---
slug: paper-solms-m-2019-the-hard-problem-of-consciousness-and-the-free-energy-principle
title: Solms (2019): The Hard Problem of Consciousness and the Free Energy Principle
canonical: https://miscsubjects.com/a/paper-solms-m-2019-the-hard-problem-of-consciousness-and-the-free-energy-principle
---

## What Solms Saw and Its Core Results

Mark Solms applies the free energy principle to the hard problem of consciousness. The hard problem asks why physical processes give rise to subjective experience at all. Solms rejects the framing that the brain produces consciousness. He treats mind and body as two observational aspects of one underlying functional process.

Core result: elemental consciousness is affect. Affect arises from an extended form of homeostasis located in the upper brainstem. This mechanism minimizes free energy. Decreases in expected uncertainty register as pleasure. Increases register as unpleasure. The formulation explains why existential imperatives feel like something to the organism.

Solms draws on dual-aspect monism. He cites Chalmers (1995) on the explanatory gap. He counters that the gap narrows when the right function—affect—is examined. Cognition can run without experience. Feeling cannot.

## Exact Primary Works and Load-Bearing Passages

Primary work: Solms, M. (2019). The Hard Problem of Consciousness and the Free Energy Principle. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 2714. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02714. Full text at https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02714/full.

Key passage on dual-aspect monism: “The brain does not produce consciousness in the sense that the liver produces bile, and physiological processes do not cause—or become or turn into—mental experiences through some curious metaphysical transformation. When I wake up in the morning and experience myself (my mind) to exist, and then confirm in the mirror that I (my body) do indeed exist, I am simply realizing the same thing from two different observational perspectives.”

Key passage on affect: “The function of experience cannot be inferred from perception and memory, but it can be inferred from feeling. There is not necessarily ‘something it is like’ to perceive and to learn, but who ever heard of an unconscious feeling—a feeling that you cannot feel? If we want to identify a mechanism that explains the phenomena of consciousness (in both its psychological and physiological aspects) we must focus on the function of feeling—the technical term for which is ‘affect.’”

Key passage on free energy formalization: “This mechanism is then formalized in terms of free energy minimization (in unpredicted contexts) where decreases and increases in expected uncertainty are felt as pleasure and unpleasure, respectively.”

Related earlier work cited by Solms: Solms, M., & Friston, K. (2018). How and why consciousness arises. Journal of Consciousness Studies (referenced in the 2019 paper).

## Convergence Patterns the Work Touches

The paper touches the convergence pattern from energy flow to structure to memory to mind. Free energy minimization is a thermodynamic imperative that produces stable patterns across scales. Solms maps this imperative onto subjective experience via affect. This aligns with the Ladder sequence in the OIP/GRAIN synthesis: difference generates flow, flow generates structure, structure generates memory, memory generates life, life generates mind.

The work also touches the Mirror Layer. The reader of the system sits inside the system. Solms treats first-person feeling as one valid observational perspective on the same lawful process observed third-person as physiology. No external vantage point is required.

## Distance from the Full OIP/GRAIN Synthesis

Solms stays close on the thermodynamic-to-mind bridge. He supplies a mechanistic account that links free energy to felt uncertainty. He does not address branching, spirals, waves, symmetry, flow networks, bounded chaos, or scale invariance across physical domains. He does not formalize object invocation or ledger mechanics. The paper remains within neuroscience and philosophy of mind.

The synthesis treats the universe as having a grain that reliably produces these patterns. Solms provides one instance of the grain at the level of conscious affect. He does not claim universality beyond the organism.

## Honest Limits and Disconfirming Edges

The account rests on dual-aspect monism. This position is philosophical rather than empirically settled. A reductionist objection holds that the gap remains because the underlying “thing” is still described only through its appearances. Solms acknowledges the need for deeper mathematical formalization in the companion Solms and Friston (2018) paper.

Localization to the upper brainstem for core affect is supported by lesion and stimulation data, yet cortical contributions to higher-order consciousness remain under active debate. The paper does not resolve whether free-energy minimization fully accounts for all varieties of experience or only its affective core.

No human clinical trial data or large-scale replication is presented. The claims are mechanistic and interpretive. Disconfirming evidence would require demonstration that affective consciousness persists without free-energy dynamics or arises without brainstem involvement.

## Claims

The body contains the readable article above. Atomic claims follow.


