Skip to main content
Log in

Is the United States Phenomenally Conscious? Reply to Kammerer

  • Published:
Philosophia Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In Schwitzgebel (Philosophical Studies 172:1697-1721, 2015) I argued that the United States, considered as a concrete entity with people as some or all of its parts, meets plausible materialistic criteria for consciousness. Kammerer (Philosophia 43:1047-1057, 2015) defends materialism against this seemingly unintuitive conclusion by means of an “anti-nesting principle” according to which group entities cannot be literally phenomenally conscious if they contain phenomenally conscious subparts (such as people) who stand in a certain type of functional relation to the group as a whole. I raise three concerns about Kammerer’s view. First, it’s not clear that it excludes the literal phenomenal consciousness of actually existing groups of people, as one might hope such a principle would do. Second, Kammerer’s principle appears to make the literal phenomenal consciousness of a group depend in an unintuitive way on internal structural details of individuals within the group. Third, the principle appears to be ad hoc.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. For helpful discussion, thanks to David Holiday (esp. regarding the car and driver system), François Kammerer, Jeremy Pober, and commenters on The Splintered Mind blog.

References

  • Bayne, T., & Montague, M., eds. (2011). Cognitive phenomenology. Oxford: Oxford.

  • Block, N. (1978/2007). Troubles with functionalism. In N. Block, Consciousness, function, and representation. Cambridge, MA: MIT.

  • Chalmers, D. J. (1996). The conscious mind. Oxford: Oxford.

  • Kammerer, F. (2015). How a materialist can deny that the United States is probably conscious—response to Schwitzgebel. Philosophia, 43, 1047–1057.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, J. (1993). Supervenience and mind. Cambridge: Cambridge.

  • Merricks, T. (2001). Objects and persons. Oxford: Oxford.

  • Moore, A. T. (2016). The experience of reading. PhD dissertation, Department of Philosophy, University of California at Riverside.

  • Putnam, H. (1967). Psychological predicates. In W. H. Capitan and D. D. Merrill (Eds.), Art, mind, and religion. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.

  • Schwitzgebel, E. (2014). The crazyist metaphysics of mind. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 92, 665–682.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwitzgebel, E. (2015). If materialism is true, the United States is probably conscious. Philosophical Studies, 172, 1697–1721.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomasson, A. L. (2007). Ordinary objects. Oxford: Oxford.

  • Tononi, G. (2012). The Integrated Information Theory of consciousness: An updated account. Archives Italiennes de Biologie, 150, 290--326.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Eric Schwitzgebel.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Schwitzgebel, E. Is the United States Phenomenally Conscious? Reply to Kammerer. Philosophia 44, 877–883 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11406-016-9725-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11406-016-9725-8

Keywords

Navigation