Dr. Brian Keating’s Interview with Christof Koch: Exploring the Nature of Consciousness

Dr. Brian Keating’s interview with renowned neuroscientist Christof Koch offers profound insights into the nature of consciousness, integrated information theory, and the boundary between conscious and non-conscious systems. Published on March 23, 2025, this conversation delves into Koch’s new book “Then I Am Myself the World” while exploring fundamental questions about what it means to be conscious, whether artificial intelligence can experience consciousness, and how consciousness manifests across different systems.

Understanding Consciousness Through Koch’s Lens

Christof Koch defines consciousness not as a function or computation but as subjective experience—the foundation of how we exist for ourselves. During the interview, Koch explains that consciousness encompasses a spectrum of experiences including “seeing, hearing, feeling my body, being bored, being in love, hating, dreading, imagining, dreaming,” all of which represent different conscious states1. He emphasizes that consciousness is central to human existence, noting that scientists like Schrödinger and Einstein acknowledged that scientific inquiry itself depends on accessing the world through conscious experience1.

Koch articulates a crucial distinction between existence for oneself versus existence for others. When we enter deep sleep characterized by low-frequency delta waves, we “do not exist for ourselves,” though others can still observe our sleeping bodies1. Similarly, under anesthesia or after death, we cease to exist for ourselves1. This perspective positions consciousness as the fundamental way we exist subjectively, making it the primary layer of our reality.

The Evolution of Consciousness Research

When asked about progress in understanding consciousness since Thomas Nagel’s famous 1974 essay “What Is It Like To Be a Bat?”, Koch acknowledges the limitations inherent in defining consciousness precisely because of its subjective nature1. However, he emphasizes that significant theoretical advances have occurred, particularly in developing frameworks like Integrated Information Theory (IIT)1. The challenge remains that there is no universally agreed-upon theory that can definitively determine which systems possess consciousness and why.

Integrated Information Theory: A New Paradigm

Koch presents Integrated Information Theory as a minority view that stands in contrast to functionalist approaches to consciousness1. While functionalists like philosopher Daniel Dennett suggest that consciousness emerges from specific functions implemented in computational systems, IIT takes a fundamentally different approach1.

Beyond Computation and Function

According to Koch, IIT starts with consciousness itself rather than attempting to “squeeze the juice of the wine of consciousness out of the water of the brain”1. The theory recognizes several fundamental properties of consciousness:

It is unified (one experience)
It is specific (a particular experience out of trillions of possibilities)
It has boundaries (some things are inside consciousness, most are outside)
It is structured (with parts and subparts)1

IIT seeks to identify causal substrates that reflect these properties, leading to a mathematical framework that can calculate both the quantity of consciousness (phi) and its structure1. Koch explains: “IIT says well I can now in principle unfold the causal power of this system mathematically and I can derive both its quantity of consciousness… it’s a pure number, it can be zero or positive, the bigger the phi the more the system exists for itself, the more the system is irreducible, the more the system is conscious”1.

Mathematical Structure and Experience

A central claim of IIT is that the mathematical structure derived from analyzing a system’s causal relationships corresponds to conscious experience1. Koch suggests this structure should explain fundamental aspects of consciousness such as why space feels extended, why time flows forward, and why particular subjective experiences like colors or emotions feel the way they do1.

Consciousness Across Different Systems

One of the most fascinating aspects of Koch’s discussion involves determining which systems can be conscious according to IIT. He explains that IIT predicts consciousness exists as “local maxima of integrated information”1.

Individual vs. Collective Consciousness

Koch uses his interaction with interviewer Brian Keating to illustrate a key point: while both individuals possess consciousness individually, their interaction does not create a shared “uber-consciousness”1. This is because the causal interactions between their separate brains are “minute” compared to the vastly more integrated information processing occurring within each brain1. However, he speculates that with sufficient neural connections between two brains (similar to the corpus callosum connecting hemispheres), individual consciousnesses could theoretically merge into a single new consciousness1.

Split-Brain Phenomena

To further illustrate his point, Koch references split-brain patients who have had their corpus callosum surgically severed. In these cases, what was once a single consciousness appears to become two separate conscious entities sharing one body—”two conscious entities and they may as well be on other sides of the moon”1. One hemisphere typically controls speech, while researchers can observe “intermanual conflicts” between the now-separate conscious systems1.

Consciousness in Non-Human Systems

The interview briefly touches on potential consciousness in non-human systems. Koch suggests that even a single-celled organism like a paramecium might “feel a little bit like something” due to its complex molecular interactions1. Once its membrane dissolves (death), this subjective experience would cease1. IIT provides a framework for evaluating consciousness across diverse systems based on their causal structure rather than anthropocentric criteria.

Exploring Altered States of Consciousness

Koch mentions several altered states of consciousness explored in his book, including experiences from meditation, dancing, and psychedelics1. While the transcript doesn’t elaborate on these experiences, Koch suggests they provided transformative perspectives that informed his understanding of consciousness1.

The Question of AI Consciousness

Though only briefly addressed in the available transcript, Koch appears skeptical about consciousness in current artificial intelligence systems. He suggests that proponents of functionalist theories might believe large language models (LLMs) like ChatGPT either already possess consciousness or soon will1. In contrast, his IIT perspective suggests these systems “don’t have any state of being they don’t exist for themselves”1. From Koch’s perspective, these AI systems can perform impressive functions but lack the causal structure necessary for genuine consciousness.

Conclusion

Christof Koch’s conversation with Brian Keating offers valuable insights into the frontier of consciousness research. Through Integrated Information Theory, Koch provides a framework that moves beyond functionalist approaches to consciousness, suggesting that what matters is not what a system does but how it is causally structured. This perspective has profound implications for understanding consciousness across biological systems, artificial intelligence, and potential future technologies.

Koch’s work challenges us to reconsider fundamental assumptions about consciousness, suggesting it is not merely a computational process but an intrinsic property related to how certain systems are structured. As neuroscience and artificial intelligence continue to advance, Koch’s theoretical framework offers a valuable lens through which to evaluate claims about consciousness in diverse systems while respecting the subjective nature that makes consciousness so uniquely challenging to study.