Free will and determinism have recently attracted the attention of Buddhist scholars who have defended conflicting views on this issue. I argue that there is no reason to think that this problem cannot arise in Buddhist philosophy, since there are two senses of ‘free will’ that are compatible with the doctrine of non-self. I propose a reconstruction of a problem of free will and determinism in Early Buddhism, given a) the assumption that Buddhist causation entails universal causal determinism, and b) (...) a crucial passage suggesting that Early Buddhism is committed to the principle of alternative possibilities which is arguably incompatible with a determinist interpretation of causation. This passage suggests that Early Buddhism must leave room for a robust, incompatibilist form of free will, and that a conception of indeterminist free will in the spirit of Robert Kane’s theory allows us to make sense of that notion. (shrink)

According to a representational theory of phenomenal consciousness (RTPC), the phenomenal character of a conscious experience is completely exhausted by its representational content. Some considerations suggested by Christopher Peacocke raise an important problem for the RTPC. In his recent bookConsciousness, where he defends a version of the RTPC, Christopher Hill argues that to solve Peacocke’s problem, visualqualiamust be identified with “visual appearances” understood as relational properties of external objects. I raise two problems for Hill’s solution and I suggest an alternative (...) way of understanding visualqualiaas visual appearances. (shrink)

Since Hume, some philosophers deny that conscious thinking requires the existence of a thinking subject. This claim is well illustrated by LichtenbergI thinkThinking is going on” (Es denkt). Bernard Williams has argued that the claim that there can be thinking without a thinking subject is incoherent. My purpose, in this paper, is to suggest an interpretation of that claim which overcomes the problem raised by Williams.

Virtually all schools of Buddhism do not accept a permanent, substantial self, and see everything as non-self. In the first part of this article I recall some arguments traditionally given in support of this perspective. Descartes’ cogito argument contradicts this, by suggesting that we know infallibly that the self, understood as a substantial enduring entity, does exist. The German aphorist Lichtenberg has suggested that all Descartes could claim to have established was the impersonal ‘There is thinking’, which would support the (...) perspective of non-self. Bernard Williams has argued that Lichtenberg’s impersonal version of the cogito is conceptually incoherent, which would entail that the Buddhist perspective of non-self is also incoherent. I propose to defend the coherence of the Buddhist perspective of non-self against Williams’s argument. (shrink)

As it has been pointed out in the literature, a Theory of Consciousness should satisfy two desiderata: i) account for the particular qualitative character of any particular conscious state, and ii) account for the fact that a conscious state is conscious ‘for the subject’.. Many have claimed that the RepresentationaI Theory of Consciousness can satisfy the first desideratum. It obviously fails, however, to meet the second desideratum. Higher-Order Approaches to Consciouness satisfy the second desideratum straightforwardly, but it remains unclear whether (...) they satisfy the first desideratum. In the first section, I underscore some problems indicating that RTC fails to satisfy the first desideratum. These problems suggest that qualitative character should be understood not as a non-mental represented feature of the world, as RTC suggests, but as a represented feature of the very conscious state itself. This suggests that HOAC are, after all, in a better position than RTC to satisfy the first desideratum, and hence both desiderata. I argue, however, that insofar as HOAC are supposed to satisfy the first desideratum, they are faced with an intolerable vicious regress. I propose that an alternative approach, the Self-Representational Theory of Consciousness is in a better position than HOAC to satisfy both desiderata. (shrink)

Paul Bernier | : Cet article discute de diverses versions du représentationnalisme de la conscience. L’objectif principal est de défendre une interprétation de la théorie auto-représentationnelle de la conscience (TARC) selon laquelle le contenu d’un état mental conscient serait une proposition de re qui est constituée, en partie, par l’état mental conscient lui-même. Je souligne d’abord certains problèmes importants auxquels est confrontée une des théories de la conscience les plus influentes, soit la théorie représentationnelle de la conscience (TRC) et soutiens (...) que la principale théorie rivale, soit la théorie de la conscience d’ordre supérieur (TCOS) doit lui être préférée. Je montre que les versions standards de la TCOS sont confrontées à un problème de régression à l’infini intolérable, et je propose la TARC comme une version non standard de la TCOS. | : This article discusses various versions of Consciousness Representationalism. Its main purpose is to defend an interpretation of the Self-Representational Theory of Consciousness (SRTC) according to which the content of a conscious state is a de re proposition which is constituted, in part, by the very conscious state itself. I first undescore some important problems for the Representational Theory of Consciousness (RTC), which is one of the most influential approach in the literature. I argue that the main rival theory, the Higher-Order Theory of Consciousness (HOTC) should be preferred. I argue that the standard versions of the HOTC are faced with an intolerable infinite regress and I propose the SRTC as a non-standard version of the HOTC. (shrink)

