Using Physics and Complexity Theory to 'Measure Consciousness'

[Laird]

I think that's what I meant yes. Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't that mean this is another one of those 'awareness/wakefulness' studies that uses the term consciousness in a manner that is misleading? Forgive me if I'm repeating myself at all, I'm not the most inclined when it comes to this kind of terminology 

I'm no expert on terminology either, but yes, I think there's cause for a claim of misleading terminology. The sense of "consciousness" that applies to the hard problem - the true "mystery" - is that of the subjective self and its subjective experiences, which is a binary scale: either you have a conscious self or you do not. This study, on the other hand, takes "consciousness" to be a matter of degree (of, as you put it, "awareness/wakefulness"). Don't get me wrong: there is a place for degrees of consciousness... just not when it comes to the hard problem, which is, as far as I can tell, a binary matter - either you have a conscious self or there is no (conscious) you to talk about.

To go on a bit of a semi-related rant from that reply to your comment:

This study takes the subjective self and its subjective experiences for granted, and does not in any way attempt to explain them, but rather tries to explain what we might refer to as an "intensity of experience" of that self with respect to certain physical correlates. But for those of us who are not physicalists, that correlation has never been in dispute anyway (refer to the metaphor of my last post). We simply ask "How on Earth do (or even could) the self and its subjective experiences come into existence from (be caused by) that which is of a different category of being ("objective" matter)?