Javascript Menu by Deluxe-Menu.com
MindPapers is now part of PhilPapers: online research in philosophy, a new service with many more features.
 
 Compiled by David Chalmers (Editor) & David Bourget (Assistant Editor), Australian National University. Submit an entry.
 
   
click here for help on how to search

1.1. Philosophy of Consciousness, Miscellaneous (Philosophy of Consciousness, Miscellaneous on PhilPapers)

Beavers, Anthony F. (2009). The phenomenological mind: An introduction to philosophy of mind and cognitive science. Philosophical Psychology 22 (4):533 – 537.   (Google | More links)
Abstract: The Phenomenological Mind, by Shaun Gallagher and Dan Zahavi, is part of a recent initiative to show that phenomenology, classically conceived as the tradition inaugurated by Edmund Husserl and not as mere introspection, contributes something important to cognitive science. (For other examples, see “References” below.) Phenomenology, of course, has been a part of cognitive science for a long time. It implicitly informs the works of Andy Clark (e.g. 1997) and John Haugeland (e.g. 1998), and Hubert Dreyfus explicitly uses it (e.g. 1992). But where the former use phenomenology in the background as broad context and Dreyfus uses it primarily (though not exclusively) as a critique of conventional AI, Gallagher and Zahavi wish to indicate a positive and constructive place for it within cognitive science. They do not recommend that we simply accept pronouncements of thinkers like Husserl, Heidegger, Sartre and Merleau‐Ponty and apply them to questions of cognition, but that we use revised forms of phenomenology to illuminate dimensions of cognitive experience that are missing in current research. The book is presented as an “introduction to philosophy of mind and cognitive science” written from a phenomenological perspective. It seeks to justify the use of phenomenology in cognitive science by showing what kinds of questions it asks and answers, the variety of uses to which it has recently been put and the fruitfulness of some of its findings. The catalog of topics, for the most part, matches other introductions to the philosophy of mind, such as questions of method, consciousness, perception, intentionality, embodiment, action, agency and other minds. One issue presented here that is not generally dealt with in existing philosophy of mind and cognitive science texts is temporality, a mainstay of the continental tradition. After an introductory chapter that places phenomenology in the context of other approaches, the book lays out the main tenets of phenomenological method. Here, one encounters expected components of phenomenology: the epoché (described below), phenomenological reduction, eidetic variation, and so on. This traditional fare is soon followed by some potential surprises, namely, attempts to “naturalize” phenomenology, a few attempts to formalize it, and the emergence of ‘neurophenomenology’. Each of these is a bit surprising because Husserl was a vocal critic of naturalism, seeing transcendental phenomenology as an alternative to the empirical study of consciousness. He was also skeptical about the possibilities of mathematizing phenomenology. Gallagher and Zahavi acknowledge these points, but since they are not repeating history or undertaking exegesis, strict adherence to canonical phenomenology is not required. Naturalizing phenomenology means recognizing that “the phenomena it studies are part of nature and are therefore also open to empirical investigation” (p..
Block, Ned (1999). Ridiculing social constructivism about phenomenal consciousness. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (1):199-201.   (Google)
Abstract: Money is a cultural construction, leukemia is not. In which category does phenomenal consciousness fit? The issue is clarified by a distinction between what cultural phenomena causally influence and what culture constitutes. Culture affects phenomenal consciousness but it is ridiculous to suppose that culture constitutes it, even in part
Caruso, Gregg (2008). Consciousness and Free Will: A Critique of the Argument from Introspection. Southwest Philosophy Review 24 (1):219-231.   (Google)
Abstract: One of the main libertarian arguments in support of free will is the argument from introspection. This argument places a great deal of faith in our conscious feeling of freedom and our introspective abilities. People often infer their own freedom from their introspective phenomenology of freedom. It is here argued that from the fact that I feel myself free, it does not necessarily follow that I am free. I maintain that it is our mistaken belief in the transparency and infallibility of consciousness that gives the introspective argument whatever power it possesses. Once we see that consciousness is neither transparent nor infallible, the argument from introspection loses all of its force. I argue that since we do not have direct, infallible access to our own minds, to rely on introspection to infer our own freedom would be a mistake.
Ellis, Ralph D. (1999). Why isn't consciousness empirically observable? Emotion, self-organization, and nonreductive physicalism. Journal of Mind and Behavior 20 (4):391-402.   (Google)
Nadler, Steven (2008). Spinoza and consciousness. Mind 117 (467).   (Google)
Abstract: Most discussions of Spinoza and consciousness—and there are not many— conclude either that he does not have an account of consciousness, or that he does have one but that it is at best confused, at worst hopeless. I argue, in fact, that people have been looking in the wrong place for Spinoza's account of consciousness, namely, at his doctrine of "ideas of ideas". Indeed, Spinoza offers the possibility of a fairly sophisticated, naturalistic account of consciousness, one that grounds it in the nature and capacities of the body. Consciousness for Spinoza, I suggest, is a certain complexity in thinking that is the correlate of the complexity of a body, and human consciousness, for Spinoza, is nothing but the correlate in Thought of the extraordinarily high complexity of the human body in Extension. In this respect, Spinoza anticipates the conception of mind that is presently emerging from studies in the so-called ‘embodied mind’ research program. Moreover, this research program, in turn, may hold out hope for a clearer understanding of some of Spinoza's more difficult claims. CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    What's this?

1.1a Philosophy of Consciousness, General Works

Armstrong, David M. & Malcolm, Norman (1984). Consciousness and Causality: A Debate on the Nature of Mind. Blackwell.   (Cited by 110 | Google)
Barlingay, S. S. (1976). Awareness. Indian Philosophical Quarterly 4 (October):83-96.   (Google)
Block, Ned (forthcoming). Consciousness. In T. Bayne, A. Cleeremans & P. Wilken (eds.), Oxford Companion to Consciousness. Oxford University Press.   (Cited by 27 | Google)
Block, Ned (2003). Philosophical issues about consciousness. In L. Nadel (ed.), Encyclopedia of Cognitive Science. Nature Publishing Group.   (Google)
Block, Ned; Flanagan, Owen J. & Guzeldere, Guven (eds.) (1997). The Nature of Consciousness: Philosophical Debates. MIT Press.   (Cited by 116 | Annotation | Google)
Block, Ned (2007). Consciousness, Function, and Representation: Collected Papers, Volume. Oxford University Press.   (Google)
Catalano, Joseph S. (2000). Thinking Matter: Consciousness From Aristotle to Putnam and Sartre. Routledge.   (Cited by 4 | Google)
Chalmers, David J. (2003). Consciousness and its place in nature. In Stephen P. Stich & Ted A. Warfield (eds.), Blackwell Guide to the Philosophy of Mind. Blackwell.   (Cited by 49 | Google | More links)
Chatterjee, Amita (ed.) (2003). Perspectives on Consciousness. New Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal.   (Google)
Chalmers, David J. (1999). Precis of The Conscious Mind. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 59 (2):435-438.   (Cited by 2 | Google | More links)
Chalmers, David J. (1996). The Conscious Mind: In Search of a Fundamental Theory. Oxford University Press.   (Cited by 2089 | Annotation | Google | More links)
Churchland, Paul M. & Churchland, Patricia S. (2003). Recent work on consciousness: Philosophical, theoretical, and empirical. In Naoyuki Osaka (ed.), Neural Basis of Consciousness. Amsterdam: J Benjamins.   (Cited by 5 | Google | More links)
Corkum, Phil (forthcoming). Attention, Perception and Thought in Aristotle. Dialogue.   (Google)
Davies, Martin & Humphreys, Glyn W. (1993). Consciousness: Philosophical and Psychological Essays. Blackwell.   (Cited by 26 | Annotation | Google)
Dennett, Daniel C. (2001). Consciousness: How much is that in real money? In Richard L. Gregory (ed.), Oxford Companion to the Mind. Oxford University Press.   (Google)
Dittrich, W. H. (1999). More mysteries about consciousness? Book review of Davies & Humphreys on consciousness. [Journal (Paginated)].   (Google | More links)
Abstract: This commentary is a plea to re-read after five years one, as it seems, almost forgotten book which has nevertheless clearly influenced the development of empirical approaches to consciousness. The book provides an illuminating look at the early period to the modern revival of consciousness research. Its subtitle 'Psychological and Philosophical Essays' describes the book's range precisely. Early attempts to disect the mystery of consciousness and many themes that are still preoccupying modern consciousness research are covered. While some areas of research have been progressed, theoretical views have not changed dramatically, and this book still seems a good guide to embark on a mysterious journey when exploring consciousness
Flanagan, Owen J. (1991). Consciousness. In Owen J. Flanagan (ed.), The Science of the Mind. MIT Press.   (Cited by 4 | Annotation | Google)
Flanagan, Owen J. & Guzeldere, Guven (1997). Consciousness: A philosophical tour. In M. Ito, Y. Miyashita & Edmund T. Rolls (eds.), Cognition, Computation, and Consciousness. Oxford University Press.   (Cited by 4 | Google)
Flanagan, Owen J. (1992). Consciousness Reconsidered. MIT Press.   (Cited by 413 | Annotation | Google)
Foss, Jeffrey E. (2000). Science and the Riddle of Consciousness: A Solution. Kluwer Academic Publishers.   (Cited by 25 | Google)
Abstract: The questions examined in the book speak directly to neuroscientists, computer scientists, psychologists, and philosophers.
