180006 SE Interdisciplinary Specialisation (2025W)
Consciousness: Theory, Methods & Frontiers
Continuous assessment of course work
Labels
Preparation meeting: Thursday October 2nd, 2025, 13:15 - 16:30
HS 2i, NIG, Universitätsstrasse 7, 2nd floor
HS 2i, NIG, Universitätsstrasse 7, 2nd floor
Registration/Deregistration
Note: The time of your registration within the registration period has no effect on the allocation of places (no first come, first served).
- Registration is open from Mo 15.09.2025 00:00 to Mo 29.09.2025 23:59
- Deregistration possible until Fr 31.10.2025 23:59
Details
max. 25 participants
Language: English
Lecturers
Classes (iCal) - next class is marked with N
- Thursday 09.10. 09:00 - 12:15 Hörsaal 2i NIG 2.Stock C0228
- Friday 10.10. 13:15 - 16:30 Hörsaal 2i NIG 2.Stock C0228
- N Thursday 13.11. 09:00 - 12:15 Seminarraum 1, Währinger Straße 29 1.UG
- Friday 14.11. 09:45 - 13:00 Hörsaal 2i NIG 2.Stock C0228
- Thursday 11.12. 09:00 - 12:15 Seminarraum 1, Währinger Straße 29 1.UG
- Friday 12.12. 16:45 - 20:00 Hörsaal 3F NIG 3.Stock
- Thursday 22.01. 09:00 - 12:15 Seminarraum 1, Währinger Straße 29 1.UG
- Friday 23.01. 09:45 - 13:00 Hörsaal 2i NIG 2.Stock C0228
Information
Aims, contents and method of the course
Assessment and permitted materials
Your final grade is based on a portfolio of work that demonstrates your engagement and understanding throughout the course.Assessment (100pts):
- Reading insight posts (30 pts): six short posts (5 pts each) showing critical engagement with core papers (insights, not summaries), including one probing question and one brief methodological or theoretical implication
- Lightning talk (20 pts): 5-6 minute presentation on one consciousness phenomenon/finding, including peer micro-facilitation (poll, debate prompt, or think-pair-share)
- Capstone proposal (5 pts): one-page research question with feasibility argument (scope, plan, ≥2 key sources).
- Final capstone (25 pts): choice between either theory (no coding required) or methods track
Theory track: 3,000-word philosophical argument
Methods track: An open-data mini-study with code & readme (documenting tools incl. any AI tools used, prompts, and verification methods).
- Oral defense (10 pts): 5-minute explanation of your key capstone argument/finding + Q&A
- Participation (10 pts): Active, prepared engagement in debates, mini-lab, and peer discussions.Permitted materials: All written work is open-book with full access to papers, notes, and online resources (properly cited). Turnitin checks academic integrity. Oral defenses may use submitted materials only. AI tools allowed for outlining/debugging but must be declared in appendix (and you may be asked to demonstrate/defend in the oral defense)
- Reading insight posts (30 pts): six short posts (5 pts each) showing critical engagement with core papers (insights, not summaries), including one probing question and one brief methodological or theoretical implication
- Lightning talk (20 pts): 5-6 minute presentation on one consciousness phenomenon/finding, including peer micro-facilitation (poll, debate prompt, or think-pair-share)
- Capstone proposal (5 pts): one-page research question with feasibility argument (scope, plan, ≥2 key sources).
- Final capstone (25 pts): choice between either theory (no coding required) or methods track
Theory track: 3,000-word philosophical argument
Methods track: An open-data mini-study with code & readme (documenting tools incl. any AI tools used, prompts, and verification methods).
