Knowledge Tree
Relations (1)
related 2.58 — strongly supporting 5 facts
The 'intermediate level fallacy' is a conceptual framework used to critique theories of consciousness by highlighting how they introduce unnecessary intermediate layers—such as biological mechanisms or the body—without successfully explaining the emergence of consciousness itself, as detailed in [1], [2], [3], and [4]. Furthermore, embodiment theories are specifically accused of utilizing this fallacy to reduce the complexity of consciousness to physical bodily states [5].
Facts (5)
Sources
Good Old-Fashioned Artificial Consciousness and the Intermediate ... frontiersin.org 5 facts
perspectiveThe 'intermediate level fallacy' is an approach that is considered explanatory disruptive because it introduces a new intermediate level that requires its own explanation and creates a new problem regarding its relation to consciousness.
claimThe body is considered an intermediate entity intended to bridge the gap between the world and consciousness, which the author identifies as the 'intermediate level fallacy.'
claimThe 'intermediate level fallacy' in Good Old-Fashioned Artificial Consciousness (GOFAC) research involves proposing an intermediate level of processing without explaining why that level should lead to consciousness, effectively providing an explanans without linking it to the explanandum.
perspectiveEmbodiment attempts to exploit the intermediate level fallacy by using an ambiguous definition of a body to reduce consciousness to the level of the body.
claimThe 'intermediate level fallacy' consists of two steps: first, suggesting an intermediate, safe level of explanation (such as biological mechanisms), and second, reducing the problem of consciousness to the mapping between personal reports and those mechanisms.