Gennaro, Rocco J. (online). Consciousness. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.   (Google)
Gray, Jeffrey A. (1995). Consciousness: What is the problem and how should it be addressed? Journal of Consciousness Studies 2 (1):5-9.   (Google)
Gray, Richard (2003). Recent work on consciousness. International Journal of Philosophical Studies 11 (1):101-107.   (Google)
Gregory, Richard L. (1988). Consciousness in science and philosophy: Conscience and con-science. In Anthony J. Marcel & E. Bisiach (eds.), Consciousness in Contemporary Science. Oxford University Press.   (Google)
Guzeldere, Guven (1995). Consciousness: What it is, how to study it, what to learn from its history. Journal of Consciousness Studies 2 (1):30-51.   (Cited by 7 | Annotation | Google)
Guzeldere, Guven (1995). Problems of consciousness: A perspective on contemporary issues, current debates. Journal of Consciousness Studies 2:112-43.   (Cited by 9 | Annotation | Google)
Hannay, Alastair (1990). Human Consciousness. Routledge.   (Cited by 7 | Google)
Hannay, Alastair (1987). The claims of consciousness: A critical survey. Inquiry 30 (December):395-434.   (Google)
Heinämaa, Sara; Lähteenmäki, Vili & Remes, Pauliina (2007). Consciousness: From Perception to Reflection in the History of Philosophy. Springer.   (Google)
Hill, Christopher S. (2009). Consciousness. Cambridge University Press.   (Google)
Abstract: This book provides a comprehensive and novel theory of consciousness. In clear and non-technical language, Christopher Hill provides interrelated accounts of six main forms of consciousness - agent consciousness, propositional consciousness (consciousness that), introspective consciousness, relational consciousness (consciousness of), experiential consciousness, and phenomenal consciousness. He develops the representational theory of mind in new directions, showing in detail how it can be used to undercut dualistic accounts of mental states. In addition he offers original and stimulating discussions of a range of psychological phenomena, including visual awareness, pain, emotional qualia, and introspection. His important book will interest a wide readership of students and scholars in philosophy of mind and cognitive science
Honderich, Ted (2004). On Consciousness. Edinburgh University Press.   (Cited by 15 | Google)
Hurley, Susan L. (1998). Consciousness in Action. Harvard University Press.   (Cited by 296 | Google | More links)
Hurley, Susan L. (online). Precis of Consciousness in Action.   (Google)
Jackson, Frank (2005). Consciousness. In Frank Jackson & Michael Smith (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Contemporary Philosophy. New York: Oxford University Press New York.   (Google)
Jackendoff, Ray S. (1987). Consciousness and the Computational Mind. MIT Press.   (Cited by 612 | Annotation | Google | More links)
Jarvilehto, Timo (online). New directions for consciousness research?   (Google)
Jaynes, Julian (1982). The problem of consciousness. In H. Mifflin (ed.), The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind.   (Google)
Josephson, B. D. & Ramachandran, V. S. (eds.) (1980). Consciousness and the Physical World: Edited Proceedings of an Interdisciplinary Symposium on Consciousness Held at the University of Cambridge in January 1978. Pergamon Press.   (Google)
Kirk, Robert E. (1994). Raw Feeling: A Philosophical Account of the Essence of Consciousness. Oxford University Press.   (Cited by 48 | Annotation | Google | More links)
Kriegel, Uriah (2006). Theories of consciousness. Philosophy Compass 1 (1):58-64.   (Google | More links)
Kriegel, Uriah (2006). Philosophical theories of consciousness: Contemporary western perspectives. In Morris Moscovitch, Evan Thompson & P. Zelazo (eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Consciousness. Cambridge University Press.   (Google)
Levine, Joseph (1997). Recent work on consciousness. American Philosophical Quarterly 34 (4):379-404.   (Cited by 9 | Google)
Livingston, Paul M. (2004). Philosophical History and the Problem of Consciousness. Cambridge University Press.   (Cited by 2 | Google | More links)
Abstract: The problem of explaining consciousness today depends on the meaning of language: the ordinary language of consciousness in which we define and express our sensations, thoughts, dreams and memories. Paul Livingston argues that this contemporary problem arises from a quest that developed over the twentieth century, and that historical analysis provides new resources for understanding and resolving it. Accordingly, Livingston traces the application of characteristic practices of analytic philosophy to problems about the relationship of experience to linguistic meaning
Lloyd, Dan (2004). Radiant Cool: A Novel Theory of Consciousness. MIT Press.   (Google)
Lormand, Eric (1996). Consciousness. In Edward Craig (ed.), Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Routledge.   (Cited by 4 | Google)
Lormand, Eric (online). Steps toward a science of consciousness?   (Google)
Lycan, William G. (1987). Consciousness. MIT Press.   (Cited by 187 | Google | More links)
Lycan, William G. (1996). Consciousness and Experience. MIT Press.   (Cited by 346 | Google)
McGinn, Colin (2004). Consciousness and Its Objects. Oxford University Press University Press.   (Cited by 5 | Google | More links)
Abstract: Colin McGinn presents his latest work on consciousness in ten interlinked papers, four of them previously unpublished. He extends and deepens his controversial solution to the mind-body problem, defending the view that consciousness is both ontologically unproblematic and epistemologically impenetrable. He also investigates the basis of our knowledge that there is a mind-body problem, and the bearing of this on attempted solutions. McGinn goes on to discuss the status of first-person authority, the possibility of atomism with respect to consciousness, extreme dualism, and the role of non-existent objects in constituting intentionality. He argues that traditional claims about our knowledge of our own mind and of the external world can be inverted; that atomism about the conscious mind might turn out to be true; that dualism is more credible the more extreme it is; and that all intentionality involves non-existent objects. These are all surprising positions, but he contends that what the philosophy of mind needs now is 'methodological radicalism' - a willingness to consider new and seemingly extravagant ideas
Metzinger, Thomas (ed.) (1995). Conscious Experience. Ferdinand Schoningh.   (Cited by 66 | Annotation | Google | More links)
Abstract: The contributions to this book are original articles, representing a cross-section of current philosophical work on consciousness and thereby allowing students and readers from other disciplines to acquaint themselves with the very latest debate, so that they can then pursue their own research interests more effectively. The volume includes a bibliography on consciousness in philosophy, cognitive science and brain research, covering the last 25 years and consisting of over 1000 entries in 18 thematic sections, compiled by David Chalmers and Thomas Metzinger
Metzinger, Thomas (1985). The problem of consciousness. In Thomas Metzinger (ed.), Conscious Experience. Imprint Academic.   (Cited by 19 | Google)
Minsky, Marvin L. (2006). Consciousness. In Marvin L. Minsky (ed.), The Emotion Machine. Simon & Schuster.   (Google)
Murata, Junichi (1997). Consciousness and the mind-body problem. In M. Ito, Y. Miyashita & Edmund T. Rolls (eds.), Cognition, Computation, and Consciousness. Oxford University Press.   (Cited by 1 | Google)
Nelkin, Norton (1996). Consciousness and the Origins of Thought. Cambridge University Press.   (Cited by 13 | Google | More links)
Abstract: This book offers a comprehensive and broadly rationalist theory of the mind which continually tests itself against experimental results and clinical data. Taking issue with Empiricists who believe that all knowledge arises from experience and that perception is a non-cognitive state, Norton Nelkin argues that perception is cognitive, constructive, and proposition-like. Further, as against Externalists who believe that our thoughts have meaning only insofar as they advert to the world outside our minds, he argues that meaning is determined 'in the head'. Finally, he offers an account of how we acquire some of our most basic concepts, including the concept of the self and that of other minds
O'Shaughnessy, Brian (2000). Consciousness and the World. Oxford University Press.   (Cited by 26 | Google | More links)
Abstract: Brian O'Shaughnessy puts forward a bold and original theory of consciousness, one of the most fascinating but puzzling aspects of human existence. He analyzes consciousness into purely psychological constituents, according pre-eminence to epistemological properties. The result is an integrated picture of the conscious mind in its natural physical setting
Papineau, David (2000). Introducing Consciousness. Totem Books.   (Cited by 4 | Google)
Papineau, David (2002). Thinking About Consciousness. Oxford University Press.   (Cited by 101 | Google | More links)
Abstract: The relation between subjective consciousness and the physical brain is widely regarded as the last mystery facing science. Papineau argues that consciousness seems mysterious not because of any hidden essence, but only because we think about it in a special way. He exposes the resulting potential for confusion, and shows that much scientific study of consciousness is misconceived
Papineau, David (2003). Theories of consciousness. In Quentin Smith & Aleksandar Jokic (eds.), Consciousness: New Philosophical Essays. Oxford: Clarendon Press.   (Cited by 2 | Google | More links)
Perry, John (2001). Knowledge, Possibility, and Consciousness. MIT Press.   (Cited by 72 | Google | More links)
Prather, Alfred G. B. (2005). Philosophy Theory and Structure of Consciousness (Part I and Part II). Kearney: Morris Publ.   (Google)
Raymont, Paul (ms). Conscious Unity.   (Google)
Revonsuo, Antti & Kamppinen, Matti (eds.) (1994). Consciousness in Philosophy and Cognitive Neuroscience. Lawrence Erlbaum.   (Cited by 40 | Google)
Abstract: Consciousness seems to be an enigmatic phenomenon: it is difficult to imagine how our perceptions of the world and our inner thoughts, sensations and feelings could be related to the immensely complicated biological organ we call the brain. This volume presents the thoughts of some of the leading philosophers and cognitive scientists who have recently participated in the discussion of the status of consciousness in science. The focus of inquiry is the question: "Is it possible to incorporate consciousness into science?" Philosophers have suggested different alternatives -- some think that consciousness should be altogether eliminated from science because it is not a real phenomenon, others that consciousness is a real, higher-level physical or neurobiological phenomenon, and still others that consciousness is fundamentally mysterious and beyond the reach of science. At the same time, however, several models or theories of the role of conscious processing in the brain have been developed in the more empirical cognitive sciences. It has been suggested that non-conscious processes must be sharply separated from conscious ones, and that the necessity of this distinction is manifested in the curious behavior of certain brain-damaged patients. This book demonstrates the dialogue between philosophical and empirical points of view. The writers present alternative solutions to the brain-consciousness problem and they discuss how the unification of biological and psychological sciences could thus become feasible. Covering a large ground, this book shows how the philosophical and empirical problems are closely interconnected. From this interdisciplinary exploration emerges the conviction that consciousness can and should be a natural part of our scientific world view
Robinson, William S. (2004). Understanding Phenomenal Consciousness. Cambridge University Press.   (Cited by 11 | Google | More links)
Abstract: William S. Robinson has for many years written insightfully about the mind-body problem. In Understanding Phenomenal Consciousness he focuses on sensory experience (eg, pain, afterimages) and perception qualities such as colors, sounds and odors to present a dualistic view of the mind, called Qualitative Event Realism, that goes against the dominant materialist views. This theory is relevant to the development of a science of consciousness which is now being pursued not only by philosophers but by researchers in psychology and the brain sciences. This provocative book will interest students and professionals who work in the philosophy of mind and will also have cross-disciplinary appeal in cognitive psychology and the brain sciences
Rogers, A. K. (1920). Some recent theories of consciousness. Mind 29 (115):294-312.   (Google | More links)
Rosenberg, Gregg H. (2004). A Place for Consciousness: Probing the Deep Structure of the Natural World. Oxford: Oxford University Press.   (Cited by 43 | Google | More links)
Abstract: What place does consciousness have in the natural world? If we reject materialism, could there be a credible alternative? In one classic example, philosophers ask whether we can ever know what is it is like for bats to sense the world using sonar. It seems obvious to many that any amount of information about a bat's physical structure and information processing leaves us guessing about the central questions concerning the character of its experience. A Place for Consciousness begins with reflections on the existence of this gap. Is it just a psychological shortcoming in our merely human understanding of the physical world? Is it a trivial consequence of the simple fact that we just cannot be bats? Or does it mean there really are facts about consciousness over and above the physical facts? If so, what does consciousness do? Why does it exist? Rosenberg sorts out these problems, especially those centering on the causal role of consciousness. He introduces a new paradigm called Liberal Naturalism for thinking about what causation is, about the natural world, and about how to create a detailed model to go along with the new paradigm. Arguing that experience is part of the categorical foundations of causality, he shows that within this new paradigm there is a place for something essentially like consciousness in all its traditional mysterious respects. A striking feature of Liberal Naturalism is that its central tenets are motivated independently of the mind-body problem, by analyzing causation itself. Because of this approach, when consciousness shows up in the picture it is not introduced in an ad hoc way, and its most puzzling features can be explained from first principles. Ultimately, Rosenberg's final solution gives consciousness a causally important role without supposing either that it is physical or that it interacts with the physical
Rosenthal, David M. (2002). Consciousness and the mind. Jerusalem Philosophical Quarterly 51 (July):227-251.   (Google)
Rowlands, Mark (2001). The Nature of Consciousness. Cambridge University Press.   (Cited by 12 | Google | More links)
Abstract: In The Nature of Consciousness, Mark Rowlands develops an innovative and radical account of the nature of phenomenal consciousness, one that has significant consequences for attempts to find a place for it in the natural order. The most significant feature of consciousness is its dual nature: consciousness can be both the directing of awareness and that upon which awareness is directed. Rowlands offers a clear and philosophically insightful discussion of the main positions in this fast-moving debate, and argues that the phenomenal aspects of conscious experience are aspects that exist only in the directing of experience towards non-phenomenal objects, a theory that undermines reductive attempts to explain consciousness in terms of what is not conscious. His book will be of interest to a wide range of readers in the philosophy of mind and language, psychology, and cognitive science
Sahu, Gopal (2002). Multi-disciplinary research on consciousness: What philosophy can do. Journal of Indian Council of Philosophical Research 19 (1):179-186.   (Google)
Sayre, Kenneth M. (1969). Consciousness: A Philosophic Study of Minds and Machines. Random House.   (Cited by 9 | Google)
Seager, William E. (2007). A brief history of the philosophical problem of consciousness. In P.D. Zelazo, Morris Moscovitch & Evan Thompson (eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Consciousness. Cambridge University Press.   (Google)
Searle, John R. (2000). Consciousness. Intellectica 31:85-110.   (Cited by 76 | Google | More links)
Searle, John R. (1987). Consciousness and the philosophers. New York Review of Books 44 (4).   (Cited by 23 | Google)
Seager, William E. (1999). Theories of Consciousness: An Introduction and Assessment. Routledge.   (Cited by 46 | Google | More links)
Abstract: Theories of Consciousness provides an introduction to a variety of approaches to consciousness, questions the nature of consciousness, and contributes to current debates about whether a scientific understanding of consciousness is possible. While discussing key figures including Descartes, Fodor, Dennett and Chalmers, the book incorporates identity theories, representational theories, intentionality, externalism and new information-based theories
Searle, John R. (1993). The problem of consciousness. Social Research 60 (1):3-16.   (Cited by 29 | Annotation | Google | More links)
Abstract: The most important scientific discovery of the present era will come when someone -- or some group -- discovers the answer to the following question: How exactly do neurobiological processes in the brain cause consciousness? This is the most important question facing us in the biological sciences, yet it is frequently evaded, and frequently misunderstood when not evaded. In order to clear the way for an understanding of this problem. I am going to begin to answer four questions: 1. What is consciousness? 2. What is the relation of consciousness to the brain? 3. What are some of the features that an empirical theory of consciousness should try to explain? 4. What are some common mistakes to avoid?
