⚙️ Tests, Falsification, and Framework Comparison

Provides concrete falsification criteria for each emergence stage and contrasts the framework with competing theories of consciousness and meaning.

Altitude:
Low
Tags:
Falsification, Tests, Comparison, Emergence, Consciousness

The pathway is only useful if it risks being wrong. Below are concrete criteria that could falsify the model, followed by a side-by-side comparison with alternative accounts of consciousness and meaning.

Falsification Criteria for Pathway Emergence

Falsification criteria table
Criterion Framework Prediction Falsification Conditions
Stage Progression Development must follow the sequence: organizational patterns → environmental cues → thermodynamic coupling → proto-semantics → neural representation → symbolic systems Discovery of symbolic agents with no neural representation, or of proto-semantic agents that never experienced thermodynamic coupling
Thermodynamic Bridge Far-from-equilibrium energy flow is required for the inside-out lens Semantic information emerging in closed, equilibrium systems
Autocatalytic Development Once proto-semantics appears, semantic complexity accelerates via positive feedback Strictly linear growth despite abundant selection pressure
Autopoietic Integration Advanced semantics requires autopoiesis & boundary maintenance Coherent high-level semantics in completely passive, non-autopoietic systems
Symbolic Threshold The shift to symbolism yields a combinatorial explosion of possible meanings Absence of threshold effects when agents acquire symbolic tokens

Comparative Framework Analysis

Comparative framework analysis table
Theory Traditional Position This Framework's Distinction Empirical Differentiator
Information Integration Theory (IIT) Consciousness = integrated information (Φ) regardless of origin Adds evolutionary & thermodynamic context; integration alone not enough Requires developmental history + energy flow
Predictive Processing Mind = hierarchical prediction error minimization Prediction is necessary but insufficient; must be nested in autopoiesis Thermodynamic / autopoietic thresholds
Enactive Cognition Meaning arises from embodied interaction Supplies specific phase transitions (autocatalytic, autopoietic) & testable energy thresholds Observable connectivity & energy-flow markers
Computational Theory of Mind Mental states are syntactic symbol manipulations Rejects syntax-only emergence; demands functional grounding via evolution and energy Semantic agents without energy coupling would falsify computational sufficiency
Panpsychist Information Theories Consciousness is fundamental at all scales Claims semantic information is not ubiquitous; emerges only after specific thresholds Absence of semantics in sub-threshold systems

Unique Contributions

  1. Thermodynamic Grounding – ties meaning to energy dissipation.
  2. Stage-Specific Predictions – six qualitative thresholds with measurable markers.
  3. Autocatalytic Dynamics – explains rapid take-off once proto-semantics appears.
  4. Autopoietic Integration – necessity of self-maintenance loops.
  5. Worldsheet Ontology – continuous physical grounding across scales.
  6. Falsifiable Architecture – multiple shots-on-goal for empirical refutation.

<< Previous: Core Principles in the Emergence of Semantic Information | Up: Pattern Realism: Matter/Energy and Information as Complementary Lenses | Next: Emergence of Consciousness >>