- Oral defense (10 pts): 5-minute explanation of your key capstone argument/finding + Q&A
- Participation (10 pts): Active, prepared engagement in debates, mini-lab, and peer discussions.Permitted materials: All written work is open-book with full access to papers, notes, and online resources (properly cited). Turnitin checks academic integrity. Oral defenses may use submitted materials only. AI tools allowed for outlining/debugging but must be declared in appendix (and you may be asked to demonstrate/defend in the oral defense)
Minimum requirements and assessment criteria
Minimum requirements to pass:
- Attendance ≥80% of contact time (maximum of 1.5 days may be missed. Make-up option: either an 800–1,000-word synthesis of the missed session’s readings + 2 discussion questions, or a 4-min recorded micro-talk)
- All six reading posts submitted (timing rule below)
- Capstone: proposal and final submission.Timing rule for each reading post:
- On time 5 pts
- Late but before class 3 pts
- After class 0 pts (still required to submit).Grading (100 pts total): participation 10; posts 30; presentation 20; proposal 5; final written 25; oral defense 10.Grade bands (Notenschlüssel):
- 1 (Sehr Gut): 91–100 pts
- 2 (Gut): 81–90 pts
- 3 (Befriedigend): 71–80 pts
- 4 (Genügend): 61–70 pts
- 5 (Nicht Genügend): ≤60 ptsThe automated plagiarism check software Turnitin will be used in this course. By registering, you consent to Turnitin checks for written work submitted.
- Attendance ≥80% of contact time (maximum of 1.5 days may be missed. Make-up option: either an 800–1,000-word synthesis of the missed session’s readings + 2 discussion questions, or a 4-min recorded micro-talk)
- All six reading posts submitted (timing rule below)
- Capstone: proposal and final submission.Timing rule for each reading post:
- On time 5 pts
- Late but before class 3 pts
- After class 0 pts (still required to submit).Grading (100 pts total): participation 10; posts 30; presentation 20; proposal 5; final written 25; oral defense 10.Grade bands (Notenschlüssel):
- 1 (Sehr Gut): 91–100 pts
- 2 (Gut): 81–90 pts
- 3 (Befriedigend): 71–80 pts
- 4 (Genügend): 61–70 pts
- 5 (Nicht Genügend): ≤60 ptsThe automated plagiarism check software Turnitin will be used in this course. By registering, you consent to Turnitin checks for written work submitted.
Examination topics
All content covered in the course sessions and core readings; especially the theoretical/methodological topics and the rationale behind your own and peers’ seminar plans/presentations. Supporting materials will be on Moodle.
Reading list
Core readings (required; posts on these are graded)
- Lau, H., & Rosenthal, D. (2011). Empirical support for higher-order theories of conscious awareness. Trends in Cognitive Sciences.
- Albantakis, L., et al. (2023). Integrated Information Theory (IIT) 4.0. PLOS Computational Biology.
- Mashour, G. A., et al. (2020). Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis. Neuron.
- Cogitate Consortium (2025). Adversarial testing of GNW and IIT. Nature.
- Montupil, J., et al. (2023). The nature of consciousness in anaesthesia. BJA Open.
- Caviola, L., et al. (2025). What will society think about AI consciousness? Trends in Cognitive Sciences.Mini-lab dataset (for information; not graded): Seedat, A., et al. (2025). Open multi-center intracranial EEG dataset with task probing conscious visual perception. Scientific Data, 12, 4833.Supplementary Readings for Deeper Exploration
• Chalmers, D. J. (1995). Facing up to the problem of consciousness. Journal of Con-
sciousness Studies, 2(3), 200–219.
Introduces the “easy” vs. “hard” problems, framing contemporary debates.
• Block, N. (1995). On a confusion about a function of consciousness. Behavioral and
Brain Sciences, 18(2), 227–247.
Distinguishes phenomenal vs. access consciousness, clarifying function vs. experience.
• Libet, B., et al. (1983). Time of conscious intention to act in relation to onset of
cerebral activity (readiness-potential). Brain, 106(3), 623–642.
Reports readiness potential preceding reported intention, sparking free-will debates.
• Nagel, T. (1974). What is it like to be a bat? The Philosophical Review, 83(4), 435–
450.
Argues that subjective “what-it-is-like” experience resists purely objective accounts.
• Thompson, E., & Varela, F. J. (2001). Radical embodiment: neural dynamics and
consciousness. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 5(10), 418–425.