Sheets-Johnstone, Maxine (1998). Consciousness: A natural history. Journal of Consciousness Studies 5 (3):260-94.   (Cited by 37 | Google | More links)
Siewert, Charles (2000). Precis of The Significance of Consciousness. Psyche 6 (12).   (Google)
Siewert, Charles (1998). The Significance of Consciousness. Princeton University Press.   (Cited by 159 | Google | More links)
Abstract: "This is a marvelous book, full of subtle, thoughtful, and original argument.
Smith, Quentin & Jokic, Aleksandar (eds.) (2003). Consciousness: New Philosophical Perspectives. Oxford University Press.   (Google)
Abstract: Consciousness is perhaps the most puzzling problem we humans face in trying to understand ourselves. Here, eighteen essays offer new angles on the subject. The contributors, who include many of the leading figures in philosophy of mind, discuss such central topics as intentionality, phenomenal content, and the relevance of quantum mechanics to the study of consciousness
Stoljar, Daniel (2006). Ignorance and Imagination: The Epistemic Origin of the Problem of Consciousness. Oxford: Oxford University Press.   (Cited by 9 | Google | More links)
Abstract: Ignorance and Imagination advances a novel way to resolve the central philosophical problem about the mind: how it is that consciousness or experience fits into a larger naturalistic picture of the world. The correct response to the problem, Stoljar argues, is not to posit a realm of experience distinct from the physical, nor to deny the reality of phenomenal experience, nor even to rethink our understanding of consciousness and the language we use to talk about it. Instead, we should view the problem itself as a consequence of our ignorance of the relevant physical facts. Stoljar shows that this change of orientation is well motivated historically, empirically, and philosophically, and that it has none of the side effects it is sometimes thought to have. The result is a philosophical perspective on the mind that has a number of far-reaching consequences: for consciousness studies, for our place in nature, and for the way we think about the relationship between philosophy and science
Strawson, Galen (1994). Mental Reality. MIT Press.   (Cited by 121 | Google | More links)
Abstract: Introduction -- A default position -- Experience -- The character of experience -- Understanding-experience -- A note about dispositional mental states -- Purely experiential content -- An account of four seconds of thought -- Questions -- The mental and the nonmental -- The mental and the publicly observable -- The mental and the behavioral -- Neobehaviorism and reductionism -- Naturalism in the philosophy of mind -- Conclusion: The three questions -- Agnostic materialism, part 1 -- Monism -- The linguistic argument -- Materialism and monism -- A comment on reduction -- The impossibility of an objective phenomenology -- Asymmetry and reduction -- Equal-status monism -- Panpsychism -- The inescapability of metaphysics -- Agnostic materialism, part 2 -- Ignorance -- Sensory spaces -- Experience, explanation, and theoretical integration -- The hard part of the mind-body problem -- Neutral monism and agnostic monism -- A comment on eliminativism, instrumentalism, and so on -- Mentalism, idealism, and immaterialism -- Mentalism -- Strict or pure process idealism -- Active-principle idealism -- Stuff idealism -- Immaterialism -- The positions restated -- The dualist options -- Frege's thesis -- Objections to pure process idealism -- The problem of mental dispositions -- Mental -- Shared abilities -- The sorting ability -- The definition of mental being -- Mental phenomena -- The view that all mental phenomena are experiential phenomena -- Natural intentionality -- E/c intentionality -- The experienceless -- Intentionality and abstract and nonexistent objects -- Experience, purely experiential content, and n/c intentionality -- Concepts in nature -- Intentionality and experience -- Summary with problem -- Pain and pain -- The neo-behaviorist view -- A linguistic argument for the necessary connection between pain and behavior -- A challenge -- The Sirians -- N.N. Novel -- An objection to the Sirians -- The Betelgeuzians -- The point of the Sirians -- Functionalism, naturalism, and realism about pain -- Unpleasantness and qualitative character -- The weather watchers -- The rooting story -- What is it like to be a weather watcher? -- The aptitudes of mental states -- The argument from the conditions for possessing the concept of space -- The argument from the conditions for language ability -- The argument from the nature of desire -- Desire and affect -- The argument from the phenomenology of desire -- Behavior -- A hopeless definition -- Difficulties -- Other-observability -- Neo-behaviorism -- The concept of mind.
Strong, Charles A. (1912). The nature of consciousness III. Journal of Philosophy, Psychology and Scientific Methods 9 (22):589-603.   (Google | More links)
Strong, Charles A. (1912). The nature of consciousness I. Journal of Philosophy, Psychology and Scientific Methods 9 (20):533-544.   (Google | More links)
Strong, Charles A. (1912). The nature of consciousness II. Journal of Philosophy, Psychology and Scientific Methods 9 (21):561-573.   (Google | More links)
Sturgeon, Scott (2000). Matters of Mind: Consciousness, Reason and Nature. Routledge.   (Cited by 39 | Google | More links)
Abstract: The mind-body problem continues to be the focus of many of our philosophical concerns. Matters of Mind tackles how the problem has spanned and how it has changed from the earlier theories of reducing aboutness to empirical cases for physicalism. The theories of perception, property explanation, content and knowledge, reliabilism and the problem of zombies and ghosts are all carefully assessed
Sutherland, Keith (1998). The mirror of consciousness. Journal Of Consciousness Studies 5 (2):235-244.   (Google)
Thompson, Evan (2007). Mind in Life: Biology, Phenomenology, and the Sciences of Mind. Harvard University Press.   (Cited by 20 | Google | More links)
Thompson, Evan & Zahavi, Dan (2007). Philosophical theories of consciousness: Continental perspectives. In Philip David Zelazo, Morris Moscovitch & Evan Thompson (eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Consciousness. Cambridge.   (Google)
Tson, M. E. (ms). From Dust to Descartes: A Mechanical and Evolutionary Explanation of Consciousness and Self-Awareness.   (Google)
Abstract: Beginning with physical reactions as simple and mechanical as rust, From Dust to Descartes goes step by evolutionary step to explore how the most remarkable and personal aspects of consciousness have arisen, how our awareness of the world of ourselves differs from that of other species, and whether machines could ever become self-aware. Part I addresses a newborn’s innate abilities. Part II shows how with these and experience, we can form expectations about the world. Parts III concentrates on the essential role that others play in the formation of self-awareness. Part IV then explores what follows from this explanation of human consciousness, touching on topics such as free will, personality, intelligence, and color perception which are often associated with self-awareness and the philosophy of mind.
Tye, Michael (2000). Consciousness, Color, and Content. MIT Press.   (Cited by 213 | Google | More links)
Tye, Michael (2007). Philosophical problems of consciousness. In Max Velmans & Susan Schneider (eds.), The Blackwell Companion to Consciousness. Blackwell.   (Google)
Tye, Michael (1995). Ten Problems of Consciousness: A Representational Theory of the Phenomenal Mind. MIT Press.   (Cited by 538 | Google | More links)
Abstract: Tye's book develops a persuasive and, in many respects, original argument for the view that the qualitative side of our mental life is representational in...
van Gulick, Robert (online). Consciousness. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.   (Cited by 5 | Google | More links)
Velmans, Max (2001). A natural account of phenomenal consciousness. Communication and Cognition 34 (1):39-59.   (Cited by 2 | Google | More links)
Abstract: Physicalists commonly argue that conscious experiences are nothing more than states of the brain, and that conscious qualia are observer-independent, physical properties of the external world. Although this assumes the 'mantle of science,' it routinely ignores the findings of science, for example in sensory physiology, perception, psychophysics, neuropsychology and comparative psychology. Consequently, although physicalism aims to naturalise consciousness, it gives an unnatural account of it. It is possible, however, to develop a natural, nonreductive, reflexive model of how consciousness relates to the brain and the physical world. This paper introduces such a model and how it construes the nature of conscious experience. Within this model the physical world as perceived (the phenomenal world) is viewed as part of conscious experience not apart from it. While in everyday life we treat this phenomenal world as if it is the "physical world", it is really just one biologically useful representation of what the world is like that may differ in many respects from the world described by physics. How the world as perceived relates to the world as described by physics can be investigated by normal science (e.g. through the study of sensory physiology, psychophysics and so on). This model of consciousness appears to be consistent with both third-person evidence of how the brain works and with first-person evidence of what it is like to have a given experience. According to the reflexive model, conscious experiences are really how they seem
Velmans, Max & Schneider, Susan (eds.) (2007). The Blackwell Companion to Consciousness. Blackwell Pub..   (Google)
Abstract: With fifty-five peer reviewed chapters written by the leading authors in the field, The Blackwell Companion to Consciousness is the most extensive and comprehensive survey of the study of consciousness available today. Provides a variety of philosophical and scientific perspectives that create a breadth of understanding of the topic Topics include the origins and extent of consciousness, different consciousness experiences, such as meditation and drug-induced states, and the neuroscience of consciousness
Villaneuva, E. (ed.) (1991). Consciousness: Philosophical Issues. Ridgeview.   (Annotation | Google)
Weisberg, Josh (2007). The Problem of Consciousness: Mental Appearance and Mental Reality. Dissertation, The City University of New York   (Google)
Abstract: of (from Philosophy Dissertations Online)
Woodbridge, Frederick J. E. (1936). The problem of consciousness again. Journal of Philosophy 33 (21):561-568.   (Cited by 1 | Google | More links)

1.1b The Concept of Consciousness

Alexander, Hartley Burr (1904). The concept of consciousness. Journal of Philosophy, Psychology and Scientific Methods 1 (5):118-124.   (Google | More links)
Allport, A. (1988). What concept of consciousness? In Anthony J. Marcel & E. Bisiach (eds.), Consciousness in Contemporary Science. Oxford University Press.   (Cited by 47 | Google)
Antony, Michael V. (ms). Are our concepts "conscious state" and "conscious creature" vague?   (Cited by 2 | Google)
Abstract: are sharp rather than vague, that they can have no borderline cases. On the other hand, many who take conscious states to be identical to, or realized by, complex physical states are committed to the vagueness of those concepts. In the paper I argue that conscious state and conscious creature are sharp by presenting four necessary conditions for conceiving borderline cases in general, and showing that some of those conditions cannot be met with conscious state. I conclude that conscious state is sharp, and the conclusion is then extended to conscious creature. The paper ends with a brief discussion of some implications
Antony, Michael V. (2006). Consciousness and vagueness. Philosophical Studies 128 (3):515-538.   (Google | More links)
Abstract: Abstract. An argument is offered for this conditional: If our current concept conscious state is sharp rather than vague, and also correct (at least in respect of its sharpness), then common versions of familiar metaphysical theories of consciousness are false--?namely versions of the identity theory, functionalism, and dualism that appeal to complex physical or functional properties in identification, realization, or correlation. Reasons are also given for taking seriously the claim that our current concept conscious state is sharp. The paper ends by surveying the theoretical options left open by the concept's sharpness and the truth of the conditional argued for in the paper
Antony, Michael V. (2002). Concepts of consciousness, kinds of consciousness, meanings of 'consciousness'. Philosophical Studies 109 (1):1-16.   (Cited by 3 | Google | More links)
Antony, Michael V. (2001). Conceiving simple experiences. Journal of Mind and Behavior 22 (3):263-86.   (Cited by 2 | Google)
Abstract: That consciousness is composed of simple or basic elements that combine to form complex experiences is an idea with a long history. This idea is approached through an examination of our
Antony, Michael V. (2001). Is 'consciousness' ambiguous? Journal of Consciousness Studies 8 (2):19-44.   (Cited by 13 | Google | More links)
Abstract: Some alleged senses of the term are access consciousness, phenomenal consciousness, state consciousness, creature consciousness, introspective consciousness, self consciousness, to name a few. In the paper I argue for two points. First, there are few if any good reasons for thinking that such alleged senses are genuine:
Antony, Michael V. (1999). Outline of a general methodology for consciousness research. Anthropology and Philosophy 3:43-56.   (Cited by 3 | Google | More links)
Abstract: In spite of the enormous interdisciplinary interest in consciousness these days, sorely lacking are general methodologies in terms of which individual research efforts across disciplines can be seen as contributing to a common end
Armstrong, David M. (1979). Three types of consciousness. In Brain and Mind. (Ciba Foundation Symposium 69).   (Cited by 6 | Google)
Armstrong, David M. (1981). What is consciousness? In The Nature of Mind. Cornell University Press.   (Cited by 70 | Annotation | Google)
