Sweet Dreams: Philosophical Obstacles to a Science of Consciousness Pdf
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
FREE SWEET DREAMS: PHILOSOPHICAL OBSTACLES TO A SCIENCE OF CONSCIOUSNESS PDF Daniel C. Dennett | 216 pages | 01 Oct 2006 | MIT Press Ltd | 9780262541916 | English | Massachusetts, United States Sweet Dreams: Philosophical Obstacles to a Science of Consciousness by Daniel C. Dennett See what's new with book lending at the Internet Archive. Uploaded by station Search icon An illustration of a magnifying glass. User icon An illustration of a person's head and chest. Sign up Log in. Web icon An illustration of a computer application window Wayback Machine Texts icon An illustration of an open book. Books Video icon An illustration of two cells of a film strip. Video Audio icon An illustration of an audio speaker. Audio Software icon An illustration of a 3. Software Images icon An illustration of two photographs. Images Donate icon An illustration of a heart shape Sweet Dreams: Philosophical Obstacles to a Science of Consciousness Ellipses icon An illustration of text ellipses. Sweet dreams : philosophical obstacles to a science of consciousness Item Preview. EMBED for wordpress. Want more? Advanced embedding details, examples, and help! Drawing on psychology, cognitive neuroscience, and artificial intelligence, he asserted that human consciousness is essentially the mental software that reorganizes the functional architecture of the brain. In Sweet Dreams, he recasts the Multiple Drafts Model as the "fame in the brain" model, as a background against which to examine the philosophical issues that "continue to bedevil the field. There are no reviews yet. Be the first one to write a review. Books for People with Print Disabilities. Internet Archive Books. Sweet Dreams (Dennett book) - Wikipedia Goodreads helps you keep track of books you want to read. Want to Read saving…. Want to Read Currently Reading Read. Other editions. Enlarge cover. Error rating book. Refresh and try again. Open Preview See a Problem? Details if other :. Thanks for telling us about the problem. Return to Book Page. Preview — Sweet Dreams by Daniel C. In the years since Daniel Dennett's influential Consciousness Explained was published inscientific research on consciousness has been a hotly contested battleground of rival theories--so rambunctious, Dennett observes, that several people are writing books just about the tumult. With Sweet DreamsDennett returns to the subject for revision and renewal of his theory In the years since Daniel Dennett's influential Consciousness Explained was published inscientific research on consciousness has been a hotly contested battleground of rival theories--so rambunctious, Dennett observes, that several people are writing books just about the tumult. With Sweet DreamsDennett returns to the subject for revision and renewal of his theory of consciousness, taking into account major empirical advances in the field since as well as recent theoretical challenges. In Consciousness ExplainedDennett proposed to replace the ubiquitous but bankrupt Cartesian Theater model which posits a privileged place in the brain where it all comes together for the magic show of consciousness with the Multiple Drafts Model. Drawing on psychology, cognitive neuroscience, and artificial intelligence, he asserted that human consciousness is essentially the mental software that reorganizes the functional architecture of the brain. In Sweet Dreamshe recasts the Multiple Drafts Model as the fame in the brain model, as a background against which to examine the philosophical issues that continue to bedevil the field. With his usual clarity and brio, Dennett enlivens his arguments with a variety of vivid examples. He isolates the Zombic Hunch that distorts much of the theorizing of both philosophers and scientists, and defends heterophenomenology, his third-person approach to the science of consciousness, against persistent misinterpretations and objections. The Sweet Dreams: Philosophical Obstacles to a Science of Consciousness challenge of Frank Jackson's thought experiment about Mary the color scientist is given a new rebuttal in the form of RoboMary, while his discussion of a famous card trick, The Tuned Deck, is designed to show that David Chalmers's Hard Problem is probably just a figment of theorists' misexploited imagination. In the final essay, the intrinsic nature of qualia is compared with the naively imagined intrinsic value of a dollar in Consciousness--How Much is That Sweet Dreams: Philosophical Obstacles to a Science of Consciousness Real Money? Get A Copy. Paperbackpages. Published September 8th by Bradford Book first published More Details Original Title. Jean Nicod Lectures. Other Editions Friend Reviews. To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up. To