Neurophenomenal structuralism and the role of computational context

Conscious experiences are defined by their relationships to one another, and these relationships are mirrored by brain structures. However, simply matching brain patterns to mental patterns is not enough to explain what a conscious experience is about. The brain's downstream processes must actively use those patterns in a way that preserves their structure and influences behavior. Purely anatomical or overly broad causal brain structures fail this test, but activation patterns can succeed when embedded in the right computational context. This means that local structuralist theories, which ignore how brain activity is used by subsequent processing, are incomplete. Any adequate structuralist account of consciousness must incorporate computational context.

Study at a glance

Abstract

Neurophenomenal structuralism posits that conscious experiences are defined relationally and that their phenomenal structures are mirrored by neural structures. While this approach offers a promising framework for identifying neural correlates of the contents of consciousness, we argue that merely establishing structural correspondences between neural and phenomenal structures is insufficient. This paper emphasizes the critical role of computational context – the network of neural processes within which a given neural activation pattern is used – in determining content. We introduce four criteria to evaluate if neural structures are viable candidates for neural correlates of contents of consciousness within this framework. These criteria highlight that, for neural structures to mirror phenomenal structures meaningfully, they must be actively exploited by the brain’s downstream processes and influence behavior in a structure-preserving way. Our analysis demonstrates that purely anatomical and overly exhaustive causal structures fail to meet specific criteria, whereas activation structures can succeed, provided they are embedded within the appropriate computational context. Our findings challenge local structuralist theories, which overlook the content-constituting role of computational context. We conclude that incorporating computational context is essential for any structuralist account of consciousness.