In the introduction to her book, Kathleen V. Wider states that her "primary concern is not with defending Sartre but with defending a position he has developed through phenomenology that helps to illuminate the nature of consciousness". This is a bit of a head-scratcher. Is it really possible to defend a position Sartre has developed without defending Sartre? One's scratching is immediately followed by sniffing, as a strong piscine odour wafts by: "I hope to show that science-based accounts of consciousness (...) can strengthen and clarify Sartre's phenomenology-based account of consciousness". Perhaps someone else's account of consciousness may be strengthened and clarified by "science-based" accounts of consciousness, but Sartre's account surely could not be. What is Wider up to? (shrink)