Notre these porte sur le probleme des etats mentaux intentionnels, te'l qu'il se pose dans le cadre de la philosophie de l'esprit contemporaine, plus prteisement dans la tradition analytique. Nous nous interessons particulierement a la notion de contenu etroit qui a recemment ete suggeree pour faire face a des difficultes importantes que rencontre la notion d'etat mental intentionnel, telle que concue dans le cadre general du fonctionnalisme. La problematique generale de cette these emerge d'une tension entre deux aspects importants des (...) etats mentaux intentionnels, soit leur intentionalite - c'est-a-dire le fait qu'ils visent le monde--et leur utilite pour expliquer les comportements humains, en raison de laquelle une psychologie scientifique aurait interet, semble-t-il, a caracteriser de facon adequate de tels etats mentaux. ;Notre propos s'organise autour d'un probleme pose par des intuitions emergeant d'experiences de pensee qui ont fait l'objet de nombreuses discussions en theorie de l'esprit . Un des objectifs importants de notre these est de clarifier les principales positions qui ont ete adoptees relativement a ces intuitions problematiques, de les evaluer en discutant les principaux arguments qui ont ete suggeres pour les defendre, et d'endosser une position qui nous parai t coherente, dans ce debat concernant l'individuation des etats mentaux intentionnels. De facon generale, cette discussion s'appuie sur l'hypothese selon laquelle les etats mentaux doivent etre individues en respectant des contraintes de pertinence explicative. Or, nous sommes amene a rejeter les principales positions qui ont ete defendues dans ce debat, a savoir les theses individualiste et anti-individualiste, puisqu'elles s'appuient sur des arguments auxquels nous nous objectons. Ainsi, relativemient au probleme de l'individuation, nous arrivons a endosser une position pluraliste, voulant que certains etats mentanux soient individues de facon compatible avec la these lndividualaliste, tandis que d'autres etats mentaux devraient l'etre en accord avec I'anti-individualisme. ;Dans la mesure ou nous acceptons le principe d'une individuation etroiet de certains etats mentaux, l'autre objectif majeur de notre these est de clarifier les principales suggestions qui ont ete faites, dans le but de caracteriser l'individuation d'etats mentaux etroits, et d'en faire une evaluation critique. Nous rejetons la suggestion d'une individuation purement syntaxique, telle que proposee par S. Stich, ainsi que l'individuation par le contenu etroit, tel que concu selon l'approche de J. Fodor. Nous endossons, finalement, une individuation qui s'appuie sur la notion de role conceptuel, telle que caracterisee dans le cadre d'une these de la bifurcation. De plus, nous soulignons que le cadre general de la these de la bifurcation a l'avantage d'etre compatible avec notre position pluraliste relativement au probleme de l'individuation. Notre principale conclusion est que la notion de contenu mental est une notion ambigue que permet de clarifier la these de la bifurcation. Cette discussion et les positions que nous sommes amene a adopter semblent avoir des implications importantes, notamment en relation aux problemes que pose la notion d'explication psychologique, mais egalement pour la problematique de l'anallyse des enonces d'attitudes propositionnelles. (shrink)

Dans la foulée de divers arguments antiphysicalistes visant à montrer que les qualia ne sont pas fonctionnalisables, Ned Block a proposé un autre argument de ce type, qui repose sur son expérience de pensée de la Terre inversée. L’argument de Block montrerait qu’un sujet peut avoir deux expériences de couleur du même type « phénoménal » qui seraient de deux types fonctionnels distincts puisque, selon lui, elles auraient des contenus intentionnels distincts. Il existerait donc une différence fondamentale entre le contenu (...) phénoménal des expériences sensorielles et leur contenu intentionnel et, dans la mesure où le contenu phénoménal ne pourrait être fonctionnalisé, le fonctionnalisme serait ainsi réfuté, à tout le moins en ce qui concerne les expériences sensorielles. Je soulève une objection qui, si elle est correcte, montre que la distinction que Block tente d’établir entre le contenu phénoménal et le contenu intentionnel des expériences est incohérente.Following the popular trend of antiphysicalist arguments which aim at showing that qualia cannot be functionalized, Ned Block has suggested yet another antiphysicalist argument, on the basis of his Inverted Earth thought experiment. The purpose of his argument is to show that a subject could have two color experiences which are of the same phenomenal type but of different functional types, insofar as they have different intentional contents. This argument would support the idea that there exists a substantial distinction between the phenomenal content of sensory experiences and their intentional content, and that functionalism is false, at least with respect to sensory experiences. I raise an objection to Block's argument which, if correct, shows that the distinction he proposes between the phenomenal and the intentional content of sensory experiences is incoherent. (shrink)

