1 00:00:00,233 --> 00:00:03,566 Nature slapped both theories of consciousness in the face at the same time 2 00:00:04,333 --> 00:00:05,900 2023 3 00:00:05,933 --> 00:00:10,933 A world-class neuroscientist has lost a 25-year-old gamble 4 00:00:11,866 --> 00:00:14,200 The bet is a case of wine 5 00:00:14,200 --> 00:00:18,233 It's one of the deepest mysteries of mankind. 6 00:00:18,266 --> 00:00:20,400 Where does consciousness live in the brain? 7 00:00:21,133 --> 00:00:23,900 His name is Christopher Koch 8 00:00:23,933 --> 00:00:28,600 I used to believe that within 25 years, science would find a neural marker of consciousness. 9 00:00:29,433 --> 00:00:30,333 What happened? 10 00:00:30,533 --> 00:00:33,300 He was at the Science of Consciousness Annual Meeting in 2023 11 00:00:33,333 --> 00:00:39,866 Handed philosopher David Chalmers a bottle of 1978 Madeira 12 00:00:39,900 --> 00:00:41,400 Admit with a wry smile 13 00:00:41,400 --> 00:00:43,500 Things were not as clear as he had imagined 14 00:00:44,266 --> 00:00:45,600 Chalmers takes the drink 15 00:00:45,600 --> 00:00:47,433 He smiled and said something 16 00:00:47,433 --> 00:00:48,533 It is clear that 17 00:00:48,533 --> 00:00:49,300 Things are not clear 18 00:00:50,200 --> 00:00:50,933 Hello 19 00:00:50,933 --> 00:00:51,666 Hello. 20 00:00:51,700 --> 00:00:52,433 I am Wang Lijie 21 00:00:53,266 --> 00:00:54,800 But the story doesn't end there. 22 00:00:55,533 --> 00:00:57,466 The year Koch lost the bet 23 00:00:57,500 --> 00:00:59,933 One of the largest consciousness experiments in history 24 00:00:59,966 --> 00:01:02,466 It is being promoted simultaneously in multiple laboratories around the world 25 00:01:03,366 --> 00:01:05,700 This project is called COGITATE. 26 00:01:05,700 --> 00:01:08,300 Funded by Templeton World Charitable Foundation 27 00:01:08,333 --> 00:01:09,000 It took seven years. 28 00:01:09,833 --> 00:01:11,033 2025 29 00:01:11,033 --> 00:01:12,600 The results are finally out 30 00:01:12,633 --> 00:01:13,833 Posted directly in Nature 31 00:01:14,833 --> 00:01:17,833 This paper does something unprecedented 32 00:01:17,833 --> 00:01:20,833 It brings together two theories that have dominated the science of consciousness for decades 33 00:01:20,833 --> 00:01:22,833 Pull into the same ring 34 00:01:22,833 --> 00:01:24,866 Use the same set of experiments to judge simultaneously 35 00:01:25,700 --> 00:01:26,533 What happened? 36 00:01:26,766 --> 00:01:28,933 Both theories have been substantially challenged 37 00:01:29,666 --> 00:01:31,566 In vernacular 38 00:01:31,600 --> 00:01:32,900 Both overturned 39 00:01:33,766 --> 00:01:35,100 Today's video 40 00:01:35,100 --> 00:01:37,333 I'm going to tell you the story of this paper. 41 00:01:38,400 --> 00:01:39,900 But what I'd rather explore 42 00:01:39,933 --> 00:01:42,200 Is a bigger problem behind this result 43 00:01:43,133 --> 00:01:45,766 Why haven't we been able to find the switch on consciousness? 44 00:01:45,900 --> 00:01:47,433 This failure itself 45 00:01:47,433 --> 00:01:50,266 Are they telling us something profound? 46 00:01:50,400 --> 00:01:52,000 Let's first understand these two theories 47 00:01:52,833 --> 00:01:55,066 The first is called integrated information theory. 48 00:01:55,100 --> 00:01:57,400 English abbreviation IIT 49 00:01:57,400 --> 00:02:01,666 It's by Giulio Tononi at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. 