Bain, Alexander (1894). Definition and problems of consciousness. Mind 3 (11):348-361.   (Cited by 1 | Google | More links)
Baruss, Imants (1986). Meta-analysis of definitions of consciousness. Imagination, Cognition, and Personality 6:321-29.   (Google)
Becerra, Rodrigo (2004). Homonymous mistakes with ontological aspirations: The persisting problem with the word 'consciousness'. Sorites 15 (December):11-23.   (Google | More links)
Bickhard, Mark H. (2005). Consciousness and reflective consciousness. Philosophical Psychology 18 (2):205-218.   (Cited by 1 | Google | More links)
Abstract: An interactive process model of the nature of representation intrinsically accounts for multiple emergent properties of consciousness, such as being a contentful experiential flow, from a situated and embodied point of view. A crucial characteristic of this model is that content is an internally related property of interactive process, rather than an externally related property as in all other contemporary models. Externally related content requires an interpreter, yielding the familiar regress of interpreters, along with a host of additional fatal problems. Further properties of consciousness, such as differentiated qualities of experience, including qualia, emerge with conscious reflection. In particular, qualia are not constituents or direct properties of consciousness per se. Assuming that they are so is a common and ultimately disastrous misconstrual of the problems of consciousness
Bird, Alexander (online). Concepts and definitions of consciousness.   (Google)
Abstract: in Encyclopedia of Consciousness, ed. William P. Banks, Amsterdam: Elsevier, forthcoming in 2009
Bisiach, E. (1988). The (haunted) brain and consciousness. In Anthony J. Marcel & E. Bisiach (eds.), Consciousness in Contemporary Science. Oxford University Press.   (Cited by 30 | Annotation | Google)
Block, Ned (1997). Author's response. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 20 (1).   (Cited by 1 | Google)
Abstract: The distinction between phenomenal (P) and access (A) consciousness arises from the battle between biological and computational approaches to the mind. If P = A, the computationalists are right; but if not, the biological nature of P yields its scientific nature
Bode, Boyd H. (1913). The definition of consciousness. Journal of Philosophy, Psychology and Scientific Methods 10 (9):232-239.   (Cited by 1 | Google | More links)
Bogen, Joseph E. (1997). An example of access-consciousness without phenomenal consciousness? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 20 (1):144-144.   (Google)
Boodin, John E. (1908). Consciousness and reality: I. Negative definition of consciousness. Journal of Philosophy, Psychology and Scientific Methods 5 (7):169-179.   (Google | More links)
Bradley, Francis H. (1893). Consciousness and experience. Mind 2 (6):211-216.   (Google | More links)
Burr Alexander, Hartley (1904). The concept of consciousness. Journal of Philosophy, Psychology and Scientific Methods 1 (5):118-124.   (Google | More links)
Burt, Cyril (1962). The concept of consciousness. British Journal of Psychology 53:229-42.   (Cited by 9 | Google | More links)
Burge, Tyler (1997). Two kinds of consciousness. In Ned Block, Owen Flanagan & Güven Güzeldere (eds.), The Nature of Consciousness: Philosophical Debates. The Mit Press.   (Google)
Cam, Philip (1985). Phenomenology and speech dispositions. Philosophical Studies 47 (May):357-68.   (Cited by 2 | Annotation | Google | More links)
Caruso, Gregg (2005). Sensory States, Consciousness, and the Cartesian Assumption. In Nathan Smith and Jason Taylor (ed.), Descartes and Cartesianism. Cambridge Scholars Press.   (Google)
Chalmers, David J. (1997). Availability: The cognitive basis of experience? In Ned Block, Owen J. Flanagan & Guven Guzeldere (eds.), The Nature of Consciousness. MIT Press.   (Cited by 26 | Annotation | Google | More links)
Abstract: [[This was written as a commentary on Ned Block 's paper "On A Confusion about a Function of Consciousness" . It appeared in _Behavioral_ _and Brain Sciences_ 20:148-9, 1997, and also in the collection _The Nature of Consciousness: Philosophical Debates_ (MIT Press, 1997) edited by Block, Flanagan, and Guzeldere. ]]
Church, Jennifer (1998). Two sorts of consciousness? Communication and Cognition 31 (1):51-71.   (Cited by 2 | Google)
Clark, Austen (2001). Phenomenal consciousness so-called. In Werner Backhaus (ed.), Neuronal Coding of Perceptual Systems. World Scientific.   (Cited by 2 | Google | More links)
Abstract: "Consciousness" is a multiply ambiguous word, and if our goal is to explain perceptual consciousness we had better be clear about which of the many senses of the word we are endorsing when we sign on to the project. I describe some of the relatively standard distinctions made in the philosophical literature about different meanings of the word "conscious". Then I consider some of the arguments of David Chalmers and of Ned Block that states of "phenomenal consciousness" pose special and intractable problems for the scientific understanding of perception. I argue that many of these problems are introduced by obscurities in the term itself, and propose a distinction between epistemic and non-epistemic senses of the term "phenomenal consciousness". That distinction helps explain why phenomenal consciousness seems so mysterious to so many people. States of "phenomenal consciousness" are not states of one, elemental (and inexplicable) kind; they are a ragtag lot, of differing levels of complexity, corralled under one heading by a regrettable ambiguity in our terminology
Conkling, Mark L. (1977). Ryle's mistake about consciousness. Philosophy Today 21:376-388.   (Google)
Crosson, Frederick J. (1966). The concept of mind and the concept of consciousness. Journal of Existentialism 6:449-458.   (Google)
Davidson, William L. (1881). Definition of consciousness. Mind 6 (23):406-412.   (Google | More links)
De Brigard, Felipe (forthcoming). Attention, Consciousness, and Commonsense. Journal of Consciousness Studies.   (Google)
Abstract: The relation of dependency between consciousness and attention is, once again, a matter
of heated debate among scientists and philosophers. There are at least three general views on the
issue. First, there are those who suggest that attention is both necessary and sufficient for
consciousness (e.g. Posner, 1994; Prinz, 2000, forthcoming). Second, there are those who
suggest that even though attention is necessary for consciousness, it may not be sufficient (e.g.
Moran & Desimone, 1984; Rensink et al., 1997; Merikle & Joordens, 1997). Finally, there are
those who suggest that attention is neither necessary nor sufficient for consciousness, that—at
most—they are two different processes that happen to be concomitant some of the time, but
which, under very specific circumstances, can be shown to come apart (e.g. Lamme, 2003;
Koivisto et al., 2005; Koch & Tsuchiya, 2007). Piles of evidence have been marshaled in favor
and against each of these alternatives, and as far as I can see, there is no hope of agreement on
the horizon.
Dennett, Daniel C. (2001). Consciousness: How much is that in real money? In Richard L. Gregory (ed.), Oxford Companion to the Mind. Oxford University Press.   (Google)
de Sousa, Ronald B. (2002). Twelve varieties of subjectivity. In M. Larrazabal & P. Miranda (eds.), Twelve Varieties of Subjectivity: Dividing in Hopes of Conquest. Kluwer.   (Cited by 3 | Google)
Dewey, John (1906). The terms 'conscious' and `consciousness'. Journal of Philosophy, Psychology and Scientific Methods 3 (2):39-41.   (Cited by 11 | Google | More links)
Evnine, Simon J. (2008). Kinds and conscious experience: Is there anything that it is like to be something? Metaphilosophy 39 (2):185–202.   (Google | More links)
Abstract: In this article I distinguish the notion of there being something it is like to be a certain kind of creature from that of there being something it is like to have a certain kind of experience. Work on consciousness has typically dealt with the latter while employing the language of the former. I propose several ways of analyzing what it is like to be a certain kind of creature and find problems with them all. The upshot is that even if there is something it is like to have certain kinds of experience, it does not follow that there is anything it is like to be a certain kind of creature. Skepticism about the existence of something that it is like to be an F is recommended
Faw, Bill (2002). Phenomenal, access, and reflexive consciousness: The missing 'blocks' in Ned Block's typlogy. Consciousness and Emotion 3 (2):145-158.   (Google)
Fingelkurts, Andrew A.; Fingelkurts, Alexander A. & Neves, Carlos F. H. (2010). Natural World Physical, Brain Operational, and Mind Phenomenal Space-Time. Physics of Life Reviews 7 (2):195-249.   (Google)
Abstract: Concepts of space and time are widely developed in physics. However, there is a considerable lack of biologically plausible theoretical frameworks that can demonstrate how space and time dimensions are implemented in the activity of the most complex life-system – the brain with a mind. Brain activity is organized both temporally and spatially, thus representing space-time in the brain. Critical analysis of recent research on the space-time organization of the brain’s activity pointed to the existence of so-called operational space-time in the brain. This space-time is limited to the execution of brain operations of differing complexity. During each such brain operation a particular short-term spatio-temporal pattern of integrated activity of different brain areas emerges within related operational space-time. At the same time, to have a fully functional human brain one needs to have a subjective mental experience. Current research on the subjective mental experience offers detailed analysis of space-time organization of the mind. According to this research, subjective mental experience (subjective virtual world) has definitive spatial and temporal properties similar to many physical phenomena. Based on systematic review of the propositions and tenets of brain and mind space-time descriptions, our aim in this review essay is to explore the relations between the two. To be precise, we would like to discuss the hypothesis that via the brain operational space-time the mind subjective space-time is connected to otherwise distant physical space-time reality.
Fite, Warner (1895). The priority of inner experience. Philosophical Review 4 (2):129-142.   (Google | More links)
Gennaro, Rocco J. (1995). Does mentality entail consciousness? Philosophia 24 (3-4):331-58.   (Cited by 1 | Google | More links)
Girle, Roderic A. (1996). Shades of consciousness. Minds and Machines 6 (2):143-57.   (Google | More links)
Goldman, Alvin (1993). Consciousness, folk psychology, and cognitive science. Consciousness and Cognition 2:364-382.   (Cited by 31 | Google | More links)
Abstract: This paper supports the basic integrity of the folk psychological conception of consciousness and its importance in cognitive theorizing. Section 1 critically examines some proposed definitions of consciousness, and argues that the folk- psychological notion of phenomenal consciousness is not captured by various functional-relational definitions. Section 2 rebuts the arguments of several writers who challenge the very existence of phenomenal consciousness, or the coherence or tenability of the folk-psychological notion of awareness. Section 3 defends a significant role for phenomenal consciousness in the execution of a certain cognitive task, viz., classification of one's own mental states. Execution of this task, which is part of folk psychologizing, is taken as a datum in scientific psychology. It is then argued (on theoretical grounds) that the most promising sort of scientific model of the self-ascription of mental states is one that posits the kinds of phenomenal properties invoked by folk psychology. Cognitive science and neuroscience can of course refine and improve upon the folk understanding of consciousness, awareness, and mental states generally. But the folk-psychological constructs should not be jettisoned; they have a role to play in cognitive theorizing
Greidanus, J. H. (1961). Fundamental Physical Theory and the Concept of Consciousness. New York, Pergamon Press.   (Google)
Hamanaka, T. (1997). The concept of consciousness in the history of neuropsychiatry. History of Psychiatry 8:361-373.   (Google | More links)
Harman, Gilbert (online). What is cognitive access?   (Google)
Heinemann, F. H. (1941). The analysis of 'experience'. Philosophical Review 50 (November):561-584.   (Google | More links)
Hellie, Benj (2010). An externalist's guide to inner experience. In Bence Nanay (ed.), Perceiving the World. Oxford University Press.   (Google)
Abstract: Let's be externalists about perceptual consciousness and think the form of veridical perceptual consciousness includes /seeing this or that mind-independent particular and its colors/. Let's also take internalism seriously, granting that spectral inversion and hallucination can be "phenomenally" the same as normal seeing. Then perceptual consciousness and phenomenality are different, and so we need to say how they are related. It's complicated!

Phenomenal sameness is (against all odds) /reflective indiscriminability/. I build a "displaced perception" account of reflection on which indiscriminability stems from shared "qualia". Qualia are compatible with direct realism: while they generate an explanatory gap (and colors do not), so does /seeing/; qualia are excluded from perceptual consciousness by its "transparency"; instead, qualia are aspects of thought about the perceived environment.

The asymmetry between my treatments of color and seeing is grounded in the asymmetry between ignorance and error: while inversion shows that normal subjects are ignorant of the natures of the colors, hallucination shows not that perceivers are ignorant of the nature of seeing but that hallucinators are prone to error about their condition. Past literature has treated inversion and hallucination as on a par: externalists see error in both cases, while internalists see mutual ignorance. My account is so complicated because plausible results require mixing it up.
