David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Pensamiento 67 (254):617-630 (2011)
Paradoxically, explorers of the territory of consciousness seem to be studying consciousness out of existence, from inside the field of "consciousness studies". How? Through their love of the phenomenon/process, they have developed powerful single models or lenses through which to understand consciousness. But in doing so, they also seek to destroy the other /equally useful/ lenses. Our opportunity lies in halting the vendettas and cross-speakings/cross-fire. The imploration is to stop the dichotomous thinking and pernicious reification of single models, and instead search for divisions of labor, complementarities, and legitimate redescriptions among the various extant models. In other words, what would happen if we reimagined the conceptual classifications of the various models of consciousness, classifications based on general philosophical dichotomies (e.g., representational/non-representational and individualist/non-individualist), as a variety of compatible and even complementary perspectives on the same complex phenomenon and process? What would happen if rather than dig in our heels vis-à-vis our favorite theory of consciousness, at the exclusion of all the others, we saw our perceived enemy as an actual, indeed necessary, friend-in-waiting? What would it take to see a battlefield as a collaborative opportunity, to see a promising pluralism rather than an endless state space of conflict?
|Keywords||Consciousness Embodied cognition Network theory Tacit knowledge Computational theory of mind Language of thought|
|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
Robert Lanning (2009). Georg Lukács and Organizing Class Consciousness. Mep Publications.
Jean E. Burns (1991). Contemporary Models of Consciousness, Part II. Journal of Mind and Behavior 12:407-420.
Michel Weber & Anderson Weekes (eds.) (2010). Process Approaches to Consciousness in Psychology, Neuroscience, and Philosophy of Mind. State University of New York Press.
Rafael G. Locke (2011). The Future of a Discipline: Considering the Ontological/Methodological Future of the Anthropology of Consciousness, Part III. Anthropology of Consciousness 22 (2):106-135.
Uriah Kriegel (2004). Consciousness and Self-Consciousness. The Monist 87 (2):182-205.
Anthony P. Atkinson, Michael S. C. Thomas & Axel Cleeremans (2000). Consciousness: Mapping the Theoretical Landscape. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 4 (10):372-382.
Jean E. Burns (1990). Contemporary Models of Consciousness, Part I. Journal of Mind and Behavior 11:153-171.
Michael V. Antony (2001). Is 'Consciousness' Ambiguous? Journal of Consciousness Studies 8 (2):19-44.
Max Velmans (1995). The Limits of Neuropsychological Models of Consciousness. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 18 (4):702-703.
Uriah Kriegel & Kenneth W. Williford (eds.) (2006). Self-Representational Approaches to Consciousness. MIT Press.
Josef Parnas & Dan Zahavi (1998). Phenomenal Consciousness and Self-Awareness: A Phenomenological Critique of Representational Theory. Journal of Consciousness Studies 5 (5-6):687-705.
Dara Llewellyn & Craig Pearson (eds.) (2011). Consciousness-Based Education: A Foundation for Teaching and Learning in the Academic Disciplines. Consciousness-Based Books, an Imprint of Maharishi University of Management Press.
Daniel C. Dennett (2001). Are We Explaining Consciousness Yet? Cognition 79 (1):221-37.
Added to index2012-01-19
Total downloads168 ( #4,674 of 1,101,746 )
Recent downloads (6 months)8 ( #34,045 of 1,101,746 )
How can I increase my downloads?