The Study of Consciousness Is Mired in Complexities and Difficulties: Can They Be Resolved?
Qeios September 29, 2024 Peer reviewed DOI: 10.32388/sv6z7v.3 via OpenAlex
Summary
The paper discusses various issues that have hindered progress in consciousness research, including the confusion of terms and definitions in the literature. It calls for clearer semantics and critiques the search for neural correlates of consciousness, emphasizing the need for operational definitions in studies. The author argues for viewing consciousness as a process rather than as a fixed entity located within the nervous system.
Study at a glance
| Key finding | The author advocates for greater semantic clarity and operational definitions in consciousness research. |
|---|
Abstract
This paper explores several etymological, semantic, sociolinguistic, and methodological issues that have, in my opinion, impeded the progress of consciousness research and discourse; and I offer some suggestions that are hopefully worthy of consideration and further discussion. I review the historical and extant conflation of terms in the literature; a plethora of published definitions and types of consciousness; and I call for greater “semantic lucidity”. I critique the rationale underpinning the search for the neural correlates of consciousness; advocate for greater adherence to the requirements of an operational definition in research; and discuss the notion of consciousness as a ‘process’ versus the premise of consciousness as a tangible ‘thing’ that can somehow be found in a particular locus within the material substrate of the nervous system.