A Defense of Cartesian Materialism
Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 59 (4):939 - 963 (1999)
| Abstract | One of the principal tasks Dennett sets himself in Consciousness Explained is to demolish the Cartesian theater model of phenomenal consciousness, which in its contemporary garb takes the form of Cartesian materialism: the idea that conscious experience is a process of presentation realized in the physical materials of the brain. The now standard response to Dennett is that, in focusing on Cartesian materialism, he attacks an impossibly naive account of consciousness held by no one currently working in cognitive science or the philosophy of mind. Our response is quite different. We believe that, once properly formulated, Cartesian materialism is no straw man. Rather, it is an attractive hypothesis about the relationship between the computational architecture of the brain and phenomenal consciousness, and hence one that is worthy of further exploration. Consequently, our primary aim in this paper is to defend Cartesian materialism from Dennett's assault. We do this by showing that Dennett's argument against this position is founded on an implicit assumption (about the relationship between phenomenal experience and information coding in the brain), which while valid in the context of classical cognitive science, is not forced on connectionism | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | No categories specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,711 |
| External links |
 |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesGerard O'Brien & Jonathan Opie (1999). A Defense of Cartesian Materialism. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 59 (4):939-63.
Michael Lockwood (1993). Dennett's Mind. Inquiry 36 (1-2):59-72.
Eleonore Stump (1995). Non-Cartesian Substance Dualism and Materialism Without Reductionism. Faith and Philosophy 12 (4):505-531.
Steven J. Todd (2009). A Difference That Makes a Difference: Passing Through Dennett's Stalinesque/Orwellian Impasse. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 60 (3):497-520.
Joseph Levine & Kelly Trogdon (2009). The Modal Status of Materialism. Philosophical Studies 145 (3):351 - 362.
Gregg Caruso (2005). Sensory States, Consciousness, and the Cartesian Assumption. In Nathan Smith and Jason Taylor (ed.), Descartes and Cartesianism. Cambridge Scholars Press.
Roland Puccetti (1993). Dennett on the Split-Brain. Psycoloquy 4 (52).
Terence E. Horgan (2006). Materialism: Matters of Definition, Defense, and Deconstruction. Philosophical Studies 131 (1):157-83.
Daniel C. Dennett (2004). Calling in the Cartesian Loans. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27 (5):661-661.
Rocco J. Gennaro, Consciousness. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Avner Cohen (1984). Descartes, Consciousness and Depersonalization: Viewing the History of Philosophy From a Strausian Perspective. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 9 (1):7-28.
Leslie Marsh (2005). Review Essay: Dennett's Sweet Dreams Philosophical Obstacles to a Science of Consciousness. Marsh, Leslie (2005) Review Essay.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2011-01-09Total downloads4 ( #178,876 of 551,119 )Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,341 of 551,119 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
