughts on the topic in the popular, philosophical, and scientific literature, and brings up some related issues that might be worth exploring. A challenge is made that uploading a mind from a brain may have intrinsic limitations on what can be uploaded: whatever is uploaded may not be recognizably human, or will be a very limited version. Keywords: mind uploading, brain emulation, mind transfer, virtual reality, robots, android, the mind-body problem, mind transfer, trans-human, 1.Introduction What if (a big if) you actually could upload or transfer your mind into a computer network or a robot? That is, you would now have your mind in a different body or ‘live in’ a virtual reality (or virtual realities).
    [Show full text]
  • The Parallel Mind by Rana Zandi a Thesis Exhibition Presented To
    The Parallel Mind By Rana Zandi A thesis exhibition presented to OCAD University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts In Digital Futures April 2018 © Rana Zandi 2018 AUTHOR’S DECLARATION I hereby declare that I am the sole author of this thesis. This is a true copy of the thesis, including any required final revisions, as accepted by my examiners. I authorize OCAD University to lend this thesis to other institutions or individuals for the purpose of scholarly research. I understand that my thesis may be made electronically available to the public. I further authorize OCAD University to reproduce this thesis by photocopying or by other means, in total or in part, at the request of other institutions or individuals for the purpose of scholarly research. ii Rana Zandi, OCAD University, Parallel Mind, Master of Arts, Digital Futures, 2018 ABSTRACT Throughout the last century, Western scholars from various fields have contributed toward finding a general theory of consciousness that can accurately describe how the human brain processes information, and how it reflects and becomes aware of this information. In 2013, Michael Graziano an American scientist focused on the awareness aspect of consciousness and proposed the Attention Schema Theory of Consciousness (AST) to solve why the mind becomes aware in the first place. This thesis takes a stance that life on the screen has allowed us to extend our identities through embodiment of a second self in cyberspace. By using textual analysis, thought experiments, conceptual models, and mind activities, this work formulates parallel mind– as a self-aware digital entity that uses the content of the digital self.
    [Show full text]
  • Delusions of Consciousness. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 23, 52-64, 2016 Also in Illusionism, Ed
    Delusions of consciousness. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 23, 52-64, 2016 also in Illusionism, Ed. Keith Frankish, 23, 52-64, 2017 Susan Blackmore This is an invited paper for a Special Issue of the Journal of Consciousness Studies. Keith Frankish wrote an introductory article, ‘Illusionism as a theory of consciousness’, outlining the general view that phenomenal consciousness is an illusion. Nearly twenty responses follow by authors including Dan Dennett, Michael Graziano, Nicholas Humphrey and Jesse Prinz among others. Here is a version of mine as submitted. It may have been edited before publication. So please do not quote from this version. Abstract Frankish’s illusionism aims to replace the hard problem with the illusion problem; to explain why phenomenal consciousness seems to exist and why the illusion is so powerful. My aim, though broadly illusionist, is to explain why many other false assumptions, or delusions, are so powerful. One reason is a simple mistake in introspection. Asking, ‘Am I conscious now?’ or ‘What is consciousness?’ makes us briefly conscious in a new way. The delusion is to conclude that consciousness is always like this instead of asking, ‘What is it like when I am not asking what is it like?’ Neuroscience and disciplined introspection give the same answer: there are multiple parallel processes with no clear distinction between conscious and unconscious ones. Consciousness is an attribution we make, not a property of only some special events or processes. Notions of the stream, contents, continuity and function of consciousness are all misguided as is the search for the NCCs. In his clear and helpful survey of the illusionist position, Frankish convincingly argues for taking illusionism seriously and for replacing the hard problem with the illusion problem.
    [Show full text]
  • Human Consciousness and Its Relationship to Social Neuroscience: a Novel Hypothesis
    Cognitive Neuroscience ISSN: 1758-8928 (Print) 1758-8936 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/pcns20 Human consciousness and its relationship to social neuroscience: A novel hypothesis Michael S. A. Graziano & Sabine Kastner To cite this article: Michael S. A. Graziano & Sabine Kastner (2011) Human consciousness and its relationship to social neuroscience: A novel hypothesis, Cognitive Neuroscience, 2:2, 98-113, DOI: 10.1080/17588928.2011.565121 To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/17588928.2011.565121 Published online: 21 Mar 2011. Submit your article to this journal Article views: 3072 Citing articles: 45 View citing articles Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=pcns20 COGNITIVE NEUROSCIENCE, 2011, 2 (2), 98–133 (Includes Discussion Paper, Commentaries, and Reply.) Discussion Paper Human consciousness and its relationship to social neuroscience: A novel hypothesis Michael S. A. Graziano and Sabine Kastner Department of Psychology, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ, USA A common modern view of consciousness is that it is an emergent property of the brain, perhaps caused by neuronal complexity, and perhaps with no adaptive value. Exactly what emerges, how it emerges, and from what specific neuronal process, are in debate. One possible explanation of consciousness, proposed here, is that it is a construct of the social perceptual machinery. Humans have specialized neuronal machinery that allows them to be socially intelligent. The primary role of this machinery is to construct models of other people’s minds thereby gaining some ability to predict the behavior of other individuals. In the present hypothesis, awareness is a perceptual reconstruction of attentional state; and the machinery that computes information about other people’s awareness is the same machinery that computes information about our own awareness.
    [Show full text]
  • 2014 TSC Tucson 20Th Anniv. Program Abstracts.Pdf
    20th Anniversary Conference Toward a Science of Consciousness April 21-26, 2014 Tucson, Arizona Tucson Marriott University Park Hotel Sponsored by The University of Arizona Center for CONSCIOUSNESS STUDIES CONTENTS Welcome . 2-4 Tucson Telephone Numbers . 5 Transportation Services . 5 Pre-Conference Workshop . 7 Conference Overview . 8 Optional Social Events . 8-9 Pre-Conference List . 10-11 Conference Week Schedule Grid . 12-22 INDEX to SESSIONS Plenary . 23-25 Concurrents . .. 26-34 Posters . 35-50 Art/Tech/Health Exhibits & Demos . 51 CCS-TSC Taxonomy and Classifications . 52-53 INDEX to ABSTRACTS Abstracts by Classification . 54-274 East-West Forum Abstracts . 275-300 Additional Abstracts . 301-303 Index to Authors . 304-306 WELCOME Welcome to Toward a Science of Consciousness 2014, the 20th anniversary of the biennial, international interdisciplinary Tucson Conference on the fundamental question of how the brain produces conscious experience . Sponsored and organized by the Center for Consciousness Studies at the University of Arizona, this year’s conference is being held for the first time at the Tucson Marriott University Park Hotel, steps from the main gate of the beautiful campus of the University of Arizona . Covering 380 acres in central Tucson, the campus is a hub of education, concerts, plays, lectures, museums, poetry readings, athletic events, playing on the great grassy mall, and just hanging out . Adjacent to the UA main gate and hotel are over 30 shops, restaurants and pubs along University Boulevard . A short walk in the opposite direction leads to the village setting of 4th Avenue and then to downtown Tucson . Toward a Science of Consciousness (TSC) is the largest and longest-running interdisciplinary conference emphasizing broad and rigorous interdisciplinary approaches to conscious awareness, the nature of existence and our place in the universe .
    [Show full text]