Article published in:
The Constitution of Phenomenal Consciousness: Toward a science and theory
Edited by Steven M. Miller
[Advances in Consciousness Research 92] 2015
► pp. 330–347

The status of consciousness in nature

The most central metaphysical question about phenomenal consciousness is that of what constitutes phenomenal consciousness, whereas the most central epistemic question about consciousness is that of whether science can eventually provide an explanation of the phenomenon. Many philosophers have argued that science doesn’t have the means to answer the question of what consciousness is (the explanatory gap) but that consciousness nonetheless is fully determined by the physical facts underlying it (no ontological gap). Others have argued that the explanatory gap in the sciences entails an ontological gap. This position is also known as ‘property dualism’. Here I examine a fourth position, according to which there an ontological gap but no explanatory gap.
Published online: 17 June 2015
https://doi.org/10.1075/aicr.92.14bro
References
Alter, T.
(2007) On the conditional analysis of phenomenal concepts. Philosophical Studies, 134(2), 235–253. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Balog, K.
(2012) In defense of the phenomenal concept strategy. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 84(1), 1–23. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bauby, J.-D.
(1997) The diving bell and the butterfly: A memoir of life in death. New York, NY: Vintage Books.Google Scholar
Bengson, J., & Moffett, M.A.
(2007) Know-how and concept-possession. Philosophical Studies, 136(1), 31–57. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bigelow, J., & Pargetter, R.
(1990) Acquaintance with qualia. Theoria, 56(3), 129–147. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Braddon-Mitchell, D.
(2003) Qualia and analytic conditionals. Journal of Philosophy, 100(3), 111–135.Google Scholar
Brogaard, B.
(2009) What Mary did yesterday: Reflections on knowledge-wh . Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 78(2), 439–467. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2011) Knowledge-how: A unified approach. In J. Bengson & M.A. Moffett (Eds.), Knowing how: Essays on knowledge, mind, and action (pp.136–160). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
forthcoming). In search of mentons: Panpsychism, physicalism and the missing link. In G. Brüntrup & L. Jaskolla (Eds.) Panpsychism New York, NY Oxford University Press
Carruthers, P.
(2000) Phenomenal consciousness: A naturalistic theory. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2005) Consciousness: Essays from a higher-order perspective. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chalmers, D.J.
(1995) Facing up to the problem of consciousness. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 2(3), 200–219.Google Scholar
(1996) The conscious mind: In search of a fundamental theory. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
(2000) What is a neural correlate of consciousness? In T. Metzinger (Ed.), Neural correlates of consciousness: Empirical and conceptual questions (pp.17–39). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
(2004a) The representational character of experience. In B. Leiter (Ed.), The future for philosophy (pp.153–181). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
(2004b) Phenomenal concepts and the knowledge argument. In P. Ludlow, D. Stoljar, & Y. Nagasawa (Eds.), There’s something about Mary: Essays on phenomenal consciousness and Frank Jackson’s knowledge argument (pp.269–298). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
(2006) Phenomenal concepts and the explanatory gap. In T. Alter & S. Walter (Eds.), Phenomenal concepts and phenomenal knowledge: New essays on consciousness and physicalism (pp.167–194). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
(2009) The two-dimensional argument against materialism. In B.P. McLaughlin, A. Beckermann, & S. Walter (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of philosophy of mind (pp.313–335). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
forthcoming). The combination problem for panpsychism. In G. Brüntrup & L. Jaskolla (Eds.) Panpsychism New York, NY Oxford University Press
Conee, E.
(1985) Physicalism and phenomenal properties. Philosophical Quarterly, 35(140), 296–302. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1994) Phenomenal knowledge. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 72(2), 136–150. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hawthorne, J.
(2002) Advice for physicalists. Philosophical Studies, 109(1), 17–52. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Horgan, T.
(1984) Jackson on physical information and qualia. Philosophical Quarterly, 34(135), 147–152. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, F.
(1982) Epiphenomenal qualia. Philosophical Quarterly, 32(127), 127–136. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1986) What Mary didn’t know. Journal of Philosophy, 83(5), 291–295. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
James, W.
(1890/1950) The principles of psychology (Vol. 2). New York, NY: Henry Holt and Company.Google Scholar
Levine, J.
(1983) Materialism and qualia: The explanatory gap. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly, 64(4), 354–361.Google Scholar
Lewis, D.
(Ed.) (1983) Postscript to “Mad pain and martian pain”. In Philosophical papers, Vol. 1 (pp.130–132). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
(1988) What experience teaches. Proceedings of the Russellian Society, 13, 29–57.Google Scholar
Litt, A., Eliasmith, C., Kroon, F.W., Weinstein, S., & Thagarda, P.
(2006) Is the brain a quantum computer? Cognitive Science, 30(3), 593–603. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Miller, S.M.
(2007) On the correlation/constitution distinction problem (and other hard problems) in the scientific study of consciousness. Acta Neuropsychiatrica, 19(3), 159–176. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Nemirow, L.
(1980) [Review of the book Mortal questions, by Thomas Nagel]. Philosophical Review, 89(3), 473–477. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1990) Physicalism and the cognitive role of acquaintance. In W.G. Lycan (Ed.), Mind and cognition: A reader (pp.490–499). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Ryle, G.
(1945–1946) Knowing how and knowing that: The presidential address. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 46, 1–16.Google Scholar
(1949) The concept of mind. New York, NY: Barnes and Noble, Inc.Google Scholar
Stalnaker, R.
(2002) What is it like to be a zombie? In T.S. Gendler & J. Hawthorne (Eds.), Conceivability and possibility (pp.385–400). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Stanley, J., & Williamson, T.
(2001) Knowing how. Journal of Philosophy, 98(8), 411–444. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Stoljar, D.
(2005) Physicalism and phenomenal concepts. Mind and Language, 20(5), 469–494. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Strawson, G.
(2006) Realistic monism: Why physicalism entails panpsychism. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 13(10–11), 3–31.Google Scholar
Tye, M.
(2000) Consciousness, color, and content. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar