# **The Language of Stress: Empirical Predictions**  **And Falsifiability Criteria** 

Joshua Craig Pace 

[https://orcid.org/0009-0008-0046-440X](https://orcid.org/0009-0008-0046-440X)

Version 1.0

Supplementary Material for:

Pace, J.C. (2026). The Language of Stress: A Value-Primitive Theory of Consciousness. FigShare. https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.31320532

# **Introduction**

The Language of Stress is not intended as a poetic metaphor or a purely descriptive framework. It is a *constraint-based theory* that makes *specific, discriminative predictions* about consciousness, attention, learning, identity, and artificial systems.

This page consolidates those predictions in one place so they can be:

* Examined critically  
* Tested empirically  
* Compared directly against competing theories of consciousness

If these predictions consistently fail, the theory should be revised or abandoned.

# **Content**

[Core Claim	2](#core-claim)

[Predictions About Conscious Experience	2](#predictions-about-conscious-experience)

[Predictions About Attention	4](#predictions-about-attention)

[Predictions About Learning and Memory	4](#predictions-about-learning-and-memory)

[Predictions About Identity and Suffering	5](#predictions-about-identity-and-suffering)

[Predictions About the Unity of Consciousness	6](#predictions-about-the-unity-of-consciousness)

[Predictions About Artificial Systems	7](#predictions-about-artificial-systems)

[What Would Falsify or Require Revision of This Theory	7](#what-would-falsify-or-require-revision-of-this-theory)

[Resources	11](#resources)

[References	11](#references)

# **Core Claim** {#core-claim}

Conscious experience is the brain’s internal valuation system — experienced subjectively as tension, stress, and relief — which allows a self-maintaining system to construct a comprehensive subjective mapping of the world and to prioritize action across heterogeneous demands.

From this claim, the following predictions necessarily follow:

# **Predictions About Conscious Experience** {#predictions-about-conscious-experience}

## **1\. Conscious intensity covaries with the magnitude of valenced topographical distortion (Σ(Deviationi × Rigidityi) × Interpretation × Self-Relevance), not with information load or integration.**

Prediction:

The intensity of conscious experience covaries with interpreted stress (i.e., significance relative to self-archetypes), not with computational complexity, representational richness, or information integration.

Implication: *Low-information but identity-relevant events (e.g., social rejection, moral threat) can produce more intense conscious experience than high-information neutral tasks.*

Differentiates From: *Global Workspace Theory, Integrated Information Theory*

## **2\. Identity Threat Amplifies Conscious Experience Disproportionately**

Prediction:

* Stressors that threaten core self-archetypes (identity, meaning, belonging) produce greater conscious amplification than equally arousing but non-identity stressors.

* Identity threat increases self-relevance weighting, not arousal.

* Two stimuli with equal arousal but different self-relevance must differ phenomenologically.

Implication: *Arousal alone cannot account for conscious intensity.*

# **Predictions About Attention** {#predictions-about-attention}

## **3\. Attention follows value gradients within the Value Topography, determined by distortion magnitude, rigidity, instability, and self-relevance.**

Prediction:

Attention is drawn toward unresolved stressors regardless of task demands or reward incentives.

Implication: *Rumination, intrusive thoughts, and attentional capture are not failures of control but natural consequences of unresolved valuation gradients.*

Differentiates From: *Salience-only and reward-maximization models of attention*

# **Predictions About Learning and Memory** {#predictions-about-learning-and-memory}

## **4\. Learning consolidates at resolution (relief) of topographical distortion, not merely relief as a feeling.**

Prediction:

Behavioral and memory updates occur most robustly at moments of topographical resolution, not at reward peaks or novelty maxima.

Implication: *Resolution (relief), rather than reward magnitude alone, is the primary driver of long-term learning.*

Differentiates From:

*Standard reinforcement learning frameworks*

## **5\. Chronic Stress Reshapes the Geometry of the Value Topography, impacting Future Interpretation, Not Just Baseline Arousal**

Prediction:

Historical stress distortions bias future interpretations even after the original stressor has been resolved.

Implication: *Trauma and chronic stress alter valuation topography, not merely emotional reactivity.*

# **Predictions About Identity and Suffering** {#predictions-about-identity-and-suffering}

## **6\. Archetype Rigidity (Defensive Intensity) Predicts Suffering More Than Deviation Magnitude**

Prediction:

Stress magnitude depends more strongly on how rigidly an archetype is held than on how large the deviation is.

Implication:

*Small violations of rigid beliefs can produce more suffering than large violations of flexible ones.*

## **7\. Conscious Experience Degrades When Valuation Collapses**

Prediction:

Conscious experience diminishes when topographical distortion collapses or decoheres, even if perception and cognition remain intact.

Implication:

*Dissociation and depersonalization reflect valuation collapse rather than information loss.*

Differentiates From: *Information-integration and binding-failure models*

# **Predictions About the Unity of Consciousness** {#predictions-about-the-unity-of-consciousness}

## **8\. Conscious Unity Reflects Unified Valuation, Not Representational Binding**

Prediction:

The unity of conscious experience arises from the valenced tension dynamics of a unified evaluative field (i.e. “Value Topography”) rather than from the binding of perceptual representations.