Advances an enactive, embodied view where brain–body–world dynamics yield con-
sciousness.
• Chalmers, D. J. (2021). Idealism and the mind–body problem. In The Routledge
Handbook of Idealism and Immaterialism (pp. 591–613). Routledge.
Examines how idealist frameworks recast the mind–body problem and evaluates
arguments for idealism’s prospects in consciousness studies.
• Seth, A. K., & Hohwy, J. (2021). Predictive processing as an empirical theory for
consciousness science. Cognitive Neuroscience, 12(2), 89–90.
Positions predictive processing as a testable framework – concrete empirical predictions.
- Lau, H., & Rosenthal, D. (2011). Empirical support for higher-order theories of conscious awareness. Trends in Cognitive Sciences.
- Albantakis, L., et al. (2023). Integrated Information Theory (IIT) 4.0. PLOS Computational Biology.
- Mashour, G. A., et al. (2020). Conscious Processing and the Global Neuronal Workspace Hypothesis. Neuron.
- Cogitate Consortium (2025). Adversarial testing of GNW and IIT. Nature.
- Montupil, J., et al. (2023). The nature of consciousness in anaesthesia. BJA Open.
- Caviola, L., et al. (2025). What will society think about AI consciousness? Trends in Cognitive Sciences.Mini-lab dataset (for information; not graded): Seedat, A., et al. (2025). Open multi-center intracranial EEG dataset with task probing conscious visual perception. Scientific Data, 12, 4833.Supplementary Readings for Deeper Exploration
• Chalmers, D. J. (1995). Facing up to the problem of consciousness. Journal of Con-
sciousness Studies, 2(3), 200–219.
Introduces the “easy” vs. “hard” problems, framing contemporary debates.
• Block, N. (1995). On a confusion about a function of consciousness. Behavioral and
Brain Sciences, 18(2), 227–247.
Distinguishes phenomenal vs. access consciousness, clarifying function vs. experience.
• Libet, B., et al. (1983). Time of conscious intention to act in relation to onset of
cerebral activity (readiness-potential). Brain, 106(3), 623–642.
Reports readiness potential preceding reported intention, sparking free-will debates.
• Nagel, T. (1974). What is it like to be a bat? The Philosophical Review, 83(4), 435–
450.
Argues that subjective “what-it-is-like” experience resists purely objective accounts.
• Thompson, E., & Varela, F. J. (2001). Radical embodiment: neural dynamics and
consciousness. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 5(10), 418–425.
Advances an enactive, embodied view where brain–body–world dynamics yield con-
sciousness.
• Chalmers, D. J. (2021). Idealism and the mind–body problem. In The Routledge
Handbook of Idealism and Immaterialism (pp. 591–613). Routledge.
Examines how idealist frameworks recast the mind–body problem and evaluates
arguments for idealism’s prospects in consciousness studies.
• Seth, A. K., & Hohwy, J. (2021). Predictive processing as an empirical theory for
consciousness science. Cognitive Neuroscience, 12(2), 89–90.
Positions predictive processing as a testable framework – concrete empirical predictions.
Association in the course directory
Last modified: Th 23.10.2025 10:26
- Core Theories: We'll examine and debate major accounts, including Global Neural Workspace, Higher-Order Thought, Integrated Information Theory, and Predictive Processing.
- Key Evidence: We will evaluate findings from varying states of consciousness (like sleep and anesthesia), explore what neural decoding can tell us about conscious content, and touch on insights from developmental and contemplative science.
- Future Frontiers: Criteria, tests, and ethical implications of machine consciousness.Method. Four blocks -- Thursday morning and Friday afternoon of the second week of each month (and penultimate week of January) -- with ≥50% active learning: structured debates on controversial findings, collaborative argument-mapping, jigsaw reading of papers, and a guided mini-lab using prepared notebooks and open datasets (EEG; no coding required).Capstone. You will complete a final project tailored to your interests (either a concise theory paper or an open-data mini-study) and present and defend it in a brief oral presentation.