Munich Center for Mathematical Philosophy, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Geschwister-Scholl-Platz 1, 80539 München, Germany; Graduate School of Systemic Neurosciences, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Großhaderner Str. 2, 82152 Planegg-Martinsried, Germany; Institute for Psychology, University of Bamberg, Markusplatz 3, 96047 Bamberg, Germany; Association for Mathematical Consciousness Science, Geschwister-Scholl-Platz 1, 80539 München, Germany.
Conscious Cogn. 2024 Mar;119:103653. doi: 10.1016/j.concog.2024.103653. Epub 2024 Feb 28.
Recent activities in virtually all fields engaged in consciousness studies indicate early signs of a structural turn, where verbal descriptions or simple formalisations of conscious experiences are replaced by structural tools, most notably mathematical spaces. My goal here is to offer three comments that, in my opinion, are essential to avoid misunderstandings in these developments early on. These comments concern metaphysical premises of structural approaches, the viability of structure-preserving mappings, and the question of what a structure of conscious experience is in the first place. I will also explain what, in my opinion, are the great promises of structural methodologies and how they might impact consciousness science at large.
近期几乎所有参与意识研究领域的活动都表明了结构转向的早期迹象,即有意识体验的口头描述或简单形式化被结构工具所取代,其中最突出的是数学空间。我在这里的目标是提供三条评论,我认为这些评论对于避免这些发展早期的误解是至关重要的。这些评论涉及结构方法的形而上学前提、保持结构的映射的可行性,以及有意识体验的结构首先是什么的问题。我还将解释我认为结构方法学的巨大承诺是什么,以及它们如何影响整个意识科学。