In Fabio Paglieri (ed.), Consciousness in interaction: the role of the natural and social context in shaping consciousness". Amsterdam: John Benjamins. John Benjamins (forthcoming)
|Abstract||Is the brain the biological substrate of consciousness? Most naturalistic philosophers of mind have supposed that the answer must obviously be «yes » to this question. However, a growing number of philosophers working in 4e (embodied, embedded, extended, enactive) cognitive science have begun to challenge this assumption, arguing instead that consciousness supervenes on the whole embodied animal in dynamic interaction with the environment. We call views that share this claim dynamic sensorimotor theories of consciousness (DSM). Clark (2009) a founder and leading proponent of the hypothesis of the extended mind, demurs, arguing that as matter of fact the biology of consciousness doesn’t allow for a brain, body and world boundary crossing architecture. We begin by looking at one of the arguments for DSM, the variable neural correlates argument. We then outline two criticisms that Clark has made of this argument and endorse his criticisms. However we finish up by using the case of sensory substitution to argue that something of this argument for DSM nevertheless survives. We suggest that Clark ought to concede sensory substitution as a case in which the conscious mind extends.|
|Keywords||Consciousness Extended Mind Cognitive Sciences Neuroscience Sensory Substitution|
|External links||This entry has no external links. Add one.|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Julian Kiverstein, Mirko Farina & Andy Clark (forthcoming). Substituting the Senses. In Mohan Matthen (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of the Philosophy of Perception. Oxford University Press.
Malika Auvray & Erik Myin (2009). Perception With Compensatory Devices: From Sensory Substitution to Sensorimotor Extension. Cognitive Science 33:1036–1058.
Victor Loughlin (2013). Sketch This: Extended Mind and Consciousness Extension. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 12 (1):41-50.
Andy Clark (2009). Spreading the Joy? Why the Machinery of Consciousness is (Probably) Still in the Head. Mind 118 (472):963-993.
Ophelia Deroy & Malika Auvray (forthcoming). Beyond Vision: The Vertical Integration of Sensory Substitution Devices. In M. Matthen & D. Stokes (eds.), Perception and Its Modalities.
Gregg Caruso (2005). Sensory States, Consciousness, and the Cartesian Assumption. In Nathan Smith and Jason Taylor (ed.), Descartes and Cartesianism. Cambridge Scholars Press.
Kevin Connolly, Craig French, David M. Gray & Adrienne Prettyman, The Unity of Consciousness and Sensory Integration: Conference Report.
K. Ramakrishna Rao (2005). Perception, Cognition, and Consciousness in Classical Hindu Psychology. Journal of Consciousness Studies 12 (3):3-30.
Uriah Kriegel (2003). Consciousness as Sensory Quality and as Implicit Self-Awareness. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 2 (1):1-26.
Jesse J. Prinz (2000). The Ins and Outs of Consciousness. Brain and Mind 1 (2):245-56.
Kevin Connolly, Craig French, David M. Gray & Adrienne Prettyman, The Unity of Consciousness and Sensory Integration (Network for Sensory Research/Brown University Workshop on Unity of Consciousness, Question 1).
Jamie Ward & Peter Meijer (2010). Visual Experiences in the Blind Induced by an Auditory Sensory Substitution Device. Consciousness and Cognition 19 (1):492-500.
J. Kevin O'Regan, Erik Myin & No (2005). Sensory Consciousness Explained (Better) in Terms of 'Corporality' and 'Alerting Capacity'. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 4 (4):369-387.
William S. Robinson (2004). Understanding Phenomenal Consciousness. Cambridge University Press.
Nivedita Gangopadhyay (2011). The Extended Mind: Born to Be Wild? A Lesson From Action-Understanding. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 10 (3):377-397.
Added to index2011-06-19
Total downloads117 ( #4,448 of 549,628 )
Recent downloads (6 months)40 ( #881 of 549,628 )
How can I increase my downloads?
|Start a new thread||There is 1 thread in this forum|
Instituto de Neuroartes
What DSM seems to show is that sensation is non epistemic and that perception is a cognitive process. The sensory as non-epistemic, merely bare,
non-conscious occurrences, represent nothing until some perceiving, useful
or mistaken, has gone on.