50 00:02:02,600 --> 00:02:04,600 The central proposition of this theory is very bold 51 00:02:05,366 --> 00:02:08,533 It says consciousness is not a function of a certain area of the brain 52 00:02:08,533 --> 00:02:10,900 It's a system's ability to integrate information itself. 53 00:02:11,766 --> 00:02:15,133 Tononi even invented a mathematical symbol to measure it 54 00:02:15,166 --> 00:02:16,100 It's called φ. 55 00:02:16,933 --> 00:02:19,100 The higher the φ value of a system 56 00:02:19,100 --> 00:02:21,266 The greater the degree of information integration 57 00:02:21,266 --> 00:02:22,766 The richer the conscious experience 58 00:02:23,766 --> 00:02:25,533 According to IIT 59 00:02:25,533 --> 00:02:28,266 The central base of consciousness is in the back of the brain 60 00:02:28,266 --> 00:02:29,433 That's the posterior cortex. 61 00:02:30,233 --> 00:02:32,133 Why the back? 62 00:02:32,200 --> 00:02:36,100 Because the posterior cortex contains a large number of densely interconnected neural circuits 63 00:02:36,100 --> 00:02:38,100 The information is highly integrated there. 64 00:02:38,100 --> 00:02:39,533 Forming a complex causal structure 65 00:02:40,533 --> 00:02:41,900 IIT forecast 66 00:02:41,933 --> 00:02:45,266 And it's this continuous synchronized activity in the posterior cortex. 67 00:02:45,300 --> 00:02:47,666 Constitutes the consciousness you are experiencing right now 68 00:02:48,466 --> 00:02:52,500 The second theory is called the global neural workspace theory 69 00:02:52,533 --> 00:02:54,700 English abbreviation GNWT 70 00:02:55,500 --> 00:02:58,733 The concept was first proposed by Bernard Barthes 71 00:02:58,766 --> 00:03:02,366 Later, the French neuroscientist Stanislas Dea 72 00:03:02,366 --> 00:03:05,700 Na developed it into a complete neuroscience model 73 00:03:06,666 --> 00:03:08,400 Its core idea is 74 00:03:08,433 --> 00:03:10,600 And consciousness is a sort of theater spotlight. 75 00:03:11,533 --> 00:03:15,900 The sensory areas in the back of the brain are always processing input. 76 00:03:15,900 --> 00:03:19,200 But most of it runs silently in the background 77 00:03:19,233 --> 00:03:20,133 You don't even realize it. 78 00:03:21,600 --> 00:03:25,866 Only when something is powerful enough to be pushed to the global stage 79 00:03:25,866 --> 00:03:27,366 Broadcast throughout the brain 80 00:03:27,400 --> 00:03:30,800 In particular, the prefrontal cortex participates in the global workspace 81 00:03:30,833 --> 00:03:32,666 You will really realize it 82 00:03:33,600 --> 00:03:36,200 The GNWT has a landmark prediction. 83 00:03:36,200 --> 00:03:36,766 It's called ignition. 84 00:03:37,600 --> 00:03:39,000 What do you mean? 85 00:03:39,133 --> 00:03:41,866 The moment you become truly aware of something 86 00:03:41,866 --> 00:03:47,100 There's a sudden burst of neural activity in the prefrontal cortex. 87 00:03:47,100 --> 00:03:48,900 It's like a match being polished. 88 00:03:50,033 --> 00:03:55,033 And this ignition occurs roughly 200 to 300 milliseconds after the stimulus is present. 89 00:03:56,033 --> 00:03:57,166 Before ignition 90 00:03:57,166 --> 00:04:00,300 And yet information just goes round and round in those sensory areas in the back of the brain. 91 00:04:01,833 --> 00:04:02,733 After ignition 92 00:04:02,733 --> 00:04:05,300 Information was thrust onto the global stage. 93 00:04:05,333 --> 00:04:06,933 You really see it 94 00:04:07,566 --> 00:04:08,900 Did you notice? 95 00:04:09,000 --> 00:04:12,066 There's a very central disagreement between these two theories. 