The Squirrel in Your Head: Attention Schema & the Hard Problem

The hard problem of consciousness can be addressed by understanding why humans are convinced of a non-physical 'something else' in the brain, with Attention Schema Theory offering a mechanistic explanation for this conviction.

• The hard problem of consciousness may be dissolved by explaining why we are convinced of subjective experience, rather than trying to explain consciousness as a separate entity.

• Attention Schema Theory (AST) proposes that subjective feeling arises from the brain's model of its own attention, leading to the belief in a non-physical 'something else.'

• A full mechanistic explanation of consciousness, like AST, may inherently leave people feeling dissatisfied, as the brain struggles to reconcile objective truth with subjective conviction.

The discussion explores various theories of consciousness, distinguishing between those explaining its brain mechanics and those addressing the 'hard problem' of subjective experience. While higher-order thought, global workspace, and Integrated Information Theory (IIT) contribute to understanding mechanics, Attention Schema Theory (AST) is favored for dissolving the hard problem by explaining the ingrained human belief in a non-physical consciousness. This theory posits that subjective feeling arises from the brain's model of attention, even if it leaves some feeling dissatisfied.

Consciousness Theories Overview

• 00:00:18 Understanding consciousness involves two main aspects: explaining its mechanics in the brain and tackling the 'hard problem' of subjective experience. For brain mechanics, a hybrid approach combining higher-order thought theories, global workspace theory, and Integrated Information Theory (IIT) is suggested as these each offer necessary conditions. However, a separate theory is needed to explain why matter gives rise to subjective feelings like seeing colors or smelling scents.

• 00:01:12 The 'hard problem' of consciousness questions how something built from matter can be responsible for subjective experience, like seeing a vibrant color or smelling a pleasant scent. This remains mysterious to many, prompting the search for a theory that can explain this leap from physical brain activity to felt sensation.

Attention Schema Theory

• 00:01:53 Attention Schema Theory (AST), proposed by Mike Graziano, is presented as the favored explanation for the 'hard problem' of consciousness. This theory aligns with Dan Dennett's philosophy and focuses on explaining why individuals are convinced there's a non-material 'something else' in their brains, rather than directly explaining consciousness itself. It suggests that if one can explain this conviction, the hard problem may effectively dissolve.

• 00:04:47 AST argues that the 'something else' many believe constitutes consciousness evaporates when understood through the lens of why we are so convinced of its existence. Using the analogy of a patient convinced of a 'squirrel in his head,' the theory proposes that understanding the why of this conviction is more fruitful than searching for the non-existent squirrel itself. This means that subjective experience might be a product of the brain's internal model of its own attention, creating the impression of a distinct, non-physical entity.

The 'What It's Like' Question

• 00:08:16 The phrase 'what it's like' is inherently relational, suggesting experiences are understood in relation to other things, both similar and dissimilar. Our associative perceptual brains and memories process information within a network of relations, giving rise to the sense of 'something it is like.' Attention Schema Theory proposes that information modeled by the attention schema is 'flagged' as special or different, allowing for direct reporting of subjective experience.

• 00:10:49 While some might argue that analogies for 'what it's like' reduce subjective feeling, the persistence of undeniable experiences like pain still points to a fundamental 'root level' of subjective feeling. AST aims to explain this subjective feeling by accounting for the internal model of attention, rather than positing a separate, non-physical realm for such experiences.

Theory Satisfaction and Dissolution

• 00:11:38 AST predicts that people will often be dissatisfied with its explanation because it mechanistically accounts for subjective experience without affirming a separate, non-physical component. Even a complete objective explanation of behaviors and brain activity might leave individuals feeling that an undeniable subjective 'feeling' is still missing. This dissatisfaction is an inherent prediction of the theory, as the very brain trying to explain the hard problem is also the one experiencing its perceived 'plague.'

• 00:15:52 The 'hard problem' is considered hard not in a metaphysical sense, but epistemologically, reflecting the difficulty for humans to reconcile a mechanistic explanation with their ingrained subjective conviction. If a mechanistic theory like AST is correct and complete, humans might be left with the challenge of accepting its truth while simultaneously feeling dissatisfied, indicating that the problem dissolves by understanding the nature of human perception rather than finding a separate 'answer' to a non-existent mystery.