Helminiak, Daniel A. (1984). Consciousness as a subject matter. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 14 (July):211-230.   (Cited by 7 | Google | More links)
Hellie, Benj (2007). Factive phenomenal characters. Philosophical Perspectives 21 (1):259--306.   (Google | More links)
Abstract: This paper expands on the discussion in the first section of 'Beyond phenomenal naivete'. Let Phenomenal Naivete be understood as the doctrine that some phenomenal characters of veridical experiences are factive properties concerning the external world. Here I present in detail a phenomenological case for Phenomenal Naivete and an argument from hallucination against it. I believe that these arguments show the concept of phenomenal character to be defective, overdetermined by its metaphysical and epistemological commitments together with the world. This does not establish a gappish eliminativism, but a gluttish pluralism, on which there are many imperfect deservers of the name 'phenomenal character'. Different projects in the philosophy of mind -- phenomenology, philosophy of conscious, metaphysics and epistemology of perception -- are concerned with different deservers of the name.
Hennig, Boris (2007). Cartesian conscientia. British Journal for the History of Philosophy 15 (3):455-484.   (Google | More links)
Abstract: Although Descartes is often said to have coined the modern notion of ‘consciousness’, he defines it neither explicitly nor implicitly. This may imply (1) that he was not the first to use ‘conscientia’ in its modern, psychological sense, or (2) that he still used it in its traditional moral sense. In this paper, I argue for the latter assumption. Descartes used ‘conscientia’ according to the meaning we also find in texts of St. Paul, Augustine, Aquinas and later scholastics. Thus the Cartesian conscientia is, technically speaking, a shared knowledge of the specific value of our thoughts as thoughts and at the same time the cause of this value. This means that it is not itself a kind of individual knowledge, awareness, or a particular thought. Rather, ‘conscientia’ refers to the evaluative knowledge of an ideal observer.
Hodgson, Shadworth H. (1894). Reflective consciousness. Mind 3 (10):208-221.   (Google | More links)
Holt, Edwin B. (1914). The Concept of Consciousness. New York,Arno Press.   (Google)
Honderich, Ted (1998). Consciousness as existence. In Anthony O'Hear (ed.), Contemporary Issues in the Philosophy of Mind. Cambridge University Press.   (Cited by 6 | Google | More links)
Honderich, Ted (2004). Consciousness as existence, devout physicalism, spiritualism. Mind and Matter 2 (1):85-104.   (Cited by 7 | Google | More links)
Abstract: Consider three answers to the question of what it actually is for you to be aware of the room you are in. (1) It is for the room in a way to exist. (2) It is for there to be only physical activity in your head, however additionally described. (3) It is for there to be non-spatial facts somehow in your head. The first theory, unlike the other two, satisfies five criteria for an adequate account of consciousness itself. The criteria have to do with the seeming nature of this consciousness, and with subjectivity, reality including non-abstractness, mind-body causation, and the differences between perceptual, reflective and affective consciousness. The theory of consciousness as existence is not open to the objection having to do with a deluded brain in a vat. The theory, as any theory of consciousness needs to, explains its own degree of failure in characterizing consciousness. It releases neuroscience and cognitive science from nervousness about consciousness, and leaves all of consciousness a subject for science. The theory is a reconstruction of our conception of consciousness. It may be that we should carry forward several theories of consciousness. But they will have to be compared in terms of truth to the five criteria for an adequate theory
Honderich, Ted (2000). Consciousness as existence again. In Bernard Elevitch (ed.), Theoria. Charlottesville: Philosophy Doc Ctr.   (Cited by 6 | Google)
Honderich, Ted (2003). Perceptual, reflective, and affective consciousness as existence. In Anthony O'Hear (ed.), Minds and Persons. Cambridge University Press.   (Cited by 1 | Google | More links)
Abstract: This is a further improved version of a paper previously called `Reflective and Affective Consciousness'. It is better now -- more or less comprehensible if still imperfect. It is the fourth in a series of papers, and continues the idea that consciousness needs to be analysed not in any of the boring ways: by way of the plain or 17th Century materialism that is still with us in new packages, or immaterialism, or dualistic identity theory, or functionalism and cognitive science with philosophical ambition. (For argued surveys of these, and a particular allegiance now abandoned in favour of Consciousness as Existence, go to Mind Brain Connection and Mind and Brain Explanation .) Consciousness needs to be analysed, rather, mainly in terms of things existing outside of heads. The final draft of the paper will eventually turn up in the annual proceedings of The Royal Institute of Philosophy, a volume under the title Minds and Persons edited by Anthony O'Hear. At the end of the paper here there is a summary of it -- in fact the handout for a lecture
Huebner, Bryce (2010). Commonsense concepts of phenomenal consciousness: Does anyone care about functional zombies? Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 9 (1).   (Google)
Abstract: It would be a mistake to deny commonsense intuitions a role in developing a theory of consciousness. However, philosophers have traditionally failed to probe commonsense in a way that allows these commonsense intuitions to make a robust contribution to a theory of consciousness. In this paper, I report the results of two experiments on purportedly phenomenal states and I argue that many disputes over the philosophical notion of ‘phenomenal consciousness’ are misguided—they fail to capture the interesting connection between commonsense ascriptions of pain and emotion. With this data in hand, I argue that our capacity to distinguish between ‘mere things’ and ‘subjects of moral concern’ rests, to a significant extent, on the sorts of mental states that we take a system to have
Hutto, Daniel D. (2001). Consciousness and Conceptual Schema. In Paavo Pylkkanen & Tere Vaden (eds.), Dimensions of Conscious Experience. John Benjamins.   (Cited by 1 | Google)
James, William (1904). Does "consciousness" exist? Journal of Philosophy, Psychology, and Scientific Methods 1 (18):477-491.   (Cited by 171 | Google | More links)
James, William (2005). The notion of consciousness: Communication made (in french) at the 5th international congress of psychology, Rome, 30 April 1905. Journal of Consciousness Studies 12 (7):55-64.   (Cited by 4 | Google)
Johnson, A. H. (1964). Ordinary experience. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 25 (September):96-107.   (Google | More links)
Kirk, Robert E. (1992). Consciousness and concepts. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 66 (66):23-40.   (Cited by 7 | Annotation | Google)
Knobe, Joshua & Prinz, Jesse J. (2008). Intuitions about consciousness: Experimental studies. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 7 (1):67-83.   (Google | More links)
Abstract: When people are trying to determine whether an entity is capable of having certain kinds of mental states, they can proceed either by thinking about the entity from a *functional* standpoint or by thinking about the entity from a *physical* standpoint. We conducted a series of studies to determine how each of these standpoints impact people’s mental state ascriptions. The results point to a striking asymmetry. It appears that ascriptions of states involving phenomenal consciousness are sensitive to physical factors in a way that ascriptions of other states are not
Krikorian, Y. H. (1938). An empirical definition of consciousness. Journal of Philosophy 35 (6):156-161.   (Google | More links)
Kriegel, Uriah (2006). Consciousness: Phenomenal consciousness, access consciousness, and scientific practice. In Paul R. Thagard (ed.), Handbook of the Philosophy of Psychology and Cognitive Science. Elsevier.   (Google)
Abstract: Key Terms: Phenomenal consciousness, access consciousness, qualitative character, subjective character, intransitive self-consciousness, disposition, categorical basis, subliminal perception, blindsight
Lagerspetz, Olli (2002). Experience and consciousness in the shadow of Descartes. Philosophical Psychology 15 (1):5-18.   (Google | More links)
Abstract: A conscious being is characterized by its ability to cope with the environment--to perceive it, sometimes change it, and perhaps reflect on it. Surprisingly, most studies of the mind's place in nature show little interest in such interaction. It is often implicitly assumed that the main questions about consciousness just concern the status of various entities, levels, etc., within the individual. The intertwined notions of "(conscious) experience" and "(phenomenal) consciousness" are considered. The predominant use of these notions in cognitive science can be traced back to Cartesianism. What is important is the survival of the central methodological commitments despite seemingly profound changes of metaphysical outlook. The author argues (1) that cognitive scientists typically assimilate perception to sensation, thereby ignoring ways in which descriptions of perception and descriptions of the environment are logically intertwined; (2) that this involves methodological solipsism and an unacknowledged sceptical position that was originally part of Descartes' Dream argument; and (3) that it is impossible to identify the object supposedly to be studied by a science of the phenomenal consciousness. A somewhat parallel argument is identified in Kant's critique of rationalist psychology
Laird, John (1923). Mental process and the conscious quality. Mind 32 (127):273-288.   (Google | More links)
Levy, Neil (2008). Does phenomenology overflow access? Journal of Consciousness Studies 15 (7):29-38.   (Google)
Abstract: Ned Block has influentially distinguished two kinds of consciousness, access and phenomenal consciousness. He argues that these two kinds of consciousness can dissociate, and therefore we cannot rely upon subjective report in constructing a science of consciousness. I argue that none of Block's evidence better supports his claim than the rival view, that access and phenomenal consciousness are perfectly correlated. Since Block's view is counterintuitive, and has wildly implausible implications, the fact that there is no evidence that better supports it than the rival view should lead us to reject it
Lormand, Eric (1996). Nonphenomenal consciousness. Noûs 30 (2):242-61.   (Cited by 20 | Google | More links)
Abstract: There is not a uniform kind of consciousness common to all conscious mental states: beliefs, emotions, perceptual experiences, pains, moods, verbal thoughts, and so on. Instead, we need a distinction between phenomenal and nonphenomenal consciousness. As if consciousness simpliciter were not mysterious enough, philosophers have recently focused their worries on phenomenal (or qualitative) consciousness, the kind that explains or constitutes there being "something it
Lormand, Eric (online). What qualitative consciousness is like.   (Cited by 1 | Google)
Lowenthal, Marvin Marx (1915). Comparative study of Spinoza and neo-realism as indicated in Holt's "concept of consciousness". Journal of Philosophy, Psychology and Scientific Methods 12 (25):673-682.   (Google | More links)
Lycan, William G. (online). The plurality of consciousness.   (Cited by 4 | Google)
Abstract: My topics are consciousness. The plural is deliberate. Both in philosophy and in psychology,
Manson, Neil Campbell (2002). Epistemic consciousness. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science A 33 (3):425-441.   (Cited by 3 | Google | More links)
Manson, Neil Campbell (2000). State consciousness and creature consciousness: A real distinction. Philosophical Psychology 13 (3):405-410.   (Cited by 1 | Google | More links)
Abstract: It is widely held that there is an important distinction between the notion of consciousness as it is applied to creatures and, on the other hand, the notion of consciousness as it applies to mental states. McBride has recently argued in this journal that whilst there may be a grammatical distinction between state consciousness and creature consciousness, there is no parallel ontological distinction. It is argued here that whilst state consciousness and creature consciousness are indeed related, they are distinct properties. Conscious creatures can have, at one time, both conscious and unconscious mental states. This raises the question of what distinguishes the conscious from unconscious mental states of a subject: a question about what state consciousness consists in. Whilst the state/creature distinction may not be of use in explaining every aspect of a subject's consciousness, it does provide a key part of the explanandum for theories of consciousness and mind. The state/creature consciousness distinction is a real one and should not be dropped from our psychological taxonomy
Margolis, Joseph (1980). The concept of consciousness. Philosophic Exchange 3:3-18.   (Google)
Markus, Gyorgy (1975). The Marxian concept of consciousness. Philosophy and Social Criticism 3 (1).   (Google)
Matthews, Gareth B. (1977). Consciousness and life. Philosophy 52 (January):13-26.   (Cited by 4 | Google)
McBride, R. (1999). Consciousness and the state/transitive/creature distinction. Philosophical Psychology 12 (2):181-196.   (Cited by 2 | Google | More links)
Abstract: This essay examines the grammatical structure underlying the use of the word "conscious". Despite the existence of this grammatical structure, I reject the assumption that actual consciousness has a similar structure. Specifically, I reject the claim that consciousness consists of three subtypes: state consciousness, transitive consciousness, and creature consciousness. I offer an inductive argument and a deductive argument that no such psychological entities exist. The inductive argument: given the lack of evidence or arguments for the entities and given that a tripartite consciousness structure evolved from a tripartite grammatical habit, it would be far too coincidental if the grammatical distinction mirrored a psychological distinction. The deductive argument (a reductio ad absurdum) shows that absurd conclusions follow from assuming the existence of three distinct psychological entities. Furthermore, the verbal habits that motivate the distinction are rendered more intelligible under a "Unitary Thesis", the idea that verbal distinctions involving use of the word "conscious" are unified in their reliance on a single ontological unit, that of conscious experience
Moody, Todd C. (1986). Distinguishing consciousness. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 47 (December):289-95.   (Annotation | Google | More links)