96 00:04:12,766 --> 00:04:16,900 Does consciousness live in the front or the back of the brain? 97 00:04:17,033 --> 00:04:18,833 IIT says behind 98 00:04:18,866 --> 00:04:22,100 And that posterior cortical integration activity is consciousness itself. 99 00:04:22,200 --> 00:04:25,133 GNWT says it's up front. 100 00:04:25,133 --> 00:04:27,000 Ignition broadcasts without prefrontal lobes 101 00:04:27,000 --> 00:04:28,433 There's no real conscious experience. 102 00:04:29,500 --> 00:04:31,333 This is not philosophers arguing on the sofa. 103 00:04:32,066 --> 00:04:34,366 This is a scientific disagreement that experiments can judge 104 00:04:35,233 --> 00:04:36,533 But for decades 105 00:04:36,533 --> 00:04:38,266 Each side does its own experiment 106 00:04:38,300 --> 00:04:39,566 Cite their own evidence 107 00:04:39,600 --> 00:04:40,600 No one can convince anyone 108 00:04:41,800 --> 00:04:44,566 The experimental design you did was good for your theory 109 00:04:44,566 --> 00:04:46,633 The experimental design I did was favorable to my theory 110 00:04:47,766 --> 00:04:51,166 This phenomenon is called confirmation bias in the philosophy of science 111 00:04:51,966 --> 00:04:53,566 How do we break this deadlock? 112 00:04:53,633 --> 00:04:55,966 Someone came up with a genius solution 113 00:04:56,000 --> 00:04:57,233 It's called adversarial collaboration. 114 00:04:58,066 --> 00:04:59,700 Simply put 115 00:04:59,733 --> 00:05:03,100 Bring proponents of both theories to the same table 116 00:05:03,133 --> 00:05:05,833 Plus a bunch of neutral referee scientists 117 00:05:05,833 --> 00:05:06,833 Let's design experiments together 118 00:05:07,733 --> 00:05:09,900 Each side writes down their own predictions 119 00:05:10,800 --> 00:05:12,266 If the result is A. 120 00:05:12,266 --> 00:05:13,200 Explain that my theory is correct 121 00:05:14,033 --> 00:05:15,433 If the result is B. 122 00:05:15,466 --> 00:05:16,066 It means I was wrong. 123 00:05:17,133 --> 00:05:19,966 We then pre-register all of those predictions. 124 00:05:20,033 --> 00:05:20,733 lock 125 00:05:20,733 --> 00:05:21,833 No post-mortem modification allowed 126 00:05:22,666 --> 00:05:25,733 Finally, a neutral third party performs experiments and analyzes the data 127 00:05:26,733 --> 00:05:28,666 The essence of this approach lies in 128 00:05:28,700 --> 00:05:33,466 No one can make up a story after seeing the results 129 00:05:33,533 --> 00:05:36,033 That's what the COGITATE Alliance does. 130 00:05:36,633 --> 00:05:38,966 They recruited 256 subjects 131 00:05:38,966 --> 00:05:41,566 And they're using three state-of-the-art brain imaging technologies. 132 00:05:42,533 --> 00:05:47,100 functional magnetic resonance fMRI 133 00:05:47,100 --> 00:05:48,600 You're looking at blood flow patterns. 134 00:05:48,633 --> 00:05:49,466 High spatial accuracy 135 00:05:50,833 --> 00:05:53,500 Magnetoencephalography MEG 136 00:05:53,500 --> 00:05:54,933 It's the magnetic field. 137 00:05:54,966 --> 00:05:55,700 High time accuracy 138 00:05:56,466 --> 00:06:00,100 And intracranial electroencephalogram iEEG 139 00:06:00,133 --> 00:06:02,533 This is putting electrodes directly into the brain to measure 140 00:06:03,400 --> 00:06:04,666 What's the concept? 