Head to head
Recurrent Processing Theory vs Seth’s Beast Machine Theory
Lamme's Recurrent Processing Theory and Seth’s “Beast Machine” Theory, compared field by field from their entries in the Atlas.
At a glance
- Both belong to the Materialism family in Kuhn's Landscape of Consciousness.
- Both treat consciousness as emergent.
- They give the same kind of answer on AI consciousness, life after death, mind uploading and meaning and purpose.
Add more theories to this comparisonCompare other theories
The claim
In brief
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.
Seth’s Beast Machine TheoryThis theory posits that conscious experiences, including perceptions of the world and the self, are forms of brain-based perceptual prediction, metaphorically termed 'controlled hallucinations' . It roots the mechanism of consciousness in the fundamental biological imperative to regulate bodily physiology in order to stay alive .
What consciousness is
Recurrent Processing TheoryConsciousness is identified as a specific recurrent processing state holding within relevant neural circuitry, such as the visual system.
Seth’s Beast Machine TheoryConsciousness is identified as forms of brain-based perceptual prediction, where phenomenological properties are explained by the computational aspects of different forms of prediction .
Big questions
Can AI be conscious?Both agree
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.
Seth’s Beast Machine TheoryLikelyAs a materialist theory focusing on computational and information-processing mechanisms (perceptual prediction) , AI systems that instantiate similar complex mechanisms should be capable of achieving consciousness .
Does consciousness survive death?Both agree
Recurrent Processing TheoryNoConsciousness is tied to physical brain activity and specific neural circuitry (recurrent processing states), suggesting cessation upon bodily death.
Seth’s Beast Machine TheoryNoConsciousness is a product of biological brains and complex, physically instantiated predictive machinery . The death of the brain leads to the irrevocable and permanent non-existence of personal consciousness .
Could a mind be uploaded?Both agree
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.
Seth’s Beast Machine TheoryYesIf consciousness is entirely explicable by the computational processes of the brain , then, in principle, the first-person mental self could be duplicated and instantiated in a non-biological substrate, enabling virtual immortality .
Does it give life meaning?Both agree
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.
Seth’s Beast Machine TheoryHumanistic onlyCategorized as a Materialism Theory, it implies no ultimate or cosmic meaning or purpose, although it supports human-created meaning and value derived from individual agency and experience .
Nature of mind
Ontology
Recurrent Processing TheoryPhysicalism
Seth’s Beast Machine TheoryPhysicalism / Materialism (Justified by its classification under Materialism Theories and its reliance on biological and computational explanations) .
Mind and body
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.
Seth’s Beast Machine TheoryConscious experiences are entirely brain-based and physically instantiated . The model supports a strong correlation or identity theory, where conscious properties arise from the physiological and computational architecture geared toward bodily regulation .
Fundamental or emergent
Recurrent Processing TheoryEmergent
Seth’s Beast Machine TheoryEmergent
Qualia
Recurrent Processing TheoryQualia are generated when a certain recurrent processing state holds of the relevant visual circuitry, making the visual state conscious.
Seth’s Beast Machine TheoryThe phenomenological properties of conscious experiences are explained by the computational aspects of the different forms of perceptual prediction utilized by the brain .
How it works
Mechanism
Recurrent Processing TheoryRecurrent processing (feedback connections) in sensory and post-sensory areas (Stage 3) is considered sufficient for consciousness.
Seth’s Beast Machine TheoryConsciousness is explained through predictive processing, where the brain generates a constant 'best guess' (prediction) of the causes of its sensory inputs . This mechanism is intrinsically tied to the regulation of bodily physiology .
Where it is
Recurrent Processing TheoryLocalized in sensory and post-sensory areas, specifically recurrent activations in the 'back of the head'.
Seth’s Beast Machine TheoryLocated in the biological brain, tied to the predictive machinery that regulates bodily physiology .
What it does
Recurrent Processing TheoryConsciousness is the specific recurrent processing state itself. The underlying purpose is implied to move the understanding of mind toward the brain.
Seth’s Beast Machine TheoryConsciousness has a functional role tied to survival . It facilitates the regulation of bodily physiology and allows the organism to model, predict, and simulate the causes of sensory inputs .
Evidence and criticism
Testability
Recurrent Processing TheoryEmpirically testable
Seth’s Beast Machine TheoryEmpirically testable (Inferred, as the theory relies on concepts within the neurobiological and computational fields which emphasize development, testing, and comparison of theories) .
Tests so far
Recurrent Processing TheoryNot stated
Seth’s Beast Machine TheoryTests involving predictive processing accounts of brain perception, cognition, and action (Justified: Specific named tests are not provided, but the theory is explicitly positioned within the predictive processing framework) .
Criticisms
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'.
Seth’s Beast Machine TheoryNot explicitly detailed in the source, but generally subject to the tension inherent in deflationary accounts of consciousness .
Sources
Key sources
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)
Seth’s Beast Machine Theory
- Being You: A New Science of Consciousness, Anil Seth (2021)
- Theories of consciousness, Anil Seth and Tim Bayne (2022)