4 ms·
"WIRED: Getting back to the theory, is your version of panpsychism truly scientific rather than metaphysical? How can it be tested? Koch: In principle, in all
by pedrosorio 12y ago
"WIRED: Getting back to the theory, is your version of panpsychism truly scientific rather than metaphysical? How can it be tested?
Koch: In principle, in all sorts of ways. One implication is that you can build two systems, each with the same input and output — but one, because of its internal structure, has integrated information. One system would be conscious, and the other not. It’s not the input-output behavior that makes a system conscious, but rather the internal wiring."
Isn't this the definition of a non-testable assertion? The observable input-output behavior is the same, yet he claims the property of consciousness is different. So where is the test?
- efnx 12y agoMaybe one has a higher (non zero) phi rating, which apparently means it is conscious. I agree with you, I don't see the test. I'd also like to agree with Koch, intuitively what he says makes sense - it's possibly a lack of understanding on the writers part that this key point is lost.
- dcre 12y agoWell, he's stipulating that we build it, so we know what the internal wiring is. That doesn't necessarily mean that what's he's describing is possible or even coherent.