141 00:06:04,833 --> 00:06:10,166 This kind of data can only be collected incidentally during surgical monitoring of patients with epilepsy 142 00:06:10,166 --> 00:06:10,733 Extremely precious 143 00:06:11,566 --> 00:06:13,200 Three tools are available at the same time 144 00:06:13,233 --> 00:06:17,733 Simultaneous locking of brain activity in three dimensions: space, time and depth 145 00:06:18,533 --> 00:06:23,233 The precision and scale of this experiment are unprecedented in the history of consciousness science 146 00:06:24,000 --> 00:06:25,433 How do you do that? 147 00:06:25,533 --> 00:06:28,333 Show subjects different types of visual stimuli 148 00:06:28,333 --> 00:06:31,366 Such as faces, objects, letters 149 00:06:31,366 --> 00:06:33,933 The length of each rendering is different 150 00:06:33,966 --> 00:06:36,566 Half a second, a second, a second and a half. 151 00:06:37,366 --> 00:06:41,666 And then we used all three of these tools to measure simultaneously in different areas of the brain. 152 00:06:42,133 --> 00:06:43,966 Activity patterns at different points in time 153 00:06:45,500 --> 00:06:46,000 Here it is. 154 00:06:47,266 --> 00:06:48,533 Look at IIT first 155 00:06:49,366 --> 00:06:50,666 IIT forecast 156 00:06:50,833 --> 00:06:53,200 When you become aware of a visual stimulus 157 00:06:53,233 --> 00:06:56,500 There should be sustained synchronized activity in the posterior cortex. 158 00:06:57,400 --> 00:06:58,366 That is to say 159 00:06:58,400 --> 00:07:03,100 Those circuits in the back should be tightly integrated. 160 00:07:03,133 --> 00:07:06,866 And this synchronization should continue until the stimulus wears off. 161 00:07:07,866 --> 00:07:09,566 What did the experiment find? 162 00:07:09,733 --> 00:07:12,433 The posterior cortex does have a sustained response 163 00:07:12,433 --> 00:07:16,333 Activity in the occipital and lateral temporal lobes does indeed reflect the duration of the stimulation 164 00:07:17,300 --> 00:07:20,633 But the kind of continuous synchronization within the posterior cortex predicted by IIT 165 00:07:20,700 --> 00:07:21,333 Did not appear 166 00:07:22,900 --> 00:07:24,566 There is indeed information in the back. 167 00:07:24,566 --> 00:07:27,333 But there is no IIT maintained between those regions. 168 00:07:27,366 --> 00:07:29,366 The kind of tightly interconnected model required 169 00:07:30,466 --> 00:07:32,733 This directly undermines the core proposition of IIT 170 00:07:32,733 --> 00:07:36,366 The structure of neural networks determines consciousness 171 00:07:37,200 --> 00:07:40,733 And look at GNWT. 172 00:07:41,200 --> 00:07:44,200 GNWT predicts two things 173 00:07:44,933 --> 00:07:45,833 first 174 00:07:45,833 --> 00:07:47,800 When the stimulus wears off 175 00:07:47,833 --> 00:07:50,166 The frontal lobes should have a clear ignition. 176 00:07:51,000 --> 00:07:52,033 second 177 00:07:52,033 --> 00:07:57,366 The prefrontal lobe should be able to represent the full range of visual content that you're aware of in every dimension. 178 00:07:57,366 --> 00:08:00,066 For example, what category and orientation do you see? 179 00:08:00,766 --> 00:08:01,766 What happened? 180 00:08:01,866 --> 00:08:03,266 The first prediction basically failed. 181 00:08:04,300 --> 00:08:06,800 Prefrontal lobe ignition when stimulation disappears 182 00:08:06,800 --> 00:08:09,400 Did not appear under most experimental conditions 183 00:08:10,233 --> 00:08:12,066 The second prediction was also discounted 184 00:08:13,633 --> 00:08:17,100 You do have content-specific activity in the frontal lobes. 185 00:08:17,133 --> 00:08:21,133 It can tell whether you're looking at faces or letters. 