RÉSUMÉ Dans la foulée de divers arguments antiphysicalistes visant à montrer que les qualia ne sont pas fonctionnalisables, Ned Block a proposé un autre argument de ce type, qui repose sur son expérience de pensée de la Terre inversée. L’argument de Block montrerait qu’un sujet peut avoir deux expériences de couleur du même type « phénoménal » qui seraient de deux types fonctionnels distincts puisque, selon lui, elles auraient des contenus intentionnels distincts. Il existerait donc une différence fondamentale entre le (...) contenu phénoménal des expériences sensorielles et leur contenu intentionnel et, dans la mesure où le contenu phénoménal ne pourrait être fonctionnalisé, le fonctionnalisme serait ainsi réfuté, à tout le moins en ce qui concerne les expériences sensorielles. Je soulève une objection qui, si elle est correcte, montre que la distinction que Block tente d’établir entre le contenu phénoménal et le contenu intentionnel des expériences est incohérente. ABSTRACT Following the popular trend of antiphysicalist arguments which aim at showing that qualia cannot be functionalized, Ned Block has suggested yet another antiphysicalist argument, on the basis of his Inverted Earth thought experiment. The purpose of his argument is to show that a subject could have two color experiences which are of the same phenomenal type but of different functional types, insofar as they have different intentional contents. This argument would support the idea that there exists a substantial distinction between the phenomenal content of sensory experiences and their intentional content, and that functionalism is false, at least with respect to sensory experiences. I raise an objection to Block's argument which, if correct, shows that the distinction he proposes between the phenomenal and the intentional content of sensory experiences is incoherent. (shrink)

Book Reviews Paul Bernier, Dialogue: Canadian Philosophical Review/Revue canadienne de philosophie, FirstView Article.

It has been disputed whether an externalist conception of the individuation of intentional states, such as beliefs and desires, is compatible with self-knowledge, that is, the claim that one's judgments about one's intentional states are non-evidential, non-inferential, and authoritative. I want to argue that these theses are indeed incompatible, notwithstanding an important objection to this incompatibility claim. The worry has been raised that if externalism is true, then for a subject to know, say, that he or she believes that p, (...) the subject would need to know, on the basis of some evidence, the external conditions which determine the belief's content. Thus, externalism would be incompatible with self-knowledge. But many philosophers have accepted an objection suggesting that this worry is mistaken because in order to have a belief one need not know the metaphysical conditions determining its content, even if they are externalist. And thus, the subject's reflexive judgment about the belief would not need to rest on evidence about those external conditions. But this objection rests on a crucial assumption according to which mental content is reflexively transparent in the sense that a subject could not judge that she or he has an intentional state and be mistaken about the content of her or his state, even if the content is externally determined. My main purpose is not reflexively transparent on the assumption of externalism and, thus, self-knowledge and externalism are incompatible. (shrink)

Dans cet article, nous considérons un paradoxe sceptique que Saul Kripke a attribué à Wittgenstein. Nous critiquons la solution directe proposée par Colin McGinn , qui a recours à la théorie causale de la référence, et nous montrons pourquoi cette solution n'est pas satisfaisante. La solution sceptique que Kripke prête à Wittgenstein est ensuite discutée à la lumière de nos considérations sur la théorie causale, ce qui nous amène à constater qu'elle est aussi insuffisante. Nous concluons en montrant que nous (...) ne sommes pas d'emblée contraints d'accepter le paradoxe.We consider a sceptical paradox which Saul Kripke has attributed to Wittgenstein. We criticize the direct solution proposed by Colin McGinn, which resorts to the causal theory of reference, and we show why this solution in not satisfying. The sceptical solution which Kripke attributes to Wittgenstein is then discussed in the light of our considerations on the causal theory ; this leads us to ascertain that it is also insufficient. We conclude by showing that we don't really need to accept the paradox as it is first presented. (shrink)

Book Reviews Paul Bernier, Dialogue: Canadian Philosophical Review/Revue canadienne de philosophie, FirstView Article.