Startseite Representation, Consciousness, and Time
Artikel
Lizenziert
Nicht lizenziert Erfordert eine Authentifizierung

Representation, Consciousness, and Time

  • Sean Allen-Hermanson EMAIL logo
Veröffentlicht/Copyright: 23. Januar 2018

Abstract

I criticize Bourget’s intuitive and empirical arguments for thinking that all possible conscious states are underived if intentional. An underived state is one of which it is not the case that it must be realized, at least in part, by intentional states distinct from itself. The intuitive argument depends upon a thought experiment about a subject who exists for only a split second while undergoing a single conscious experience. This, however, trades on an ambiguity in “split second.” Meanwhile, Bourget’s empirical argument is question-begging. My critique also has implications for debates about the essential temporality and unity of consciousness experience, and, phenomenal atomism.

References

Anderson, H.K., and R. Grush. 2009. “A Brief History of Time Consciousness: Historical Precursors to James and Husserl.” Journal of the History of Philosophy 47 (2):277–307.10.1353/hph.0.0118Suche in Google Scholar

Bayne, T. 2010. The Unity of Consciousness. New York: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199215386.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar

Bourget, D. 2010. “Consciousness Is Underived Intentionality.” Noûs 44 (1):32–58.10.1111/j.1468-0068.2009.00730.xSuche in Google Scholar

Burge, T. 1979. “Individualism and the Mental.” Midwest Studies in Philosophy 4:73–122.10.1111/j.1475-4975.1979.tb00374.xSuche in Google Scholar

Coren, S., L. Ward, and J. Enns. 2004. Sensation and Perception, 6th ed. New York: Wiley & sons.10.1002/0471264385.wei0105Suche in Google Scholar

Dainton, B. 2010. “Temporal Consciousness,” Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Accessed August 11, 2013. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/consciousness-temporal/.Suche in Google Scholar

Dennett, D.C. 1988. “Evolution, Error and Intentionality.” In Sourcebook on the Foundations of Artificial Intelligence edited by Y. Wilks and D. Partridge, 190–211. Cambridge: New Mexico University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511663116.018Suche in Google Scholar

Dennett, D.C. 1990. “The Myth of Original Intentionality.” In Modeling the Mind edited by K.A. Mohyeldin Said, W.H. Newton-Smith, R. Viale and K.V. Wilkes, 43–62. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780198249733.003.0004Suche in Google Scholar

Gray, J. 2002. “The Sound of One Hand Clapping.” Psyche 8 (11).Suche in Google Scholar

Hill, T.E. 1983. “Ideals of Human Excellence and Preserving Natural Environments.” Environmental Ethics 5:211–224.10.5840/enviroethics19835327Suche in Google Scholar

James, W. 1890. The Principles of Psychology. Dover: New York.10.1037/10538-000Suche in Google Scholar

Putnam, H. 1975. “The Meaning of ‘Meaning’.” Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science 7:131–193.10.1017/CBO9780511625251.014Suche in Google Scholar

Robbins, P. 2009. “Modularity of Mind,” Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Accessed August 11, 2013. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/modularity-mind/.10.4135/9781452276052.n234Suche in Google Scholar

Van Essen, D.C., and E.A. Deyoe. 1995. “Concurrent Processing in the Primate Visual Cortex.” In The Cognitive Neurosciences edited by M.S. Gazzaniga. Cambridge: The MIT Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2018-1-23
Published in Print: 2018-3-26

© 2018 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Heruntergeladen am 22.9.2025 von https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/mp-2018-0007/html
Button zum nach oben scrollen