186 00:08:21,433 --> 00:08:23,466 But for such details 187 00:08:23,500 --> 00:08:24,900 The frontal lobes can do almost nothing. 188 00:08:25,833 --> 00:08:30,133 This is far from the comprehensive global broadcast that GNWT describes 189 00:08:30,933 --> 00:08:31,966 So you see 190 00:08:31,966 --> 00:08:35,000 Experiments give partial marks to both theories 191 00:08:35,000 --> 00:08:36,933 But it also deducts the most crucial points 192 00:08:37,900 --> 00:08:41,100 IIT says consciousness is back-synced. 193 00:08:41,366 --> 00:08:43,700 Experiments say that synchronization doesn't exist 194 00:08:44,433 --> 00:08:48,100 GNWT says the front of consciousness ignites. 195 00:08:48,133 --> 00:08:50,733 Experiments show that the ignition is often absent 196 00:08:51,466 --> 00:08:52,600 It's a lose-lose situation. 197 00:08:53,766 --> 00:08:54,666 And notice 198 00:08:54,666 --> 00:08:56,700 The paper also points out a sentence in particular 199 00:08:57,633 --> 00:09:01,366 These challenges are not limited to IIT and GNWT. 200 00:09:01,633 --> 00:09:05,333 They also extend to other theories of consciousness that share similar predictions 201 00:09:06,200 --> 00:09:07,333 What do you mean? 202 00:09:07,466 --> 00:09:12,300 So the shockwave didn't just hit two contestants. 203 00:09:12,333 --> 00:09:17,666 All the theories that bet big on posterior cortical synchronization or prefrontal ignition 204 00:09:17,700 --> 00:09:19,633 Have to reassess their foundation 205 00:09:20,233 --> 00:09:21,700 But I want you to stop. 206 00:09:21,700 --> 00:09:25,100 Don't jump to the conclusion that these theories are rubbish 207 00:09:25,766 --> 00:09:28,666 Because this is precisely what makes science most fascinating 208 00:09:29,566 --> 00:09:30,733 Think about it. 209 00:09:30,766 --> 00:09:33,266 Newtonian mechanics was also overturned 210 00:09:33,266 --> 00:09:35,333 But is Newtonian mechanics rubbish? 211 00:09:35,466 --> 00:09:36,233 Not at all. 212 00:09:37,066 --> 00:09:39,833 It's still surprisingly accurate on an everyday scale 213 00:09:40,800 --> 00:09:45,400 Einstein's general theory of relativity overturned Newton's absolute view of spacetime 214 00:09:45,400 --> 00:09:50,300 But Einstein's theory itself is not fully compatible with quantum mechanics to this day 215 00:09:51,233 --> 00:09:53,966 The deepest cracks in physics have yet to be repaired 216 00:09:54,833 --> 00:09:57,333 So you're saying physics failed? 217 00:09:57,466 --> 00:09:57,666 Nope. 218 00:09:58,633 --> 00:10:02,933 Every time an elaborate theory falls apart in front of an experiment 219 00:10:02,966 --> 00:10:04,600 Light leaking from cracks 220 00:10:04,600 --> 00:10:06,233 Often the next breakthrough 221 00:10:06,866 --> 00:10:09,000 And you look at the results. 222 00:10:09,000 --> 00:10:10,733 Will find a very interesting pattern 223 00:10:11,566 --> 00:10:14,500 Consciousness is indeed in the visual cortex. 224 00:10:14,966 --> 00:10:19,000 Ventral temporal lobe and inferior frontal cortex were found 225 00:10:19,033 --> 00:10:21,966 And the prefrontal and early visual areas 226 00:10:21,966 --> 00:10:24,666 There is indeed content-specific synchronization. 227 00:10:25,533 --> 00:10:26,533 That is to say 228 00:10:26,533 --> 00:10:29,866 Consciousness doesn't live in the front, it doesn't live in the back. 229 00:10:29,900 --> 00:10:34,600 It's more of a back-to-front, front-to-back dynamic. 