7
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 26 Nov 2025
7 points (88.9% liked)
Science
14699 readers
1 users here now
Studies, research findings, and interesting tidbits from the ever-expanding scientific world.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
Be sure to also check out these other Fediverse science communities:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Whenever I see the term "consciousness" in a paper, it automatically gets flagged in my head as non-serious. But I work in AI, so maybe that shouldn't apply to whatever your field is. That brings me to the next problem: I can't figure out what your field is supposed to be from this paper. It's lacking the background and prior work sections that would serve to position your work into the greater context of existing work.
Thanks for the critique — fair points. A few clarifications directly based on the ICT Model v1.1 (the version linked in the post):
In the paper “consciousness” is used operationally, not philosophically.
ICT defines it strictly as:
C ∝ dI/dT — rate of informational change over time (Section 1.1, Eq. 2)
No metaphysics, no claims about qualia — only measurable information dynamics (entropy-rate, LZ-complexity rate, update-energy).
Also clarified in v1.1: ICT sits at the intersection of:
information physics,
thermodynamics of computation,
temporal dynamics,
neuroscience of information processing.
(Sections 1.1, 2, and Correspondence Table)
The model does not present itself as philosophy of mind.
v1.1 explicitly connects the framework to:
Landauer limit,
Bekenstein bounds,
Friston’s free-energy principle,
algorithmic complexity measures,
temporal stability / phase structure.
(All referenced in Sections 1.1–2)
The paper includes three concrete experiments (Section 8) designed for empirical testing:
Neuroenergetic test of dI/dT
Structure-without-energy input experiment
Cross-substrate information-fixation thresholds
All with operational variables, not philosophical language.
Your comment is useful — especially about clearly signaling the disciplinary context. But everything I’ve referenced above is directly in the v1.1 preprint and defines ICT as a physical/informational model, not a metaphysical one.
Happy to refine further if needed.