Natsoulas, Thomas (1985). An introduction to the perceptual kind of conception of direct (reflective) consciousness. Journal of Mind and Behavior 6:333-356.   (Cited by 8 | Google)
Natsoulas, Thomas (1983). A selective review of conceptions of consciousness with special reference to behavioristic contributions. Cognition and Brain Theory 6:417-47.   (Cited by 6 | Annotation | Google)
Natsoulas, Thomas (1978). Consciousness. American Psychologist 33:906-14.   (Cited by 37 | Annotation | Google)
Natsoulas, Thomas (2000). Consciousness and conscience. Journal of Mind and Behavior 21 (4):327-352.   (Google)
Natsoulas, Thomas (1995). Consciousness(3) and Gibson's concept of awareness. Journal of Mind and Behavior 3 (3):305-28.   (Google)
Natsoulas, Thomas (1997). Consciousness and self-awareness: Consciousness (1,2,3,4,5,6). Journal of Mind and Behavior 18 (1):53-94.   (Google)
Natsoulas, Thomas (1983). Concepts of consciousness. Journal of Mind and Behavior 4:195-232.   (Google)
Natsoulas, Thomas (1993). Consciousness(4): Varieties of intrinsic theory. Journal of Mind and Behavior 14 (2):107-32.   (Cited by 4 | Google)
Natsoulas, Thomas (2001). On the intrinsic nature of states of consciousness: Attempted inroads from the first person perspective. Journal Of Mind And Behavior 22 (3):219-248.   (Cited by 2 | Google)
Natsoulas, Thomas (1998). Tertiary consciousness. Journal of Mind and Behavior 19 (2):141-176.   (Cited by 7 | Google)
Natsoulas, Thomas (1998). The case for intrinsic theory (parts 1-3). Journal of Mind and Behavior 17:267-85.   (Google)
Natsoulas, Thomas (1991). The concept of consciousness(1): The interpersonal meaning. Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior 21 (September):63-89.   (Google)
Natsoulas, Thomas (1991). The concept of consciousness(2): The personal meaning. Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior 21 (September):339-67.   (Google)
Natsoulas, Thomas (1992). The concept of consciousness(3): The awareness meaning. Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior 2 (2):199-25.   (Google)
Natsoulas, Thomas (1994). The concept of consciousness(4): The reflective meaning. Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior 24 (4):373-400.   (Google)
Natsoulas, Thomas (1994). The concept of consciousness(5): The unitive meaning. Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior 24 (4):401-24.   (Google)
Natsoulas, Thomas (1999). The concept of consciousness: The general state meaning. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 29 (1):59-87.   (Cited by 29 | Google | More links)
Natsoulas, Thomas (1991). The concept of consciousness: The personal meaning. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour (September) 339 (September):339-367.   (Cited by 15 | Google | More links)
Natsoulas, Thomas (1992). The concept of consciousness: The awareness meaning. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 22 (2):199-225.   (Cited by 9 | Google | More links)
Natsoulas, Thomas (1996). The sciousness hypothesis: Part I. Journal of Mind and Behavior 17 (1):45-66.   (Cited by 4 | Google)
Nelkin, Norton (1993). What is consciousness? Philosophy of Science 60 (3):419-34.   (Cited by 11 | Annotation | Google | More links)
Nelkin, Norton (1987). What is it like to be a person? Mind and Language 2:220-41.   (Cited by 5 | Annotation | Google | More links)
Nguyen, A. Minh (2001). A critique of Dretske's conception of state consciousness. Journal of Philosophical Research 26 (January):187-206.   (Google)
Niedermeyer, E. (1999). A concept of consciousness. Italian Journal of Neurological Sciences 20:7-15.   (Cited by 7 | Google | More links)
Nixon, Gregory (2010). Hollows of Experience. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research (3):234-288.   (Google | More links)
Abstract: This essay is divided into two parts, deeply intermingled. Part I examines not only the
origin of conscious experience but also how it is possible to ask of our own
consciousness how it came to be. Part II examines the origin of experience itself, which
soon reveals itself as the ontological question of Being. The chief premise of Part I
chapter is that symbolic communion and the categorizations of language have enabled
human organisms to distinguish between themselves as actually existing entities and
their own immediate experience of themselves and their world. This enables them to
reflect upon abstract concepts, including “self,” “experience,” and “world.” Symbolic
communication and conceptualization grow out of identification, the act of first
observing conscious experiencing and intimating what it is like, mimesis, a gestural
protolanguage learned through imitation, and reflection, seeing oneself through the eyes
of others. The step into actual intentional speech is made through self-assertion,
narrative, and intersubjectivity. These three become the spiral of human cultural
development that includes not only the adaptive satisfaction of our biological needs, but
also the creativity of thought. With the mental-conceptual separation of subject and
object – of self and world – the human ability to witness the universe (and each other) is
the ground of our genuinely human quality. Consciousness gives human life its
distinctively human reality. It is, therefore, one and the same ability that enables us to
shape planet Earth by means of conceptual representations (rather than by means of our
hands alone) while also awakening us to the significance of being.

Looking beyond human self-consciousness to investigate the origin and nature of
awareness itself in Part 2, reductive objective materialism is found to be of little use.
Direct experience also falls short in that, in order to be transformed into objective
knowledge about itself, it must always be interpreted through and limited by the
symbolic contexts of culture and the idiosyncratic conceptualizations of the individual.
Awareness in itself must thus be considered ultimately unexplainable, but this may
more indicate its inexpressible transcendence of all symbolic qualifiers than its
nonexistence. It is suggested that awareness is not “self-aware” (as in deity) but is
instead unknowing yet identical with the only true universal: the impetus of creative
unfolding. Our human knowledge, as an expression of this unfolding, is seen to emerge
from our conscious experiencing and, in turn, to have the power – and enormous
responsibility – of directing that experience. Our underlying symbolic worldviews are
found to be autopoietic: They limit or open our conscious experience, which, in turn,
confirms those worldview expectations. As we explore a future of unforeseeable
technological breakthroughs on an ailing planet who patiently copes with our “success,”
truly vital decisions about the nature, meaning, and future of conscious experience will
have to be made.
O'Shaughnessy, Brian (1998). Experience. In Anthony O'Hear (ed.), Contemporary Issues in the Philosophy of Mind. Cambridge University Press.   (Google)
O'Shaughnessy, Brian (1991). The anatomy of consciousness. Philosophical Issues 1:135-177.   (Cited by 3 | Google | More links)
Piccinini, Gualtiero (2007). The ontology of creature consciousness: A challenge for philosophy. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 30 (1):103-104.   (Google | More links)
Place, Ullin T. (1992). Two concepts of consciousness: The biological/private and the linguistic/social. Acta Analytica 7 (8):53-72.   (Google)
Prinz, Jesse J. (2007). All consciousness is perceptual. In Brian P. McLaughlin & Jonathan D. Cohen (eds.), Contemporary Debates in Philosophy of Mind. Blackwell.   (Cited by 3 | Google)
Rehmke, Johannes (1897). Experience. Philosophical Review 6 (6):608-625.   (Google | More links)
Rehmke, Johannes (1897). Fundamental conceptions regarding the nature of consciousness. Philosophical Review 6 (5):449-470.   (Google | More links)
Ripley, Charles (1984). Sperry's concept of consciousness. Inquiry 27 (December):399-423.   (Cited by 4 | Annotation | Google)
Roberts, William H. (1941). Experience - noun or verb? Journal of Philosophy 38 (September):542-548.   (Google | More links)
Rosenthal, David (web). Concepts and definitions of consciousness. In P W. Banks (ed.), Encyclopedia of Consciousness. Elsevier.   (Google)
Abstract: in Encyclopedia of Consciousness, ed. William P. Banks, Amsterdam: Elsevier, forthcoming in 2009
Rosenthal, David M. (2001). Consciousness and sensation. In N. J. Smelser & B. Baltes (eds.), International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences.   (Google)
Rosenthal, David (2001). Consciousness and sensation: Philosophical aspects. In N. J. Smelser & P. B. Baltes (eds.), International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences. Pergamon/Elsevier.   (Google)
Abstract: consciousness. Such unconscious processing always
Cambridge, UK
tends to re?ect habitual or strong responses. From this
Rose, Hilary (1999). Changing constructions of consciousness. Journal of Consciousness Studies 6 (11-12):251-258.   (Google)
Rosenthal, David M. (2002). How many kinds of consciousness? Consciousness and Cognition 11 (4):653-665.   (Cited by 18 | Google | More links)
Rosenthal, David M. (online). Kinds of consciousness.   (Cited by 1 | Google)
Rosenthal, David M. (1997). Phenomenal consciousness and what it's like. Behavioral And Brain Sciences 20 (1):64-65.   (Cited by 3 | Google | More links)
Abstract: be realized. Whatever gets access to phenomenal awareness (to consciousness and P-consciousness are almost always present or P-consciousness as described by Block) is represented within this absent together.
Rosenthal, David M. (1994). State consciousness and transitive consciousness. Consciousness and Cognition 2 (3):355-63.   (Cited by 25 | Google)
Rosenthal, David M. (1991). The independence of consciousness and sensory quality. Philosophical Issues 1:15-36.   (Cited by 42 | Annotation | Google | More links)
Ryle, Gilbert (1951). Feelings. Philosophical Quarterly 1 (April):193-205.   (Cited by 4 | Google | More links)
Schlösser, Ulrich (ms). Hegel's conception of philosophical critique. The concept of consciousness and the structure of proof in the introduction to the phenomenology of spirit.   (Google)
Abstract: Among philosophers in the period of change between the late 18th and early 19th centuries it was a widespread conviction that, because the status of a demonstrative theory made up of axioms and proofs was neither available nor desirable for philosophy, philosophical critique would also not be external to the business of philosophy. Rather it was to belong to the essence of philosophy itself. Against this background Hegel occupied himself almost from the beginning of his philosophical thinking with the question of how a critique that is also able to convince an adherent of a theory differing from one’s own should proceed. Initially it must provide him with a description of his standpoint that he himself can accept. Moreover, the critique must tie up with a method of examination that is part of this standpoint itself, because its adherent would not otherwise have to agree to the procedure. Hegel is interested in this matter not only as a description of the hermeneutic situation in which the adherents of two particular, opposing positions find themselves. Rather, he asks himself whether an idea for the procedure of philosophical critique that commits itself to such considerations can also be generalized. This would require giving a minimalist description of the starting point in a way that allows as large a spectrum as possible of positions that are to be the object of the critique to recognize themselves within it. And the procedure of the critique must be able to be developed from this description itself
Shanon, Benny (1990). Consciousness. Journal of Mind and Behavior 11 (2):137-51.   (Cited by 6 | Annotation | Google)
Shand, Alexander F. (1891). The nature of consciousness. Mind 16 (62):206-222.   (Google | More links)
Singer Jr, Edgar A. (1929). On the conscious mind. Journal of Philosophy 26 (21):561-575.   (Google)
Sloman, Aaron (ms). What is it like to be a rock?   (Cited by 3 | Google | More links)
Abstract: This paper aims to replace deep sounding unanswerable, time-wasting pseudo- questions which are often posed in the context of attacking some version of the strong AI thesis, with deep, discovery-driving, real questions about the nature and content of internal states of intelligent agents of various kinds. In particular the question
Smith, David Woodruff (2001). Three facets of consciousness. Axiomathes 12 (1-2):55-85.   (Google | More links)
Abstract: Over the past century phenomenology has ably analyzed the basic structuresof consciousness as we experience it. Yet recent philosophy of mind, lookingto brain activity and computational function, has found it difficult to makeroom for the structures of subjectivity and intentionality that phenomenologyhas appraised. In order to understand consciousness as something that is bothsubjective and grounded in neural activity, we need to delve into phenomenologyand ontology. I draw a fundamental distinction in ontology among the form,appearance, and substrate of any entity. Applying this three-facet ontology toconsciousness, we distinguish: the intentionality of consciousness (its form),the way we experience consciousness (its appearance, including so-called qualia),and the physical, biological, and cultural basis of consciousness (its substrate).We can thus show how these very different aspects of consciousness fit togetherin a fundamental ontology. And we can thereby define the proper domains ofphenomenology and other disciplinesthat contribute to our understanding of consciousness
Sperry, Roger W. (1969). A modified concept of consciousness. Psychological Review 76:532-36.   (Cited by 80 | Annotation | Google)
Sytsma, Justin (2010). Folk psychology and phenomenal consciousness. Philosophy Compass 5 (8):700-711.   (Google | More links)
Abstract: In studying folk psychology, cognitive and developmental psychologists have mainly focused on how people conceive of non-experiential states, such as beliefs and desires. As a result, we know very little about how the non-philosophers (or the folk) understand the mental states that philosophers typically classify as being phenomenally conscious. In particular, it is not known whether the folk even tend to classify mental states in terms of their being or not being phenomenally conscious in the first place. Things have changed dramatically in the last few years, however, with a flurry of ground-breaking research by psychologists and experimental philosophers. In this article, I will review this work, carefully distinguishing between two questions: First, are the ascriptions that the folk make with regard to the mental states that philosophers classify as phenomenally conscious related to their decisions about whether morally right or wrong action has been done to an entity? Second, do the folk tend to classify mental states in the way that philosophers do, distinguishing between mental states that are phenomenally conscious and mental states that are not phenomenally conscious?