230 00:10:35,633 --> 00:10:39,966 The actual data is far more complex than any theory can draw 231 00:10:41,566 --> 00:10:43,400 Interestingly, 2024 232 00:10:43,400 --> 00:10:48,600 There was also a review paper co-authored by multiple proponents of the theory of consciousness 233 00:10:48,633 --> 00:10:52,666 Published in Neuron, the top journal of neuroscience 234 00:10:53,633 --> 00:10:55,666 This paper acknowledges an important fact 235 00:10:56,333 --> 00:10:58,033 Current theories of consciousness 236 00:10:58,033 --> 00:11:01,366 Including IIT, GNWT, higher-order theory 237 00:11:01,900 --> 00:11:05,033 Cyclic processing theory and predictive processing theory 238 00:11:05,033 --> 00:11:07,000 The controversy between them far outweighs the consensus 239 00:11:07,833 --> 00:11:09,500 Even the most basic questions 240 00:11:09,500 --> 00:11:12,533 What is consciousness and how to identify conscious states 241 00:11:13,000 --> 00:11:17,466 What are the requirements for a qualified theory of consciousness? 242 00:11:17,466 --> 00:11:18,766 No one agreed 243 00:11:19,533 --> 00:11:20,800 What does that mean? 244 00:11:21,033 --> 00:11:24,233 Means the current state of the science of consciousness 245 00:11:24,233 --> 00:11:26,033 This is a little bit like physics a hundred years ago. 246 00:11:26,866 --> 00:11:31,500 Classical physics thought it was finishing the puzzle of the universe. 247 00:11:31,500 --> 00:11:32,600 Only two small dark clouds remain 248 00:11:33,300 --> 00:11:37,600 It turned out that those two dark clouds exploded relativity theory and quantum mechanics 249 00:11:37,633 --> 00:11:38,933 It directly overturned the entire foundation 250 00:11:39,800 --> 00:11:43,466 The science of consciousness may now be standing at a similar crossroads 251 00:11:44,433 --> 00:11:46,166 The old framework is no longer sufficient 252 00:11:46,200 --> 00:11:47,700 But the new framework has not yet been born 253 00:11:48,633 --> 00:11:52,433 And the methodology of COGITATE this adversarial collaboration itself 254 00:11:52,466 --> 00:11:55,400 Perhaps more valuable than any single experimental result 255 00:11:56,433 --> 00:12:00,000 Because it creates a scientific culture of honesty about failure. 256 00:12:01,066 --> 00:12:03,666 You can't just do experiments that work for you. 257 00:12:03,700 --> 00:12:08,433 You have to expose your core projections to the worst possible conditions. 258 00:12:09,466 --> 00:12:12,966 If this method could be extended to other fields of science 259 00:12:12,966 --> 00:12:17,700 The reproducibility crisis caused by many low-quality studies may be alleviated 260 00:12:18,400 --> 00:12:19,933 Which leads me to a deeper question. 261 00:12:20,666 --> 00:12:23,600 We humans have a deep-rooted cognitive habit 262 00:12:23,633 --> 00:12:24,900 We like to find that thing. 263 00:12:25,733 --> 00:12:26,833 What is consciousness? 264 00:12:26,966 --> 00:12:28,066 Where is it? 265 00:12:28,300 --> 00:12:29,566 Give me a place 266 00:12:29,566 --> 00:12:30,466 A mechanism 267 00:12:30,500 --> 00:12:31,000 It's a switch. 268 00:12:31,833 --> 00:12:32,733 We love nouns. 269 00:12:33,400 --> 00:12:35,300 We always turn verbs into nouns. 