Research Program / Claims / suggestion-9
If science only thinks in terms of particles, waves, or fields, it is still off track; it must perceive the consciousness behind any manifestation.
科学若只思考粒子、波或场仍偏离正轨，必须感知任何显现背后的意识。
Concept suggestion · Domain Belief Dynamics and Mind–Body Regulation · ontological claim · interface 3/3 · testability 3/3 · status untested · ★ fundable
This program treats the Seth Material as a source of hypotheses, not as doctrine to be validated. Lead dossiers are AI-compiled from the corpus with a book-and-session citation after every statement; literature reviews are AI web-search summaries whose references were all DOI-verified against Crossref; the agenda draft is an AI synthesis. None of it is Seth's original text, and none of it represents scientific consensus. English fields are machine-translated; the Chinese text is authoritative.
Seth sources (book §session)
Adjudicating experiment
Currently there is no experiment that can adjudicate the entire sentence, because consciousness behind manifestation has not been defined as an independent observable. A multicenter study of visual consciousness and masking with about 300 participants could first be conducted, combining EEG, fMRI, and causal brain stimulation, over about two years; claimants must provide in advance new models and unique predictions beyond physical/neural models, and compare predictive performance using held-out data. If the newly added consciousness variables merely rename measured neural states, no distinguishable test has been achieved.
Suggested paper title
Incremental Predictive Value of Conscious-State Models Beyond Neural Dynamics: A Preregistered Adversarial Study
What it would overturn
Only if added consciousness variables show irreducible causal contributions would it challenge the assumption that the complete physical state and its dynamics are sufficient to explain observable events.
Candidate labs / funders
Cogitate Consortium，意识理论对抗性合作研究联盟; Lucia Melloni，意识神经机制研究; Giulio Tononi，威斯康星大学麦迪逊分校，意识与睡眠研究; Stanislas Dehaene，法兰西学院，意识与认知神经科学研究
Specificity of Seth's formulation
This is a research stance rather than a mechanistic model; it specifies less about neural location, temporal course, and causal structure than existing consciousness theories, so it currently yields no unique predictions.
Note
Failure of a specific prediction from a neural theory of consciousness does not imply idealism; increased predictive performance may also arise from incomplete measurement and cannot directly prove that physical descriptions are insufficient in principle.
Evidence (1, DOI-verified via Crossref)
Cite: Future Mind Institute, Seth Material Research Agenda, claim suggestion-9, https://www.seth.org.cn/en/research/claims/suggestion-9