The case for intrinsic theory XI: A disagreement regarding the kind of feature inner awareness is
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Mind and Behavior 25 (3):187-211 (2004)
Motivating this article, as well as the immediately preceding article in the present series, is Kriegel’s recent “Intrinsic Theory and the Content of Inner Awareness,” which consists of a defense of six theses regarding the content of inner awareness. I address here only the first of these six theses, along the very same lines as Kriegel does, that is, with special reference to Woodruff Smith’s phenomenological conception of inner awareness. The first thesis is as follows: “Inner awareness is . . . an aspect of the content of conscious states, not an aspect of their psychological attitude or mode.” And Kriegel describes Woodruff Smith’s conception as denying inner awareness is an aspect of a conscious mental-occurrence instance’s content. Unlike Woodruff Smith, Kriegel holds every conscious mental-occurrence instance presents itself therein too; it does so “secondarily,” giving itself less attention than it does its primary object . I examine here three arguments that Kriegel discerns and opposes in Woodruff Smith’s discussions in favor of inner awareness’s being a part of the modality of presentation in a conscious experience — which part is held to modify the presentation involved in the experience. In addition, I devote some attention to two positive arguments of Kriegel’s against the thesis that inner awareness is such a feature. However, I do not find Kriegel’s negative or positive arguments contra Woodruff Smith’s account to be compelling
|Keywords||Awareness Consciousness Intrinsic Metaphysics Perception|
|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
Thomas Natsoulas (2004). The Case for Intrinsic Theory: X. A Phenomenologist's Account of Inner Awareness. Journal of Mind and Behavior 25 (2):97-121.
Thomas Natsoulas (2001). The Case for Intrinsic Theory V: Some Arguments From James's Varieties. Journal of Mind and Behavior 22 (1):41-67.
Thomas Natsoulas (1999). The Case for Intrinsic Theory IV: An Argument From How Conscious Mental-Occurrence Instances Seem. Journal of Mind and Behavior 20 (3):257-276.
Thomas Natsoulas (1996). The Case for Intrinsic Theory: I. An Introduction. Journal of Mind and Behavior 17 (3):267-286.
Uriah Kriegel (2003). Intrinsic Theory and the Content of Inner Awareness. Journal of Mind and Behavior 24 (2):169-196.
Thomas Natsoulas (2006). The Case for Intrinsic Theory: XIII. The Role of the Qualitative in a Modal Account of Inner Awareness. Journal of Mind and Behavior 27 (3-4):319-350.
Thomas Natsoulas (2006). The Case for Intrinsic Theory: XII. Inner Awareness Conceived of as a Modal Character of Conscious Experiences. Journal of Mind and Behavior 27 (3-4):183-214.
Thomas Natsoulas (2004). The Case for Intrinsic Theory IX . Further Discussion of an Equivocal Remembrance Account. Journal of Mind and Behavior 25 (1):7-32.
Thomas Natsoulas (1996). The Case for Intrinsic Theory: II. An Examination of a Conception of Consciousness 'Subscript 4' as Intrinsic, Necessary, and Concomitant. Journal of Mind and Behavior 17 (4):369-390.
Thomas Natsoulas (1998). The Case for Intrinsic Theory: III. Intrinsic Inner Awareness and the Problem of Straightforward Objectivation. Journal of Mind and Behavior 19 (1):1-19.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2009-01-28
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?