Sytsma, Justin & Machery, Edouard (2009). How to study folk intuitions about phenomenal consciousness. Philosophical Psychology 22 (1):21 – 35.   (Google | More links)
Abstract: The assumption that the concept of phenomenal consciousness is pretheoretical is often found in the philosophical debates on consciousness. Unfortunately, this assumption has not received the kind of empirical attention that it deserves. We suspect that this is in part due to difficulties that arise in attempting to test folk intuitions about consciousness. In this article we elucidate and defend a key methodological principle for this work. We draw this principle out by considering recent experimental work on the topic by Joshua Knobe and Jesse Prinz (2008). We charge that their studies do not establish that the folk have a concept of phenomenal consciousness in part because they compare group agents to individuals . The problem is that group agents and individuals differ in some significant ways in terms of functional organization and behavior. We propose that future experiments should establish that ordinary people are disposed to ascribe different mental states to entities that are given behaviorally and functionally equivalent descriptions
Sytsma, Justin & Machery, Edouard (forthcoming). Two conceptions of subjective experience. Philosophical Studies.   (Google | More links)
Abstract: Do philosophers and ordinary people conceive of subjective experience in the same way? In this article, we argue that they do not and that the philosophical concept of phenomenal consciousness does not coincide with the folk conception. We first offer experimental support for the hypothesis that philosophers and ordinary people conceive of subjective experience in markedly different ways. We then explore experimentally the folk conception, proposing that for the folk, subjective experience is closely linked to valence. We conclude by considering the implications of our findings for a central issue in the philosophy of mind, the hard problem of consciousness
Thomas, Nigel J. T. (1998). Imagination, eliminativism, and the pre-history of consciousness. Consciousness Research Abstracts 3.   (Cited by 4 | Google | More links)
Abstract: Classical and medieval writers had no term for consciousness in anything like the modern sense, and their philosophy seems not to have been troubled by the mind-body problem. Contemporary eliminativists find strong support in this fact for their claim that consciousness does not exist, or, at least, is not an appropriate scientific explanandum. They typically hold that contemporary conceptions of consciousness are artefacts of Descartes' (now outmoded) views about matter and his unrealistic craving for epistemological certainty. Essentially, they say, our belief in consciousness is a residue of once pressing, but now irrelevant, intellectual tensions between religion and the rising new science of the Early Modern period. With the attempts of Descartes and his successors to resolve these tensions, Western thought began down a track toward the conceptual cul-de-sac of the "hard problem". Plausibly, the problem will only be (dis)solved, and the onward march of science assured, when we are able to shake off the pervasive influence of the Cartesian tradition in a way that goes far beyond the mere rejection of dualism. But when we do so, eliminativists contend, the distinctively Cartesian notion of consciousness will simply drop out of our world-picture, like phlogiston or the vital entelechy
Tye, Michael (1995). The burning house. In Thomas Metzinger (ed.), Conscious Experience. Imprint Academic & Paderborn.   (Cited by 8 | Annotation | Google)
Vaneechoutte, Mario (2000). Experience, awareness, and consciousness: Suggestions for definitions as offered by an evolutionary approach. Foundations of Science 5 (4):429-456.   (Cited by 1 | Google | More links)
Abstract: An evolutionary point of view is proposed to make more appropriate distinctions between experience, awareness and consciousness. Experience can be defined as a characteristic linked closely to specific pattern matching, a characteristic already apparent at the molecular level at least. Awareness can be regarded as the special experience of one or more central, final modules in the animal neuronal brain. Awareness is what experience is to animals.Finally, consciousness could be defined as reflexive awareness. The ability for reflexive awareness is distinctly different from animal and human awareness and depends upon the availability of a separate frame of reference, as provided by symbolic language. As such, words have made reflexive awareness
van der Waals, E. G. (1949). The psycho-analytical and the phenomenological concept of consciousness. International Journal of Psychoanalysis 30.   (Google)
Velmans, Max, Defining consciousness.   (Google | More links)
Abstract: The following extracts with connecting comments suggest a departure point for a definitions of consciousness that preserves its everyday phenomenology while allowing an understanding of what consciousness is to deepen as scientific investigation proceeds. I argue that current definitions are often theory-driven rather than following the contours of ordinary experience. Consequently they are sometimes too broad, sometimes too narrow, and sometimes not definitions of phenomenal consciousness at all. As an alternative, an ecologically valid, reflexive approach to consciousness is suggested that is consistent with science and with common sense
Velmans, Prof Max (2009). How to define consciousness—and how not to define consciousness. Cogprints.   (Google)
Abstract: Definitions of consciousness need to be sufficiently broad to include all examples of conscious states and sufficiently narrow to exclude entities, events and processes that are not conscious. Unfortunately, deviations from these simple principles are common in modern consciousness studies, with consequent confusion and internal division in the field. The present paper gives example of ways in which definitions of consciousness can be either too broad or too narrow. It also discusses some of the main ways in which pre-existing theoretical commitments (about the nature of consciousness, mind and world) have intruded into definitions. Similar problems can arise in the way a “conscious process” is defined, potentially obscuring the way that conscious phenomenology actually relates to its neural correlates and antecedent causes in the brain, body and external world. Once a definition of “consciousness” is firmly grounded in its phenomenology, investigations of its ontology and its relationships to entities, events and processes that are not conscious can begin, and this may in time transmute the meaning (or sense) of the term. As our scientific understanding of these relationships deepen, our understanding of what consciousness is will also deepen. A similar transmutation of meaning (with growth of knowledge) occurs with basic terms in physics such as "energy", and "time."
Woodbridge, Frederick J. E. (1905). The nature of consciousness. Journal of Philosophy, Psychology and Scientific Methods 2 (5):119-125.   (Cited by 3 | Google | More links)
Zemach, Eddy M. (1973). The nature of consciousness. Dialectica 27:43-65.   (Google | More links)

1.1c Philosophy of Consciousness, Misc

Becker, Joe (2008). Conceptualizing Mind and Consciousness: Using Constructivist Ideas to Transcend the Physical Bind. Human Development 51 (3):165-189.   (Google)
Abstract: Philosophers and scientists seeking to conceptualize consciousness, and subjective experience in particular, have focused on sensation and perception, and have emphasized binding – how a percept holds together. Building on a constructivist approach to conception centered on separistic-holistic complexes incorporating multiple levels of abstraction, the present approach reconceptualizes binding and opens a new path to theorizing the emergence of consciousness. It is proposed that all subjective experience involves multiple levels of abstraction, a central feature of conception. This modifies the prevalent idea of sequential development from sensation through perception to conception. Further, this approach to mind and consciousness links constructivist theory to artistic activity and suggests that conception, subjective experience, aboutness (intentionality), and agency are linked together through separistic-holistic complexes. It also argues for change in the prevailing constructivist view that regards the process of production of new levels of conception as inherently directed towards better fit with the external environment. Copyright © 2008 S. Karger AG, Basel
Burton, Robert G. (2005). A multilevel, interdisciplinary approach to phenomenal consciousness. Southern Journal of Philosophy 43 (4):531-543.   (Google)
Byrne, Alex; Hilbert, David & Siegel, Susanna (online). Do we see more than we can access?   (Google)
Carruthers, Peter (2001). Who is blind to blindsight? Psyche 7 (4).   (Google)
Chalmers, David J. (unknown). On ``consciousness and the philosophers''. .   (Google)
Abstract: John Searle's review of my book The Conscious Mind appeared in the March 6, 1997 edition of the New York Review of Books. I replied in a letter printed in their May 15, 1997 edition, and Searle's response appeared simultaneously. I set up this web page so that interested people can see my reply to Searle in turn, and to give access to other relevant materials
Chalmers, David J. (unknown). Reply to mulhauser's review of the conscious mind. .   (Google)
Abstract: First, I should clarify the notion of "taking consciousness seriously", which serves as a premise in my work. Mulhauser characterizes this as the assumption that no cognitive theory of consciousness will suffice. The latter assumption would indeed beg some crucial questions, but it is not the assumption that I make. I make an assumption about the problem of consciousness, not about any solution. To quote (p. xii): Throughout the book, I have assumed that consciousness exists, and that to redefine the problem as that of explaining how certain cognitive and behavioral functions are performed is unacceptable. This is what I mean by taking consciousness seriously. That is, the premise is simply that there is a phenomenon to be explained, and that the problems of explaining such functions as discrimination, integration, self monitoring, reportability, and so on do not exhaust all the problems in the vicinity. The deepest problem of consciousness, as I understand it, is not the problem of how all these functions are performed, but rather the problem of explaining how and why all this activity supports states of subjective experience
Chalmers, David J. (1997). Response to Searle. New York Review of Books 44 (8).   (Google)
Abstract: In my book _The Conscious Mind_ , I deny a number of claims that John Searle finds "obvious", and I make some claims that he finds "absurd". But if the mind/body problem has taught us anything, it is that nothing about consciousness is obvious, and that one person's obvious truth is another person's absurdity. So instead of throwing around this sort of language, it is best to examine the claims themselves and the arguments that I give for them, to see whether Searle says anything of substance that touches them
Clark, Andy (2000). Phenomenal immediacy and the doors of sensation. Journal of Consciousness Studies 7 (4):21-24.   (Cited by 6 | Google)
Cody, Arthur B. (1994). Hannay's consciousness. Inquiry 37 (1):117-132.   (Google)
Corkum, Phil (2005). Aristotle on consciousness. Newsletters for the Society for Ancient Greek Philosophy 5 (1):80-93.   (Google)
Dennett, Daniel C. (2005). Two steps closer on consciousness. In Brian L. Keeley (ed.), Paul Churchland. Cambridge University Press.   (Cited by 1 | Google)
Abstract: For a solid quarter century Paul Churchland and I have been wheeling around in the space of work on consciousness, and though from up close it may appear that we =ve been rather vehemently opposed to each other =s position, from the bird =s eye view, we are moving in a rather tight spiral within the universe of contested views, both staunch materialists, interested in the same phenomena and the same empirical theories of those phenomena, but differing only over where the main chance lies for progress
Dretske, Fred (2001). First person warrant: Comments on Siewert's The Significance of Consciousness. Psyche 7 (11).   (Cited by 1 | Google)
Dreyfus, George & Thompson, Evan (2007). Philosophical theories of consciousness: Asian perspectives. In Philip David Zelazo, Morris Moscovitch & Evan Thompson (eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Consciousness. Cambridge.   (Google)
Gale, Richard M. (online). William James on the misery and glory of consciousness.   (Google)
Gertler, Brie (2001). The relationship between phenomenality and intentionality: Comments on Siewert's The Significance of Consciousness. Psyche 7 (17).   (Google)
Abstract: Charles Siewert offers a persuasive argument to show that the presence of certain phenomenal features logically suffices for the presence of certain intentional ones. He claims that this shows that (some) phenomenal features are inherently intentional. I argue that he has not established the latter thesis, even if we grant the logical sufficiency claim. For he has not ruled out a rival alternative interpretation of the relevant data, namely, that (some) intentional features are inherently phenomenal
Graham, George & Horgan, Terence E. (1998). Sensations and grain processes. In Gregory R. Mulhauser (ed.), Evolving Consciousness. John Benjamins.   (Cited by 4 | Google)
Hannay, Alastair (1994). Comments on Honderich, Sprigge, Dreyfus and Rubin, and Elster. Synthese 98 (1):95-112.   (Google | More links)
Harr, (2000). Social construction and consciousness. In Max Velmans (ed.), Investigating Phenomenal Consciousness: New Methodologies and Maps. Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins Publishing Company..   (Google)
