Abstract
Integrated Information Theory (IIT) is one of the most prominent candidates for a theory of consciousness, although it has received much criticism for trying to live up to expectations. Based on the relevance of three issues generalized from the developments of IITs, we have summarized the main ideas of IIT into two levels. At the second level, IIT claims to be strictly anchoring consciousness, but the first level on which it is based is more about autonomous systems or systems that have reached some other critical complexity. In this paper, we argue that the clear gap between the two levels of explanation of IIT has led to these criticisms and that its panpsychist tendency plays a crucial role in this. We suggest that the problems of IIT are far from being "pseudoscience", and by adding more necessary elements, when the first level is combined with the second level, IIT can genuinely move toward an appropriate theory of consciousness that can provide necessary and sufficient interpretations.