David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Consciousness Studies 15 (8):5-34 (2008)
In this paper Dennett's method of heterophenomenology is discussed. After a brief explanation of the method, three arguments in support of it are considered in turn. First, the argument from the possibility of error and self-delusion of the subject is found to ignore the panoply of intermediate position that one can take with regard to the epistemic status of first-personal knowledge. The argument is also criticized for employing an epistemic double-standard. Second, the argument from the neutrality of heterophenomenology is found to be defeated by the fact that, contrary to Dennett's claims, third-person, functionalist and instrumentalist assumptions substantially underpin and inform the method. Similarities between heterophenomenology and the Turing Test are furthermore explored, and it is shown that a weaker version of the neutrality claim also fails. Third, the argument from the appeal to the standard practice of science is shown to substantially rest on an equivocation on the term 'heterophenomenology' and is therefore rejected. Finally, it is suggested that the use of introspective reports is not inherently at odds with sound scientific procedures.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Shannon Vallor (2009). The Fantasy of Third-Person Science: Phenomenology, Ontology and Evidence. [REVIEW] Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 8 (1):1-15.
Charles Siewert (2007). In Favor of (Plain) Phenomenology. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 6 (1-2):201-220.
Hubert L. Dreyfus & Sean D. Kelly (2007). Heterophenomenology: Heavy-Handed Sleight-of-Hand. [REVIEW] Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 6 (1-2):45-55.
Jethro Masís (2012). Phenomenological Skillful Coping: Another Counter-Argument to Daniel Dennett's Heterophenomenology. Journal of Philosophy of Life 2 (1):67-91.
Jean-Michel Roy (2007). Heterophenomenology and Phenomenological Skepticism. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 6 (1-2):1-20.
Daniel C. Dennett (2007). Heterophenomenology Reconsidered. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 6 (1-2):247-270.
Gualtiero Piccinini (2010). How to Improve on Heterophenomenology: The Self-Measurement Methodology of First-Person Data. Journal of Consciousness Studies 17 (3-4):3 - 4.
Max Velmans (2007). Heterophenomenology Vs. Critical Phenomenology. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 6 (1-2):221-230.
William A. Adams (2006). Transpersonal Heterophenomenology? Journal of Consciousness Studies 13 (4):89-93.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads55 ( #27,996 of 1,099,035 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #114,795 of 1,099,035 )
How can I increase my downloads?