The unfolding argument: Why IIT and other causal structure theories cannot explain consciousness
Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 25, 2026

Conscious and Non-conscious Representations of Emotional Faces in Asperger's Syndrome
Published on: July 31, 2016
Adrien Doerig1, Aaron Schurger2, Kathryn Hess3
1Laboratory of Psychophysics, Brain Mind Institute, EPFL, Switzerland.
Abstract:
How can we explain consciousness? This question has become a vibrant topic of neuroscience research in recent decades. A large body of empirical results has been accumulated, and many theories have been proposed. Certain theories suggest that consciousness should be explained in terms of brain functions, such as accessing information in a global workspace, applying higher order to lower order representations, or predictive coding. These functions could be realized by a variety of patterns of brain connectivity. Other theories, such as Information Integration Theory (IIT) and Recurrent Processing Theory (RPT), identify causal structure with consciousness. For example, according to these theories, feedforward systems are never conscious, and feedback systems always are. Here, using theorems from the theory of computation, we show that causal structure theories are either false or outside the realm of science.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Kinetic Molecular Theory and Gas Laws Explain Properties of Gas Molecules
Attribution Theory
Scientific Laws and Theories
The Unfolded Protein Response
Causality in Epidemiology
Valence Bond Theory

