Anil Seth is one of the world’s leading neuroscientists who is working on the ‘problem’ of consciousness. His ideas are discussed in the book Being You (2022). His working theory is that our conscious experiences of the world and the self are forms of brain-based prediction – ‘controlled hallucinations’ – that arise with, through, and because of our living bodies. We are conscious, beast machines, Seth believes.

The widely held assumption in science is that the brain is responsible for creating our conscious experiences. Philosopher David Chalmers, who introduced the term ‘the hard problem of consciousness’, wrote: ‘It is widely agreed that experience arises from a physical basis, but we have no good explanation of why and how it so arises.’

Why is there so much agreement about the physical nature of consciousness if it is totally unclear and unexplainable how something physical can cause a mental state? The opposite approach – consciousness producing physical states – is almost never considered in science.

Seth is honest in stating that his view is philosophical and not a proven scientific fact. He writes: ‘My preferred philosophical position, and the default position of many neuroscientists, is physicalism or materialism. This is the idea that the universe is made of physical stuff, and that conscious states are either identical to, or somehow emerge from particular arrangements of this physical stuff.’ He does not elaborate on why he favors this philosophy. Although he briefly acknowledges alternatives such as dualism and idealism, he does not engage in a detailed discussion of why materialism should be considered a preferable default, particularly over idealism – the view that the mind creates reality.

Seth’s theory is summarized in this following statement: ‘The experience of being you emerges from the way the brain predicts and controls the internal state of the body. The essence of selfhood is neither a rational mind nor an immaterial soul. It is a deeply embodied biological process. a process that underpins the simple feeling of being alive that is the basis for all our experiences of self, indeed for any conscious experience at all. Being you is literally about your body’ (P. 6/7).

Seth bypasses the hard problem of consciousness – solving the problem of why consciousness should arise from material interaction in brains – by introducing ‘the real problem of consciousness’. The real problem, he writes, accepts that conscious experiences exist and focuses primarily on their phenomenological properties. What is it like to be something? His task is then to explain, predict and control what happens in the brain leading to a certain experience. What happens in the brain that makes you see red rather than blue? What happens when you experience a jealous feeling?

What sets Seth’s theory apart is his view of the brain as a prediction machine. According to him, everything we see, hear, and feel is simply the brain’s best guess about the causes of its sensory inputs. Essentially, all our perceptions are hallucinations, and when these hallucinations align across individuals, we call it reality. Through examples of various visual illusions, Seth demonstrates that perception is a generative, creative act.

However, I struggle to see why materialism is necessary in this framework. Imagine you’re at the zoo and see a black and furry shape – your brain’s best guess about the most probable cause for this sensory input is that it’s a gorilla, so the perception of a gorilla is created. Why must this perceived gorilla correspond to a physical, material gorilla in the external world? In my view, the creation in the mind of the gorilla is the gorilla.

My thoughts about this book
Neuroscientists like Anil Seth have come a long way in explaining how the brain modulates conscious experiences, but they have one major conceptual leap to make, namely that the brain does not create conscious experiences, but merely puts restraints on it. Reality is not created by the brain, but by the mind itself: the brain and body are part of this controlled hallucination as well. Brains and neurons are not really ‘there’, but they are what consciousness looks like to observers from the outside. Why ‘they’ (the materialists) find this one so hard I can only speculate about. Perhaps it is that once you acknowledge that you are part of a larger consciousness, that means that you are truly immortal and forever part of nature. And this can be a frightening idea, I guess.

You can read more about my (very distinct) ideas about consciousness on my platform:
http://free-consciousness.com