Open the map

Head to head

Crick and Koch’s NCC vs Nagel’s Mind and Cosmos

Crick and Koch’s Neural Correlates of Consciousness (NCC) and Nagel's Mind and Cosmos, compared field by field from their entries in the Atlas.

At a glance

Add more theories to this comparisonCompare other theories

The claim

In brief
Crick and Koch’s NCCThis theory proposes a scientific agenda to identify the Neural Correlate of Consciousness (NCC), defined as the minimum activities in the brain that are jointly sufficient and necessary for any specific conscious perception or subjective experience. It asserts that consciousness is entirely physical and can be fully reduced to these specific brain activities.
Nagel’s Mind and CosmosThis perspective challenges the prevailing materialist Neo-Darwinian conception of nature, arguing that it fails to account for the irreducible nature of subjective experience, or 'what it is like' to be a conscious organism. It proposes that mind must be incorporated as a fundamental principle of nature itself.
What consciousness is
Crick and Koch’s NCCConsciousness (phenomenal consciousness/qualia) is identified as the Neural Correlate of Consciousness (NCC), the precise minimum pattern of neural activity in the brain necessary and sufficient for subjective experience.
Nagel’s Mind and CosmosConsciousness is fundamentally subjective experience—'how it is for the subject himself'—which resists reduction to purely physical, third-person descriptions.

Big questions

Crick and Koch’s NCCYesIf consciousness is entirely reducible to physical organizational patterns (NCC), then non-biological systems capable of replicating those precise patterns should also become conscious, barring technological constraints.
Nagel’s Mind and CosmosUncertainAs a critique of functionalism and reductionism, Nagel's view suggests that purely computational entities lacking fundamental mental properties are likely philosophical zombies; outcome depends on whether future AI can instantiate the hypothesized universal mental principles.
Crick and Koch’s NCCNoAs a Materialist theory, consciousness is wholly dependent on the physical brain; cessation of brain function entails the end of consciousness.
Nagel’s Mind and CosmosConditionalIf consciousness is a universal, fundamental property rather than a biological emergent, its essence may persist after bodily dissolution (inferred from panpsychist leanings), though likely without retention of personal identity.
Crick and Koch’s NCCYesIf the NCC states can be perfectly measured and replicated in a digital or artificial medium (mind uploading), the resulting system would be functionally and phenomenally identical, achieving virtual immortality in principle.
Nagel’s Mind and CosmosUnlikelyThe irreducibility of subjective experience means duplication of physical/functional patterns alone would fail to transfer the original first-person consciousness.
Crick and Koch’s NCCHumanistic onlyConsistent with Materialism, consciousness is a biological product of evolution and physics, conferring no ultimate cosmic meaning or teleology beyond that which humans create for themselves.
Nagel’s Mind and CosmosCosmic/UltimateExplicitly seeks to incorporate mind as a fundamental natural principle to overcome the 'pointlessness' implied by materialism, suggesting a non-theistic, inherent cosmic purpose or value.

Nature of mind

Ontology
Crick and Koch’s NCCReductive Physicalism/Materialism. The NCC approach is considered macroscopic materialism.
Nagel’s Mind and CosmosPhilosophical Challenge (leaning towards Universal Monism/Panpsychism)
Mind and body
Crick and Koch’s NCCIdentity Theory. Mental states are wholly identical to and fully explained by the physical NCC states.
Nagel’s Mind and CosmosCritiques the current conception of the mind-body relationship, asserting that we lack any conception of how physical and phenomenological aspects could be related or identical.
Fundamental or emergent
Crick and Koch’s NCCEmergent
Nagel’s Mind and CosmosPrimitive (or fundamental)
Qualia
Crick and Koch’s NCCQualia (the qualitative feel of experience) are identified with the minimum neural activities (NCC) that are jointly sufficient for specific conscious perception, although the mechanism for this identity remains the central 'hard problem' challenge.
Nagel’s Mind and CosmosQualia (felt qualities) are the core of the problem, and Nagel argues that no objective or physicalist explanation currently formulated can account for their subjective reality.

How it works

Mechanism
Crick and Koch’s NCCThe search for and definition of the Neural Correlate of Consciousness (NCC): the specific minimum neural activities necessary and sufficient for subjective experience.
Nagel’s Mind and CosmosPrimarily focuses on exposing the conceptual limits of physical reductionism rather than positing a definitive mechanism. Mechanistically, his solution suggests consciousness arises through the composition of fundamental, panpsychic-like elements.
Where it is
Crick and Koch’s NCCLocalized in specific brain areas. Early candidates included the claustrum (as a 'conductor' coordinating percepts); later candidates focused on the posterior cerebral cortex (temporo-parietal-occipital hot zone).
Nagel’s Mind and CosmosUniversal/Systemic (inferred from universal monism/panpsychism leanings) or inherent in the fabric of nature.
What it does
Crick and Koch’s NCCConsciousness is directly caused by, and is identical to, the NCC activity. NCC mechanisms (spikes, flows, circuits) are seen as constitutive of phenomenal consciousness.
Nagel’s Mind and CosmosPrimarily critical, arguing against the materialist view that consciousness is an inert epiphenomenon. If mind is a fundamental principle, it implies an irreducible, organizing role in the cosmos.

Evidence and criticism

Testability
Crick and Koch’s NCCEmpirically testable. The search for the NCC is defined as a scientific program seeking testable biological bases for consciousness.
Nagel’s Mind and CosmosUncertain/Primarily Conceptual. The theory's strength lies in its diagnosis of the explanatory gap, not in empirical verification. His suggested alternative (panpsychism) is highly speculative.
Tests so far
Crick and Koch’s NCCIdentifying specific clusters of neurons or brain regions (like the claustrum or posterior cortex) that are active during conscious experience.,Measuring electrophysiological activity (e.g., action potentials and neural circuits).
Nagel’s Mind and CosmosNot stated
Criticisms
Crick and Koch’s NCCThe primary tension is the 'explanatory gap': identifying a correlation (NCC) does not explain the identity statement of how physical activity (spikes/chemicals) literally generates phenomenal feel (qualia). The failure to identify a 'clear' NCC after decades of research is a practical limitation.
Nagel’s Mind and CosmosCriticized for retreating to 'mysterianism' and for rejecting established scientific frameworks (Neo-Darwinian materialism) without offering a concrete, robust, and detailed secular ontology as an alternative.

Sources

Key sources
Crick and Koch’s NCC
  • Towards a neurobiological theory of consciousness, F. Crick and C. Koch (1990)
  • What is the function of the claustrum?, F. Crick and C. Koch (2005)
  • The Quest for Consciousness: a Neurobiological Approach, C. Koch (2004)
Nagel’s Mind and Cosmos
  • What Is It Like to Be a Bat? (1974)
  • The View from Nowhere (1986)
  • Mind & Cosmos: Why the Materialist Neo-Darwinian Conception of Nature Is Almost Certainly False (2012)

More comparisons

All head-to-head comparisons →