The reputation of science is being tarnished by the persecution of leading theories. Johan Storm believes that all prominent theories of consciousness hold some truth.
Neurobiologist Johan Storm from the University of Oslo has found himself at the heart of debates surrounding theories of consciousness, attempting to defuse tensions. A year ago, the prominent theory, integrated information theory (IIT), came under fire, with accusations of being “pseudo” leveled against it. A letter making such claims was signed by numerous well-known neurobiologists.
In order to grasp the essence of this debate, it is crucial to recognize that while everyone possesses consciousness, there remains a lack of clarity on its nature. Historically, researchers shied away from studying this realm, opting to focus on behavior rather than consciousness. Yet, with the advent of new neuroimaging technologies, interest has once again been piqued in this realm, leading to the emergence of numerous new theories. Presently, over twenty theories of consciousness hold weight.
Among these, two theories stand out as the most influential: integrated information theory (IIT) and theory of global neural space (Global Neuronal Workspace Theory, GNWT). Johan Storm Christof Koch from the Allen Institute, is notably ambitious. The theory posits that consciousness arises from a high level of information within the brain and a rich amount of interaction among various brain elements. Storm elucidated, “This implies that integrated information surpasses the sum of individual parts’ information.”
GNWT, pioneered by Stanislas Dehaene, centers on the notion that consciousness emanates from information deemed significant enough to be disseminated throughout various brain regions. Storm remarked, “Despite the influx of vast information into the brain, the majority remains subconscious. Only select data of sufficient importance trigger a surge of activity and become conscious.”