The philosophy of phenomenal consciousness
An introduction
The scientific study of consciousness is constantly making new discoveries, but one particular aspect of consciousness remains problematic to explain. This is the fact that conscious experiences present themselves to us in a first-person way: there is something it feels like to be the subject of a conscious experience. This ‘phenomenal’ aspect of consciousness seems to be subjective, private, and knowable in a special way, making it difficult to reconcile with the scientific focus on objective, third-person data. This introduction provides an overview of phenomenal consciousness, explores philosophical arguments about its nature, and considers whether or not we should expect to find an explanation for the properties of phenomenal consciousness.
References (41)
Alter, T. (1998). A limited defense of the knowledge argument. Philosophical Studies, 90(1), 35–56.
Baars, B.J. (1988). A cognitive theory of consciousness. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
Bennett, K. (2007). Mental causation. Philosophy Compass, 2(2), 316–337.
Block, N. (1978). Troubles with functionalism. In C.W. Savage (Ed.), Minnesota studies in the philosophy of science, Vol. 9, Perception and cognition: Issues in the foundations of psychology (pp.261–325). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
Block, N. (1995). On a confusion about a function of consciousness. Behavioral and Brain and Sciences, 18(2), 227–247.
Block, N. (2007). Consciousness, accessibility, and the mesh between psychology and neuroscience. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 30(5–6), 481–499.
Chalmers, D.J. (1995). Facing up to the problem of consciousness. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 2(3), 200–219.
Chalmers, D.J. (1996). The conscious mind: In search of a fundamental theory. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Chalmers, D.J. (1997). Availability: The cognitive basis of experience? In N. Block, O. Flanagan, & G. Güzeldere (Eds.), The nature of consciousness: Philosophical debates (pp.421–424). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Chalmers, D.J. (1999). Materialism and the metaphysics of modality. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 59(2), 473–496.
Chalmers, D.J., & Jackson, F. (2001). Conceptual analysis and reductive explanation. Philosophical Review, 110(3), 315–361.
Conee, E. (1994). Phenomenal knowledge. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 72(2), 136–150.
Dehaene, S. (2001). The cognitive neuroscience of consciousness. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Dennett, D.C. (1995). The unimagined preposterousness of zombies. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 2(4), 322–326.
Descartes, R. (1641/1996). Meditations on first philosophy. With selections from the objections and replies (J. Cottingham, Trans., Rev. ed.). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Dretske, F. (1995). Naturalizing the mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Hill, C.S., & McLaughlin, B.P. (1999). There are fewer things in reality than are dreamt of in Chalmers’s philosophy. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 59(2), 445–454.
Jackson, F. (1982). Epiphenomenal qualia. Philosophical Quarterly, 32(127), 127–136.
Kim, J. (1989). The myth of non-reductive materialism. Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association, 63(3), 31–47.
Kim, J. (2005). Physicalism, or something near enough. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Kouider, S. (2009) Neurobiological theories of consciousness. In W.P. Banks (Ed.), Encyclopedia of consciousness, Vol. 2 (pp.87–100). Oxford, UK: Elsevier.
Lau, H.C., & Rosenthal, D. (2011). Empirical support for higher-order theories of conscious awareness. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 15(8), 365–373.
Levine, J. (1983). Materialism and qualia: The explanatory gap. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly, 64(4), 354–361.
Lewis, D. (Ed.). (1983). Postscript to “Mad pain and martian pain”. In Philosophical Papers, Vol. 1 (pp.130–132). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Lewis, D.K. (1986). On the plurality of worlds. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishers.
Liversedge, S.P., & Findlay, J.M. (2000). Saccadic eye movements and cognition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4(1), 6–14.
Loar, B. (1990). Phenomenal states. Philosophical Perspectives, 4, 81–108.
Lycan, W.G. (1996). Consciousness and experience. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Mehta, N., & Mashour, G.A. (2013). General and specific consciousness: A first-order representationalist approach. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 407.
Nagel, T. (1974). What is it like to be a bat? Philosophical Review, 83(4), 435–450.
Panconesi, A. (2008). Serotonin and migraine: A reconsideration of the central theory. Journal of Headache and Pain, 9(5), 267–276.
Polger, T.W. (2004). Natural minds. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Price, N.S.C. (2013). Overview of visual system structure and function. In S.M. Miller (Ed.), The constitution of visual consciousness: Lessons from binocular rivalry (pp.37–76). Advances in Consciousness Research (Vol. 90). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Putnam, H. (1967). Psychological predicates. In W.H. Capitan & D.D. Merrill (Eds.), Art, mind, and religion (pp.37–48). Pittsburgh, PA: Pittsburgh University Press.
Rajala, A.Z., Reininger, K.R., Lancaster, K.M., & Populin, L.C. (2010). Rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta) do recognize themselves in the mirror: Implications for the evolution of self-recognition. PLoS ONE, 5(9), e12865.
Rosenthal, D.M. (1986). Two concepts of consciousness. Philosophical Studies, 49(3), 329–359.
Schneider, S. (2012). Why property dualists must reject substance physicalism. Philosophical Studies, 157(1), 61–76.
Smart, J.J.C. (1959). Sensations and brain processes. Philosophical Review, 68(2), 141–156.
Tye, M. (1994). Qualia, content, and the inverted spectrum. Noûs, 28(2), 159–183.
Yablo, S. (1993). Is conceivability a guide to possibility? Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 53(1), 1–42.
Cited by (1)
Cited by one other publication
McWeeny, Jennifer & Keya Maitra
2022.
Introduction. In
Feminist Philosophy of Mind,
► pp. 1 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 24 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.