Head to head
Christian Soul Theory vs Recurrent Processing Theory
Christian Soul Theory and Lamme's Recurrent Processing Theory, compared field by field from their entries in the Atlas.
At a glance
- Christian Soul Theory belongs to the Dualism family in Kuhn's Landscape of Consciousness, Recurrent Processing Theory to Materialism.
- Christian Soul Theory treats consciousness as fundamental; Recurrent Processing Theory treats it as emergent.
- On AI consciousness, Christian Soul Theory says “Unlikely” and Recurrent Processing Theory says “Likely”.
- On life after death, Christian Soul Theory says “Yes” and Recurrent Processing Theory says “No”.
- On mind uploading, Christian Soul Theory says “No” and Recurrent Processing Theory says “Yes”.
- On meaning and purpose, Christian Soul Theory says “Cosmic/Ultimate” and Recurrent Processing Theory says “Humanistic only”.
Add more theories to this comparisonCompare other theories
The claim
In brief
Christian Soul TheoryThis theory posits that the human person is composed of two fundamentally distinct substances: a wholly immaterial, substantial soul (the self) and a physical body or brain. The soul is the locus of consciousness, provides personal identity, and interacts with the body in a cause-and-effect manner.
Recurrent Processing TheoryLamme's Recurrent Processing Theory (RPT) posits that consciousness is both necessary and sufficient when reciprocal (recurrent) feedback connections occur among neural areas, particularly in sensory systems. This processing, which happens locally in sensory and post-sensory areas (Stage 3), generates phenomenal experience without requiring global broadcast access.
What consciousness is
Christian Soul TheoryConsciousness and the mind are grounded in the substantial, unified, wholly immaterial soul, which is the entity that has experiences and grounds personal identity.
Recurrent Processing TheoryConsciousness is identified as a specific recurrent processing state holding within relevant neural circuitry, such as the visual system.
Big questions
Can AI be conscious?Differ
Christian Soul TheoryUnlikelyIf consciousness requires a radically separate, nonphysical substance (soul) that is divinely created or allocated, non-biological intelligences could not generate this necessary component, making AI consciousness impossible.
Recurrent Processing TheoryLikelyAs a Materialism Theory, AI consciousness must, in principle, be possible if the requisite pattern of recurrent processing could be artificially duplicated in a non-biological substrate.
Christian Soul TheoryYesThe soul is the ‘real you,’ existing independently of the body and providing the clearest mechanism for the persistence of individual consciousness post-mortem, fulfilling the core tenet of Abrahamic religions.
Recurrent Processing TheoryNoConsciousness is tied to physical brain activity and specific neural circuitry (recurrent processing states), suggesting cessation upon bodily death.
Christian Soul TheoryNoUploading neural patterns and pathways would only duplicate the physical basis of consciousness. Since the necessary nonphysical substance (the soul) would be absent from the duplicate, first-person mental self-preservation would be impossible.
Recurrent Processing TheoryYesSince consciousness is the recurrent processing state itself, a perfect duplication of that process onto a new medium (upload) would generate the first-person self, enabling virtual immortality.
Christian Soul TheoryCosmic/UltimateAs a theological theory, it provides ultimate meaning, purpose, and value tied to divine creation, destiny, and the spiritual nature of human existence.
Recurrent Processing TheoryHumanistic onlyThe theory focuses on a purely physicalist, neurobiological explanation of phenomenal experience and does not support any ultimate cosmic meaning or purpose.
Nature of mind
Ontology
Christian Soul TheorySubstance Dualism. Reality consists of at least two ontological categories: physical (brain/body) and nonphysical (soul).
Recurrent Processing TheoryPhysicalism
Mind and body
Christian Soul TheoryInteractionist: The immaterial soul relates to the physical body/brain in an informing and cause-effect way, meaning physical states cause phenomenal states, and phenomenal states cause physical states.
Recurrent Processing TheoryIdentity/Reductionist approach, arguing that the notion of mind must move toward that of the brain, and consciousness is identical to a recurrent processing state in physical circuitry.
Fundamental or emergent
Christian Soul TheoryPrimitive. The soul is a substantial, nonphysical substance, often held to be created and allocated by God (Creationism) rather than arising from material processes.
Recurrent Processing TheoryEmergent
Qualia
Christian Soul TheoryQualia (qualitative feel) are phenomenal properties borne by the immaterial soul, which provides the single, unitary awareness of complex experiences.
Recurrent Processing TheoryQualia are generated when a certain recurrent processing state holds of the relevant visual circuitry, making the visual state conscious.
How it works
Mechanism
Christian Soul TheoryInteractionism, which requires that the physical world is not causally closed, allowing the nonphysical soul to exert causal power over the physical brain and vice versa.
Recurrent Processing TheoryRecurrent processing (feedback connections) in sensory and post-sensory areas (Stage 3) is considered sufficient for consciousness.
Where it is
Christian Soul TheoryThe non-extended soul is associated with the body, being fully 'present' at each point within it.
Recurrent Processing TheoryLocalized in sensory and post-sensory areas, specifically recurrent activations in the 'back of the head'.
What it does
Christian Soul TheoryThe soul's main functional role is providing causal efficacy for mental states (especially in relation to libertarian free will) and grounding personal identity. It also gives form to and animates the body.
Recurrent Processing TheoryConsciousness is the specific recurrent processing state itself. The underlying purpose is implied to move the understanding of mind toward the brain.
Evidence and criticism
Testability
Christian Soul TheorySpeculative/Philosophical. Direct empirical testing is impossible due to the soul’s nonphysical nature. It is argued that empirical evidence for survival beyond death (like NDEs/OBEs) would instantaneously falsify materialism and support dualism.
Recurrent Processing TheoryEmpirically testable
Tests so far
Christian Soul TheoryReported observations such as near-death experiences (NDEs) and out-of-body experiences (OBEs) are cited by adherents as phenomena requiring a nonphysical explanation, which the soul provides.
Recurrent Processing TheoryNot stated
Criticisms
Christian Soul TheoryThe primary tension is the problem of mental causation (how an immaterial soul can causally interact with the physical body/brain) and the conflict with the widely accepted scientific principle of the causal closure of the physical world. Critics often attribute persistence in this view to 'folk myths' or persistent traditions.
Recurrent Processing TheoryCritiques Global Workspace Theory (GWT) as being 'all about access but not about seeing'. Is itself criticized by Ned Block as a 'truncated form of the global workspace account'.
Sources
Key sources
Christian Soul Theory
- The Substance of Consciousness: A Comprehensive Defense of Contemporary Substance Dualism (2023)
- The Soul: How We Know It’s Real and Why it Matters, J.P. Moreland (2014)
- Mind, Brain, and Free Will, Richard Swinburne (2013)
Recurrent Processing Theory
- Towards a true neural stance on consciousness, Victor Lamme (2006)
- How neuroscience will change our view on consciousness, Victor Lamme (2010)
- Wu, 2018 (Discussing Lamme's RPT) (2018)
More comparisons
Christian Soul Theory vs …
Recurrent Processing Theory vs …
- Recurrent Processing Theory vs Orch OR
- Recurrent Processing Theory vs Spira’s Non-Duality
- Recurrent Processing Theory vs Goff’s Panpsychism
- Recurrent Processing Theory vs Bentley Hart’s Monism
- Recurrent Processing Theory vs Kastrup’s Analytic Idealism
- Recurrent Processing Theory vs Chalmers’s Panpsychism