Another theory of consciousness: the integrated information theory

Another theory of consciousness: the integrated information theory

The problem is that such description, while understandable and explainable, uses either unexplainable concepts of the modern world, such as consciousness, or some concepts derived from and inclusive of them. For example, "information."

07

06

Tononi also introduces some axioms of consciousness. The following can be said about consciousness: it exists; it exists internally and is real even in the absence of external influence; it consists of many elements; each state of consciousness consists of a large number of these elements; it is very structured; it is specific and carries specific information; it is integrated, unified, i.e., holistic; and it is defined.

Those points are something that could be used as a starting point for further research. This could be anything. For example, we offer visual perception, while Tononi suggests something else as a starting point. It doesn’t matter. What does matter is the approach itself: instead of going down to the cellular level, one should first understand what exactly needs to be studied and how it can be done.

03

According to IIT, experience is identical to the causal structure that determines what consciousness contains. This structure consists of elements we are not aware of. Let’s call them concepts.

05

02

This is how Tononi formulates the problem: it is basically impossible to understand consciousness taking the brain as a starting point. First, one needs to articulate the approaches and the points of any conscious state, and then — identify the mechanisms and properties of a physical system that accounts for this process.

04

In his theory, Tononi postulates that consciousness and conscious experience are a fundamental aspect of all reality, and consciousness is identical to a certain kind of information, which the theory refers to as "integrated information".

08

What is it? And why would replacing one term with another make things clearer? How should it be studied? Is a distinction made here between consciousness and thinking? As the wording goes, it is impossible to understand consciousness using the brain as a starting point, hence such a distinction has been made. And what mathematical, or rather computational, laws are at work in this thinking?

If we do try to explain concepts — consciousness/matter (as antagonisms), thinking, intuition, living/non-living, we become somewhat aware that there are no explanations for many currently used concepts, values, postulates, laws, and dogmas in general. And the same holds true, among other things, for the notion of "information."

09

There is an interesting theory, the integrated information theory (IIT), which is a bit more elaborate than the remaining majority of theories on the topic. IIT is explored by both mathematicians and neuroscientists while offering at least some theory-based computations. Giulio Tononi is credited as its author.

01