ask other readers questions about Sweet Dreamsplease sign up. Can this book be read on its own, or do I have to read Consciousness Explained first? See 1 question about Sweet Dreams…. Lists with This Book. Community Reviews. Showing Average rating 3. Rating details. More filters. Sort order. Aug 28, Greg rated it liked it Shelves: mind-and-brain. Something has been bugging me more and more about Dennett recently. The more I read about consciousness, whether it be from the perspective of neuroscience, philosophy, or psychology, the more I think there is a real question that needs to be answered about qualia. Qualia, the character of subjective experience. The redness of red. The smell of a rose. The feeling Sweet Dreams: Philosophical Obstacles to a Science of Consciousness anger or love, and the experience of pain. Chalmers dubbed this the "hard problem of consciousness", referring to the problem of e Something has been bugging me more and more about Dennett recently. Chalmers dubbed this the "hard problem of consciousness", referring to the problem of explaining why we have qualitative phenomenal experiences. And many brilliant philosophers have expended much energy trying to explain or explain away these qualia states in terms of the underlying nuerological processes. Dennett thinks there is no conversation to be had. Qualia do not exist. He spends a lot of time criticizing different views of qualia, stating that the fact that there is no clear consensus in regards to what philosophers mean by qualia is a huge problem for the debate rightly so. He provides thought experiment after thought experiment that showcase the many errors in logic that go into Sweet Dreams: Philosophical Obstacles to a Science of Consciousness normal conception of what qualia is. These are all valid criticisms, but criticizing the logic behind various conceptions of qualia does not change the fact that I have subjective experience, and right now neither philosophy nor neuroscience can explain how this subjective experience is substantiated by neuronal firing. This is Sweet Dreams: Philosophical Obstacles to a Science of Consciousness important question, one which we may never have an answer to for all I know. But denying that there is a question in the first place doesn't make any sense to me. One example that Dennett uses is an experiment where a series of alternating pictures are presented to subjects. The pictures are identical accept for one small part which is changed in color. Subjects are asked to push a button when they become aware of the difference in pictures which takes people a long time. He then asks if before you were aware of the difference, if your color qualia was changing as the image that falls on your retina, and sent to your visual Sweet Dreams: Philosophical Obstacles to a Science of Consciousness is obviously changing. He then proceeds to outline all sorts of problems with whatever answer you give. I'm as strong a materialist as Dennett is I guess until Chalmers convinces me otherwiseso to me, I have an even more vested interest in thinking that there needs to be an explanation for how and why qualia exists. Explaining how our neurophysiology substantiates experience, meaning, and a unified conscious experience is to me the holy grain of consciousness research. Am I missing something? Dennett is great about pointing out logical fallacies in regards to all sorts of theories of consciousness, but seems to be quite content to Sweet Dreams: Philosophical Obstacles to a Science of Consciousness all sorts of vague holes in his theories. View all 8 comments. Selon les critiques Chalmers, Nagel, Levine Il soutient : non. Jan 09, Leo Horovitz rated it really liked it Shelves: philosophyphilosophy- of-mindmindconsciousnessnon-fictionscience. After finishing Consciousness Explained recently and liking it very much, feeling convinced Dennett tackles the issues in the appropriate way, I felt a need to read this one next. Here, Dennett elaborates on his ideas that in order to understand consciousness, we need to take empirical findings seriously and if we do, we realize that there is no room for any center of consciousness in the brain. Rather, we find that activities are spread out over different areas having different functional roles After finishing Consciousness Explained recently and liking it very much, feeling convinced Dennett tackles the issues in the appropriate way, I felt a need to read this one next. Rather, we find that activities are spread out over different areas having different functional roles, somehow adding up to conscious experiences. He sketches a theory of how and why certain activities result in conscious awareness, Sweet Dreams: Philosophical Obstacles to a Science of Consciousness his earlier attempts through the multiple drafts model and fame models of