Hurley, Susan L. (online). Is there a substantive disagreement here? Reply to Chemero and Cordeiro.   (Google)
Hurley, Susan L. (online). The space of reasons vs. the space of inference: Reply to Noe.   (Google)
Kirk, Robert E. (2002). Thinking about Papineau's Thinking About Consciousness. SWIF Philosophy of Mind [December 2.   (Google | More links)
Levin, Janet (1997). Consciousness disputed (review of Chalmers, Dretske, and tye). British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 48 (1):91-107.   (Google)
Levine, Joseph (2001). Phenomenal consciousness and the first-person. Psyche 7 (10).   (Google)
Lähteenmäki, Vili (2007). Orders of Consciousness and Forms of Reflexivity in Descartes. In Sara Heinämaa, Vili Lähteenmäki & Pauliina Remes (eds.), Consciousness: From Perception to Reflection in the History of Philosophy. Springer.   (Google)
Lähteenmäki, Vili (2008). The Sphere of Experience in Locke: The Relations Between Reflection, Consciousness, and Ideas. Locke Studies 8 (1):59-100.   (Google)
Livingston, Paul M. (2002). Experience and structure: Philosophical history and the problem of consciousness. Journal Of Consciousness Studies 9 (3):15-33.   (Google | More links)
Ludwig, Kirk A. (2002). Phenomenal consciousness and intentionality: Comments on The Significance of Consciousness. Psyche 8 (8).   (Cited by 2 | Google)
Abstract: _The Significance of Consciousness_ . Princeton: Princeton University Press. $42.50 hbk. x + 374pp. ISBN: 0691027242. ABSTRACT: I discuss three issues about the relation of phenomenal consciousness, in the sense Siewert isolates, to
Lurz, Robert W. (2001). Taking the first-person approach: Two worries for Siewert's sense of 'consciousness'. Psyche 7 (14).   (Google)
Lycan, William G. (2001). Have we neglected phenomenal consciousness? Psyche 7 (3).   (Cited by 6 | Google)
Abstract: Charles Siewert's _The Significance of Consciousness_ contends that most philosophers and psychologists who have written about "consciousness" have neglected a crucial type or aspect that Siewert calls "phenomenal consciousness" and tries carefully to define. The present article argues that some philosophers, at least, have not neglected phenomenal consciousness and have offered tenable theories of it
Melnuk, Andrew (2002). Papineau on the intuition of distinctness. SWIF Philosophy of Mind 10.   (Google)
Nagel, Thomas (1993). The mind wins. New York Review of Books, March 4.   (Cited by 3 | Google)
Natsoulas, Thomas (2000). On the intrinsic nature of states of consciousness: Further considerations in the light of James's conception. Consciousness and Emotion 1 (1):139-166.   (Google)
Abstract: How are the states of consciousness intrinsically so that they all qualify as ?feelings? in William James?s generic sense? Only a small, propaedeutic part of what is required to address the intrinsic nature of such states can be accomplished here. I restrict my topic mainly to a certain characteristic that belongs to each of those pulses of mentality that successively make up James?s stream of consciousness. Certain statements of James?s are intended to pick out the variable ?width? belonging to a stream of consciousness as it flows. Attention to this proposed property brings me to a discussion of (a) the unitary character of each of the states of consciousness however complex they may frequently be and (b) how to conceive of their complexity without recourse to a misleading spatial metaphor
Nelkin, Dana K. (2001). Phenomenal consciousness and intentionality. Psyche 7 (13).   (Google)
Abstract: Siewert identifies a special kind of conscious experience, phenomenal consciousness, that is the sort of consciousness missing in a variety of cases of blindsight. He then argues that phenomenal consciousness has been neglected by students of consciousness when it should not be. According to Siewert, the neglect is based at least in part on two false assumptions: (i) phenomenal features are not intentional and (ii) phenomenal character is restricted to sensory experience. By identifying an essential tension in Siewert's characterization of phenomenal consciousness, I argue that his case for denying (i) and (ii) is at best incomplete
Noe, Alva (ms). Perception, action, and nonconceptual content.   (Google)
Abstract: profile deforms as we move about it. As perceivers we are masters of the patterns of sensorimotor contingency that shape our perceptual interaction with the world. We expect changes in such things as apparent size, shape and color to occur as we actively explore the environment. In encountering perspective-dependent changes of this sort, we learn how things are quite apart form our particular perspective. Our possession of these skills is constitutive of our ability to see (and generally to perceive). This is confirmed by the fact that we can disrupt a person
Papineau, David (2003). Reply to Kirk and Melnyk. SWIF Philosophy of Mind 9.   (Google | More links)
Abstract: I am lucky to have two such penetrating commentators as Robert Kirk and Andrew Melnyk. It is also fortunate that they come at me from different directions, and so cover different aspects of my book. Robert Kirk has doubts about the overall structure of my enterprise, and in particular about my central commitment to a distinctive species of phenomenal concepts. Andrew Melnyk, by contrast, offers no objections to my general brand of materialism. Instead he focuses specifically on my discussion of the anti-materialist 'intuition of distinctness', raising questions about my attempt to explain this intuition away, and offering alternative suggestions of his own
Piccinini, Gualtiero (2007). The Ontology of Creature Consciousness: A Challenge for Philosophy. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 30 (1):103-104.   (Google)
Abstract: I appeal to Merker's theory to motivate a hypothesis about the ontology of consciousness: Creature consciousness is (at least partially) constitutive of phenomenal consciousness. Rather than elaborating theories of phenomenal consciousness couched solely in terms of state consciousness, as philosophers are fond of doing, a correct approach to phenomenal consciousness should begin with an account of creature consciousness.
Robbins, Philip (2008). Consciousness and the social mind. Cognitive Systems Research 9 (1-2):15-23.   (Google)
Rosenthal, David (web). Phenomenological overflow and cognitive access. Behavioral and Brain Sciences.   (Google)
Seager, William E. (2001). Consciousness, value and functionalism. Psyche 7 (20).   (Google)
Siewert, Charles (2004). Replies. Psyche.   (Google)
Smith, A. D. (2001). O'Shaughnessy's consciousness. Philosophical Quarterly 51 (205):532-539.   (Google | More links)
Sundstrom, Par (2006). Review of Papineau's Thinking About Consciousness. Theoria 76 (1).   (Google)
Sundström, Pär (2005). Wittgenstein, consciousness, and the mind. Sorites 16 (December):6-22.   (Google | More links)
Sytsma, Justin (2009). Phenomenological obviousness and the new science of consciousness. Philosophy of Science 76 (5).   (Google | More links)
Abstract: Is phenomenal consciousness a problem for the brain sciences? An increasing number of researchers hold not only that it is but that its very existence is a deep mystery. That this problematic phenomenon exists is generally taken for granted: It is asserted that phenomenal consciousness is just phenomenologically obvious. In contrast, I hold that there is no such phenomenon and, thus, that it does not pose a problem for the brain sciences. For this denial to be plausible, however, I need to show that phenomenal consciousness is not phenomenologically obvious. That is the goal of this article. †To contact the author, please write to: 1414 Simona Drive, Pittsburgh, PA 15201; e‐mail: jmsytsma@gmail.com
Thomas, Alan (1997). Kant, McDowell and the theory of consciousness. European Journal of Philosophy 5 (3):283-305.   (Cited by 3 | Google | More links)
Abstract: This paper examines some of the central arguments of John McDowell's Mind and World, particularly his treatment of the Kantian themes of the spontaneity of thought and of the nature of self-consciousness. It is argued that in so far as McDowell departs from Kant, his position becomes less plausible in three respects. First, the space of reason is identified with the space of responsible and critical freedom in a way that runs together issues about synthesis below the level of concepts and at the level of complete judgements. This leads to the unwarranted exclusion of animal minds from the space of reasons. Second, McDowell draws no essential distinction between apperception and inner sense, a distinction which is important to a defensible Kantian view and to the very idea of a sui generis transcendental knowledge of the mind that is consistent with Kant's critical principles. McDowell does not take into account some of Kant's developed arguments about the inherently reflective nature of consciousness which is interpreted as an adverbial theory of the nature of conscious experience, a mode of being in a mental state (so neither an intrinsic nor extrinsic property of it). Third, McDowell endorses a standard treatment of Kant's approach to the mind in which a merely formal account of mind needs to be anchored outside consciousness on the physical body. The arguments for this conclusion, both in Mind and World and in related work by Bermudez and Hurley, is shown to be very inconclusive as a criticism of Kant. The capacity to self-ascribe thoughts that are already conscious shows, but does not say, a truth about the unity of our conscious experience that does not require further anchoring on a physical body; at that stage of the Critique Kant is describing conditions for conscious experience in general, not the conscious experience of spatio-temporally located makers of judgements. The alleged lacuna in Kant's arguments is no lacuna at all
Thomas, Nigel (ms). The study of imagination as an approach to consciousness.   (Google)
Abstract: The concept of consciousness appears to have had little currency before the 17th century. Not only did philosophers before Descartes fail to worry about how consciousness fitted into the natural world, they did not even claim to be conscious. If we are conscious, however, we must assume that they were too, and it hardly seems plausible that they could have been unaware of it. In fact, when the mind was discussed in former ages, both before and within the work of Descartes, the concept of imagination filled most (not all) of the key conceptual roles that consciousness fills today. Although it was not considered uniquely problematic, in the way that consciousness is, imagination continued to be used in these ways long after the Cartesian revolution. It was both the mental arena where thinking took place - where ideas (images) had their being and their interaction - and, implicitly, the power whereby the deliverances of the material sense organs were integrated and rendered meaningful (and, thereby, rendered 'mental'). This suggests that the study of the imagination (in the relevant senses) ought to have a considerable bearing on the study of consciousness, and it may even provide a way to outflank the notorious 'hard problem' that seems to stand in the way of a direct scientific assault on consciousness itself
Tranchina, Michael, Freedom and Spirituality.   (Google)
Abstract: This essay explores the phenomenon of spirituality by delineating of the rise of free will as a product of a reflective consciousness synthesized from conditioned responses resulting from external demands.
Uzgalis, William (2008). Review of Barry Dainton, The Phenomenal Self. Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews 2008 (12).   (Google)
Velmans, Prof Max (2009). Psychophysical nature. In Cogprints.   (Google | More links)
Abstract: There are two quite distinct ways in which events that we normally think of as “physical” relate in an intimate way to events that we normally think of as “psychological”. One intimate relation occurs in exteroception at the point where events in the world become events as-perceived. The other intimate relationship occurs at the interface of conscious experience with its neural correlates in the brain. The chapter examines each of these relationships and positions them within a dual-aspect, reflexive model of how consciousness relates to the brain and external world. The chapter goes on to provide grounds for viewing mind and nature as fundamentally psychophysical, and examines similar views as well as differences in previously unpublished writings of Wolfgang Pauli, one of the founders of quantum mechanics
Vosgerau, Gottfried (2009). Mental Representation and Self-Consciousness: From Basic Self-Representation to Self-Related Cognition. Dissertation, Ruhr-Universität Bochum   (Google)
Abstract: One oft the most fascinating abilities of humans is the ability to become conscious of the own physical and mental states. In this systematic investigation of self-consciousness, a representational theory is developed that is able to distinguish between different levels of self-consciousness. The most basic levels are already present in such simple animals as ants. From these basic forms, which are also relevant for adult human self-consciousness, high-level self-consciousness including self-knowledge can arise. Thereby, the theory is not only able to integrate developmental considerations but also to sharply distinguish different aspects of the complex phenomenon self-consciousness. Pathological breakdowns of these different aspects, as they can be found in schizophrenia, are explained by specific impairments on different levels of self-representation. In this way, the work shows that a naturalistic theory of self-consciousness is possible, if the analysis starts with very simple and basic mechanisms instead of starting on the »top of the iceberg«.
Witmer, D. Gene (2001). Experience, appearance, and hidden features. Psyche 7 (9).   (Google)