Implication: *Experience fragments when valuation fragments, even if perception remains integrated.*

# **Predictions About Artificial Systems** {#predictions-about-artificial-systems}

## **9\. Optimization Without Unified Valuation Does Not Produce Conscious Experience**

Prediction:  
Systems that optimize reward, loss, or performance without a unified stress-based valuation currency do not instantiate subjective experience.

Clarification: Scale, integration, and competence are insufficient without valuation grounded in self-integrity.

## **10\. Persistent Self-Archetypes Are Necessary for Consciousness**

Prediction:

Systems without persistent identity constraints (self-archetypes) cannot exhibit stable phenomenology.

Implication: *Transient agents and task-local models lack the conditions required for conscious experience.*

# **What Would Falsify or Require Revision of This Theory** {#what-would-falsify-or-require-revision-of-this-theory}

The Language of Stress would be seriously undermined and require substantial revision if evidence showed that:

## **Conscious Intensity and Information Integration**

Finding: Conscious intensity reliably tracks information integration independent of stress interpretation across multiple experimental paradigms.

Implication: *This would suggest either: (a) our operational definition of "stress interpretation" is incomplete and must be expanded to include what we currently measure as pure information integration, or (b) the core claim that consciousness is primarily a valuation system needs fundamental reconsideration in favor of information-processing models.*

## **Attention and Unresolved Stressors**

Finding: Attention consistently ignores unresolved stressors when external rewards are sufficiently high, with no evidence of suppressed background tension.

Implication: *This would suggest either: (a) the reward system operates through a different mechanism than tension dynamics and can completely override stress gradients, requiring a dual-pathway model, or (b) what we're measuring as "unresolved stress" doesn't actually create the predicted attentional pull, undermining the tension-attention link.*

## **Learning Consolidation Timing**

Finding: Learning consistently consolidates most strongly at reward peaks rather than at moments of relief, across diverse learning contexts.

Implication: *This would suggest either: (a) relief and reward peaks are more correlated than the theory assumes, and we need better methods to dissociate them, or (b) standard reinforcement learning frameworks better capture the learning mechanism, and stress relief is epiphenomenal to the actual consolidation process.*

## **Dissociation and Valuation**

Finding: Dissociative states preserve normal valuation processes (demonstrated through decision-making tasks and affective responses) while eliminating subjective experience.

Implication: *This would suggest either: (a) valuation and phenomenal experience can be dissociated, contradicting the identity claim that they are the same process at different levels of description, or (b) our measures of "preserved valuation" are actually measuring unconscious processing, and we need better paradigms to detect valuation collapse.*

## **Artificial Consciousness Without Valuation**

Finding: Artificial systems demonstrate robust, consistent phenomenology (through behavioral markers, self-report, and novel problem-solving) without implementing unified valuation or identity preservation mechanisms.

Implication: *This would suggest either: (a) consciousness can emerge from architectures fundamentally different from tension dynamics, and the Language of Stress captures one sufficient pathway but not a necessary one, or (b) the systems in question have developed valuation-like mechanisms through different computational means that we failed to recognize as functionally equivalent.*

## **Chronic Stress and Future Interpretation**

Finding: Historical stress exposure shows no measurable bias in future interpretations once the original stressor is resolved and physiological markers have returned to baseline.

Implication: *This would suggest either: (a) the "distortion persistence" mechanism requires longer timescales or more severe stressors than initially predicted, or (b) stress affects only acute reactivity, not the underlying valuation topography as the theory claims.*

## **Archetype Rigidity and Suffering**

Finding: Suffering magnitude correlates more strongly with deviation magnitude than with archetype rigidity across diverse populations and stressor types.

Implication: *This would suggest either: (a) our methods for measuring rigidity are inadequate and don't capture the relevant psychological construct, or (b) the rigidity variable is less central to the model than predicted, and a simpler deviation-magnitude model is sufficient.*

## **Closing Note on Falsification**

These predictions are not offered as final answers, but as testable commitments. *Importantly, partial disconfirmation would motivate refinement rather than wholesale abandonment.* The Language of Stress is intended to be sharpened through criticism, empirical testing, and formalization—not protected from them.

The theory makes a strong claim: that valenced tension dynamics are both necessary and sufficient for phenomenal consciousness. Evidence against necessity (consciousness without tension dynamics) would be more damaging than evidence against sufficiency (tension dynamics without consciousness), but both would demand serious theoretical revision.

We welcome empirical challenges and stand ready to update the framework based on evidence.

# **Resources** {#resources}

Open Science Framework: [https://osf.io/tpsrv](https://osf.io/tpsrv)

Project Website: [https://www.languageofstress.com](https://www.languageofstress.com)

# **References** {#references}

Pace, J. C. (2026). The language of stress: Canonical axioms. *FigShare*. https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.31271923 

Pace, J. C. (2026). The Language of Stress: Theory Fundamentals. *FigShare.* https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.31193530

Pace, J. C. (2026). The language of stress project. *Open Science Framework*. https://osf.io/tpsrv