270 00:12:36,133 --> 00:12:38,400 Turning sight into vision 271 00:12:38,400 --> 00:12:40,133 Transforming thinking into thinking 272 00:12:40,166 --> 00:12:41,666 Turning awareness into consciousness 273 00:12:42,733 --> 00:12:45,566 But the moment you turn consciousness into consciousness 274 00:12:45,600 --> 00:12:47,233 You've made a dangerous assumption 275 00:12:48,100 --> 00:12:49,900 You assume it's a thing 276 00:12:49,933 --> 00:12:55,233 An entity that can be located, measured, locked in a brain region 277 00:12:55,300 --> 00:12:58,933 IIT locks it in the posterior cortex, GNWT. 278 00:12:58,933 --> 00:13:01,200 We shut them up in the prefrontal workspace. 279 00:13:01,200 --> 00:13:02,633 The results of the experiment found that 280 00:13:02,633 --> 00:13:04,566 It doesn't stay in any room entirely 281 00:13:05,266 --> 00:13:08,600 I made a point in the previous video about predictive coding 282 00:13:09,333 --> 00:13:10,733 Consciousness is not a noun 283 00:13:10,733 --> 00:13:11,366 It's a verb. 284 00:13:12,200 --> 00:13:14,433 It's not something you can find. 285 00:13:14,466 --> 00:13:16,566 It's an ongoing event. 286 00:13:17,233 --> 00:13:21,233 I told you that your brain is a predictor. 287 00:13:21,233 --> 00:13:25,900 It creates a controlled illusion about the world all the time 288 00:13:25,900 --> 00:13:28,466 We then calibrate it with sensory data. 289 00:13:29,533 --> 00:13:31,500 But the fabrication process itself 290 00:13:31,533 --> 00:13:33,300 Neither in a single brain region 291 00:13:33,300 --> 00:13:35,300 It's not a single ignition. 292 00:13:36,033 --> 00:13:42,400 It's a prediction and calibration loop that the entire brain runs simultaneously on multiple levels. 293 00:13:43,833 --> 00:13:46,700 The results of this COGITATE experiment 294 00:13:46,733 --> 00:13:48,900 Instead, it confirms this view from the side 295 00:13:50,033 --> 00:13:53,833 Consciousness doesn't live in the back, it doesn't live in the front. 296 00:13:53,833 --> 00:13:56,933 Because consciousness may not be a thing that lives somewhere at all 297 00:13:57,833 --> 00:14:00,633 It's a whole-brain dynamic. 298 00:14:00,666 --> 00:14:02,166 Involving posterior sensory encoding 299 00:14:02,966 --> 00:14:06,000 Classification Integration in the Middle and Attention in the Front 300 00:14:06,033 --> 00:14:08,466 Continuous exchange of information between regulators 301 00:14:09,166 --> 00:14:13,233 You single out any link and say it's consciousness 302 00:14:13,233 --> 00:14:15,100 They all just grabbed the elephant by one leg 303 00:14:16,133 --> 00:14:18,333 Only Knowledge Sect said something similar two thousand years ago 304 00:14:19,500 --> 00:14:21,166 Consciousness is not an entity 305 00:14:21,200 --> 00:14:23,000 It's a process of karmic convergence. 306 00:14:23,966 --> 00:14:26,066 You go to the brain to find the location of consciousness 307 00:14:26,066 --> 00:14:28,466 It's like you're looking for the wind in the wind where the wind lives 308 00:14:29,333 --> 00:14:31,700 The wind doesn't live anywhere 309 00:14:31,700 --> 00:14:33,433 The wind is the air itself. 310 00:14:33,966 --> 00:14:35,500 It's not that science has gone wrong. 311 00:14:36,300 --> 00:14:37,400 Quite the contrary. 312 00:14:37,433 --> 00:14:40,533 This kind of rollover is a sign that science is approaching the truth 313 00:14:41,466 --> 00:14:46,600 When your most well-designed models fall apart in the face of your most rigorous experiments 314 00:14:46,633 --> 00:14:48,300 The crack exposed 315 00:14:48,300 --> 00:14:50,300 It's a blind spot in the way we ask questions. 316 00:14:51,233 --> 00:14:55,766 In 1995, Chalmers posed a question that no one has been able to answer. 317 00:14:55,800 --> 00:14:57,200 It's called the hard problem of consciousness. 