Can we define consciousness by mapping its relationships instead of its essence?

Space · Published 27 October 2026 Swipe more like this →

In short: Defining what it means to be conscious is notoriously difficult because the internal experience feels private. However, some researchers suggest a radical shift: instead of trying to isolate the 'thing' called consciousness, we can identify it by exhaustively describing how it relates to everything else in our world.

The challenge of characterizing consciousness has led much of modern empirical research toward identifying neural correlates—the specific brain activities associated with subjective experience. While various models have attempted to link these neural features to functions like qualia or levels of awareness, a fundamental problem remains: how do we move from observation to a rigorous definition? Some thinkers argue that the 'nature' of consciousness might be too elusive for direct isolation.

One proposed solution utilizes category theory, specifically the Yoneda lemma. This mathematical principle suggests that two objects in a category are equivalent if they share all the same relationships with other objects in that category. By applying this to consciousness, researchers propose defining it through its exhaustive relationships to external and internal states. If we can map these connections perfectly, we create a formal structure that characterizes consciousness without needing to 'touch' its inner essence.

This relational approach offers a potential gold standard for empirical testing. Rather than just looking for brain signals, scientists could use categorical structures to formalize research on specific phenomena, such as the structural differences between color qualia at the fovea versus the periphery of vision. Furthermore, Naotsugu Tsuchiya emphasizes that any theory—whether mathematical or relational—must be held to a strict scientific standard: it must make risky predictions, publish negative results, and survive rigorous attempts to prove it wrong.

Ultimately, this shift moves the goalposts from metaphysical speculation toward structural mapping. By focusing on how consciousness interacts with other systems, researchers aim to create a framework that is both mathematically sound and empirically testable, providing a way to study one of humanity's deepest mysteries through the logic of connection.

General information, not professional advice. Spotted an error? Flag the card or see corrections and complaints.

Intellect Plus is a visual educational discovery platform for exploring fascinating facts and ideas. Brain Food, Not Brain Rot. What is Intellect Plus?

Related

• The search for a single definition of consciousness remains elusive
• Is consciousness a byproduct of matter or something more fundamental?
• Can category theory bridge the gap between subjective experience and brain activity?
• Does mapping the brain explain the one who experiences it?
• Is the brain's 'hardware' enough to explain the feeling of being?
• The traditional model of an atom is fundamentally incorrect
• Can satellite data predict the next global food price crisis?
• The invisible journey from human logic to machine execution
• Why spacecraft movement in orbit defies our everyday intuition of motion and physics
• Is washing your hair in orbit really different from your daily shower on Earth?
• Is entropy simply a measure of the information hidden within a physical system?
• The space age technology hidden inside your favorite mobile game

More in Space · Latest · A–Z · All topics