Do you have constant tactile experience of your feet in your shoes? Or is experience limited to what's in attention?
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Consciousness Studies 14 (3):5-35 (2007)
According to rich views of consciousness (e.g., James, Searle), we have a constant, complex flow of experience (or 'phenomenology') in multiple modalities simultaneously. According to thin views (e.g., Dennett, Mack and Rock), conscious experience is limited to one or a few topics, regions, objects, or modalities at a time. Existing introspective and empirical arguments on this issue (including arguments from 'inattentional blindness') generally beg the question. Participants in the present experiment wore beepers during everyday activity. When a beep sounded, they were to take note of the conscious experience, if any, they were having at the last undisturbed moment immediately prior to the beep. Some participants were asked to report any experience they could remember. Others were asked simply to report whether there was visual experience or not (and if so, what it was). Still others were asked about experience in the far right visual field, or tactile experience, or tactile experience in the left foot. A majority of participants in the full experience and the visual conditions reported visual experience in every single sample. Tactile and peripheral visual experience were reported less often. However, the proper interpretation of these results is uncertain
|Keywords||INATTENTIONAL BLINDNESS UNCONSCIOUS PERCEPTION DETECT CHANGES AWARENESS CONSCIOUSNESS FAILURE EVENTS SCENES NEED|
|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
Carolyn Dicey Jennings (2015). Attention and Perceptual Organization. Philosophical Studies 172 (5):1265-1278.
Tim Bayne & Maja Spener (2010). Introspective Humility. Philosophical Issues 20 (1):1-22.
Sebastian Watzl (2011). The Philosophical Significance of Attention. Philosophy Compass 6 (10):722-733.
Neil Mehta (2013). Is There a Phenomenological Argument for Higher-Order Representationalism? Philosophical Studies 164 (2):357-370.
Jeff Yoshimi & David W. Vinson (2015). Extending Gurwitsch’s Field Theory of Consciousness. Consciousness and Cognition 34:104-123.
Similar books and articles
Gregory M. Nixon (2010). From Panexperientialism to Conscious Experience: The Continuum of Experience. Journal of Consciousness Exploration and Research 1 (3):216-233.
Kathleen Akins (1993). What is It Like to Be Boring and Myopic? In B. Dahlbom (ed.), Dennett and His Critics. Blackwell
Sebastian Watzl (2013). Silencing the Experience of Change. Philosophical Studies 165 (3):1009-1032.
Robert Schroer (2012). Representationalism and the Scene-Immediacy of Visual Experience: A Journey to the Fringe and Back. Philosophical Psychology 25 (4):595 - 615.
Eric Schwitzgebel (2002). How Well Do We Know Our Own Conscious Experience? The Case of Visual Imagery. Journal of Consciousness Studies 9 (5):35-53.
Cees van Leeuwen (2007). What Needs to Emerge to Make You Conscious? Journal of Consciousness Studies 14 (1):115-136.
Alva Noë (2001). Experience and the Active Mind. Synthese 61 (1):41-60.
Eric Schwitzgebel (2000). How Well Do We Know Our Own Conscious Experience? The Case of Human Echolocation. Philosophical Topics 28 (5-6):235-46.
Paul Coates (2004). Wilfrid Sellars, Perceptual Consciousness, and Theory of Attention. Essays in Philosophy 5 (1):1-25.
Ronald A. Rensink (2000). When Good Observers Go Bad: Change Blindness, Inattentional Blindness, and Visual Experience. [Journal (on-Line/Unpaginated)] 6 (9).
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads80 ( #38,486 of 1,725,832 )
Recent downloads (6 months)7 ( #92,975 of 1,725,832 )
How can I increase my downloads?