318 00:14:58,066 --> 00:15:01,100 He said you could explain how the brain processes information. 319 00:15:01,466 --> 00:15:04,533 How do you create behavior? How do you form memories? 320 00:15:04,566 --> 00:15:08,033 But none of this answers a fundamental question 321 00:15:08,033 --> 00:15:11,433 Why are these physical processes accompanied by subjective experience? 322 00:15:11,633 --> 00:15:15,166 Why doesn't everything run in the dark? 323 00:15:15,266 --> 00:15:18,900 Why is there someone feeling something inside? 324 00:15:19,033 --> 00:15:23,333 This is a problem that, to this day, no theory has been able to get to the heart of. 325 00:15:24,366 --> 00:15:29,900 Maybe we don't need a better theory to answer where consciousness is. 326 00:15:29,900 --> 00:15:32,266 It's about learning to ask a better question. 327 00:15:33,066 --> 00:15:35,733 After Koch loses the bet in 2023 328 00:15:35,733 --> 00:15:37,566 Made another bet with Chalmers on the spot 329 00:15:38,433 --> 00:15:39,266 Bet another 25 years 330 00:15:39,833 --> 00:15:42,333 He said when I was 91 331 00:15:42,333 --> 00:15:44,866 Science must be able to understand the neural mechanism of consciousness 332 00:15:45,833 --> 00:15:47,333 Chalmers is 82 years old 333 00:15:47,333 --> 00:15:48,633 Shake his hand 334 00:15:48,633 --> 00:15:49,300 Say yes. 335 00:15:49,333 --> 00:15:49,600 I'll take it. 336 00:15:50,566 --> 00:15:51,933 This image particularly moved me 337 00:15:52,800 --> 00:15:55,900 Two people who have been struggling with consciousness all their lives 338 00:15:55,900 --> 00:15:58,266 One is the most optimistic neuroscientist. 339 00:15:58,300 --> 00:16:01,100 One is the sharpest philosopher of consciousness. 340 00:16:01,100 --> 00:16:02,366 Nobody convinced anybody. 341 00:16:02,400 --> 00:16:03,533 But no one gave up 342 00:16:04,466 --> 00:16:06,833 They're still willing to gamble for another 25 years 343 00:16:08,300 --> 00:16:10,300 It's not because they know the answer. 344 00:16:10,300 --> 00:16:13,733 It's because they know it's a problem worth a lifetime. 345 00:16:14,733 --> 00:16:18,266 This reverence for the unknown and obsession with the truth 346 00:16:18,266 --> 00:16:20,666 That's what impresses me the most about the scientific spirit. 347 00:16:21,733 --> 00:16:23,833 And maybe that's what consciousness is. 348 00:16:24,833 --> 00:16:26,300 The more you try to catch it 349 00:16:26,333 --> 00:16:27,766 The more it slips through your fingers 350 00:16:28,666 --> 00:16:33,000 It's like you're trying to use a flashlight to illuminate the source of the flashlight itself. 351 00:16:33,000 --> 00:16:34,600 You can only shine anywhere else 352 00:16:35,466 --> 00:16:37,600 But the process of you chasing it itself 353 00:16:37,633 --> 00:16:41,666 It's a process of questioning, rolling over, rebuilding. 354 00:16:41,700 --> 00:16:44,000 That's exactly what consciousness is doing. 355 00:16:45,233 --> 00:16:47,400 You think you are searching for consciousness 356 00:16:47,400 --> 00:16:50,633 But in fact consciousness is the very thing that is being sought. 357 00:16:51,566 --> 00:16:52,800 What do you think? 358 00:16:52,933 --> 00:16:56,066 Do you think science will eventually find the switch on consciousness? 359 00:16:56,200 --> 00:17:00,733 Or is consciousness itself the seeker that can never be found? 360 00:17:00,833 --> 00:17:01,766 I am Wang Lijie 361 00:17:02,066 --> 00:17:02,766 See you next time.