Open the map

Head to head

Attention Schema Theory vs Searle’s Biological Naturalism

Attention Schema Theory and Searle’s Biological Naturalism, 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
Attention Schema TheoryThis theory posits that consciousness arises when the brain constructs a quick, simplified, internal model—an attention schema—of its own process of attention. The brain mistakenly interprets and reports this internal representation as a subjective, non-physical essence or a 'self-caricature,' even though it is fundamentally a computational product.
Searle’s Biological NaturalismBiological Naturalism posits that consciousness is a real, irreducible, subjective biological feature of the brain, entirely caused by lower-level neurobiological processes and realized as higher-level system features. This approach seeks to solve the mind-body problem by accepting the scientific worldview while acknowledging the first-person ontology of conscious experience.
What consciousness is
Attention Schema TheoryConsciousness is identified as the brain’s internal representation or simplified model of its own mechanism of attention (the attention schema), which is a specific example of higher-order thought.
Searle’s Biological NaturalismConscious states are identified as real parts of the real world that are higher-level, system features of the brain, defined as states of awareness, sentience, or feeling that persist during wakefulness.

Big questions

Attention Schema TheoryLikelySince consciousness is defined as a computational process (the creation of an attention schema), in principle, artificial systems that implement the necessary computational architecture could become conscious. Furthermore, observers will inevitably make the social attribution of consciousness to sufficiently complex AI systems that act like they are conscious.
Searle’s Biological NaturalismConditionalSearle rejects consciousness via simulation (Chinese Room Argument) but argues that if the causally sufficient biological mechanism is known, an artificial machine that implements that same mechanism could be conscious, as consciousness does not strictly require biological neurons, only sufficient causal power.
Attention Schema TheoryNoAs a Materialist/Neurobiological theory, consciousness is tied to the physical substrate (the biological, information-processing machine), precluding survival beyond the decay of the body.
Searle’s Biological NaturalismNoConsciousness is entirely physical and solely the product of biological brains; therefore, death of the brain and body means irrevocable, permanent non-existence.
Attention Schema TheoryPossibleIf the consciousness is realized as a computational structure (the attention schema), and if this structure and the relevant information processing systems can be accurately uploaded to a non-biological medium, virtual immortality is theoretically possible.
Searle’s Biological NaturalismYesIf consciousness is entirely explainable by physical/biological states, then duplicating those states (and their causal relations) in a non-biological medium would, in principle, allow for the uploading and continuation of the first-person mental self.
Attention Schema TheoryHumanistic onlyConsciousness provides an adaptive, evolutionary purpose (monitoring and regulating attention for action control), but does not imply any ultimate or cosmic meaning, consistent with Materialism.
Searle’s Biological NaturalismHumanistic onlyAs a materialist theory, Biological Naturalism struggles to rationalize ultimate cosmic meaning or purpose, though humanistic meaning created by ourselves remains possible.

Nature of mind

Ontology
Attention Schema TheoryPhysicalism
Searle’s Biological NaturalismPhysicalism (Biological Naturalism). It holds that consciousness is part of nature as a subjective, qualitative biological property, rejecting attempts to 'naturalize' it by denying its subjective ontology.
Mind and body
Attention Schema TheoryConsciousness is the report generated by a biological, information processing machine (the brain) through the assessment of its internal data, meaning mental states are computational and wholly physical.
Searle’s Biological NaturalismConscious states are causally reduced to lower-level brain processes (causal reducibility), but are ontologically irreducible to these processes because consciousness has a subjective (first-person) ontology while its basis has an objective (third-person) ontology.
Fundamental or emergent
Attention Schema TheoryEmergent
Searle’s Biological NaturalismEmergent
Qualia
Attention Schema TheoryConsciousness is described as a 'self-caricature' or an illusory report of a non-physical essence, suggesting a deflationary or illusionist account of qualia, akin to Daniel Dennett’s view.
Searle’s Biological NaturalismConscious states are inherently qualitative, in the sense that there is a distinct qualitative feel to being in any particular conscious state, and this qualitative feel is a real and irreducible part of the world.

How it works

Mechanism
Attention Schema TheoryThe construction and maintenance of a simplified internal model (the attention schema) of the process of attention, rooted in principles from control engineering.
Searle’s Biological NaturalismThe principle is that all conscious states are reliably and universally caused by lower-level brain processes and realized as system features, functioning as a real biological machine.
Where it is
Attention Schema TheoryLocated within the biological, information-processing system of the brain.
Searle’s Biological NaturalismLocalized in the biological brain, specifically realized in the brain as higher-level or system features.
What it does
Attention Schema TheoryThe functional role of the attention schema is to monitor and regulate the brain's attention in order to control actions in the world. The resulting capacity allows the system to claim consciousness.
Searle’s Biological NaturalismConscious states function causally (causal efficacy) as real parts of the real world, providing a basis for intentional action and interaction with the environment.

Evidence and criticism

Testability
Attention Schema TheoryEmpirically testable
Searle’s Biological NaturalismEmpirically testable in principle, as the theory requires finding the exact causal details of how lower-level brain processes cause consciousness.
Tests so far
Attention Schema TheoryNot stated
Searle’s Biological NaturalismThe theory is generally supported by empirical evidence from neuroscience showing the link between consciousness and brain activity (e.g., brain impairment, brain stimulation).
Criticisms
Attention Schema TheoryThe theory explains how a system can *claim* consciousness but faces the general limitation, shared by similar functionalist models, of conclusively proving or explaining the actual subjective feel (the 'anybody home' problem) which remains eternally uncertain, even by the proponent's admission.
Searle’s Biological NaturalismCritics dispute the claim that the causal connection between brain states and consciousness is fully established. Tension exists in maintaining materialism while arguing consciousness is ontologically subjective and irreducible to objective physical processes.

Sources

Key sources
Attention Schema Theory
  • True nature of consciousness: solving the biggest mystery of your mind, M. Graziano (2019)
  • Rethinking Consciousness: A Scientific Theory of Subjective Experience, M. Graziano (2019)
  • Can consciousness be non-biological?, M. Graziano (2014)
Searle’s Biological Naturalism
  • The Rediscovery of Mind (1992)
  • Biological naturalism (2007)
  • What things are conscious? (2007)

More comparisons

All head-to-head comparisons →