DOCSLIB.ORG

Crime and Consciousness: Science and Involuntary Acts Deborah W

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Crime and Consciousness: Science and Involuntary Acts Deborah W University of Minnesota Law School Scholarship Repository Minnesota Law Review 2002 Crime and Consciousness: Science and Involuntary Acts Deborah W. Denno Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.umn.edu/mlr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Denno, Deborah W., "Crime and Consciousness: Science and Involuntary Acts" (2002). Minnesota Law Review. 747. https://scholarship.law.umn.edu/mlr/747 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the University of Minnesota Law School. It has been accepted for inclusion in Minnesota Law Review collection by an authorized administrator of the Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Crime and Consciousness: Science and Involuntary Acts Deborah W. Dennot [T]he state of a man's mind is as much a fact as the state of his digestion.1 INTRODUCTION In 1906, psychologist Edouard Clapar~de experimented with the mind. He pricked the hand of a memory-impaired patient while greeting her with a pin concealed between his fingers. As always, the patient failed to recognize Claparode when the two soon met again; yet, she refused to shake his hand, explaining that it might be unpleasant but she did not know why.2 With this test, Clapar~de revealed the dynamics of 1 Professor of Law, Fordham University School of Law. I am most grateful to the following individuals for their comments on this Article: Jerome Bruner, Paul Chevigny, Edward Chikofsky, Dwight Denno, Hal Edgar, Phoebe Ellsworth, Cynthia Estlund, Robert Ferguson, Lawrence Fleischer, Katherine Franke, Kent Greenawalt, Christopher Hale, Nancy King, Dorie Klein, Benjamin Libet, Jack Litman, Henry Monaghan, Ren~e Romkens, Kendall Thomas, Vance Torbert, Lloyd Weinreb, Ian Weinstein, and R. George Wright. For comments on earlier versions of this Article, I thank the participants in presentations given at Cleveland Marshall School of Law (the Criminal Justice Forum), Columbia University School of Law, Emory University School of Law, Fordham University School of Law, the Institute of Advanced Legal Studies (Department of Advanced Studies, University of London), the University of Kentucky College of Law (Randall-Park Colloquium), the Law & Society Association Annual Meeting, New York University School of Law (the Hoffimger Criminal Justice Colloquium), the Renaissance Weekend 50 panels, Vanderbilt University School of Law, and Woodhull Medical and Mental Health Center (Grand Rounds, Department of Psychiatry). I very much appreciate the extraordinary reference support provided by the staffs at Fordham Law School Library, the Diamond Library at Columbia Law School, and the New York Public Library. This Article benefitted from the superb research assistance offered by Janice Greer, Natalie Milani, Michael Pereira, Marianna Politzer, and Michael Rudy, as well as the administrative excellence provided by Daniel Auld and Christian Steriti. Any errors in this Article are, of course, mine only. 1. Edgington v. Fitzmaurice, 29 Ch. D. 459, 483 (1885) (Bowen, L. J.). 2. E. Clapar~de, Recognition and "Me-ness," in ORGANIZATION AND MINNESOTA LAW REVIEW [Vol 87:269 "covert awareness"-the inconsistency between individuals' conscious acts and their unconscious memories, perceptions, 3 and judgments. Clapar~de's research was unusual for its time. For most of the twentieth century, the topic of consciousness, apart from Freudian theory, 4 was not considered fit for serious scientific PATHOLOGY OF THOUGHT 58, 68-75 (David Rapaport ed., trans., 1951) (discussing a patient suffering from Korsakoffs psychosis, a serious memory disorder that prevents individuals from recalling recent experiences). 3. Alan Cowey, Grasping the Essentials, NATURE, Jan. 10, 1991, at 102 (1991) [hereinafter Cowey, Grasping]. Current definitions of these conscious and unconscious processes, and the controversies concerning them, are presented in Part II of this Article. The term "covert awareness" refers to the empirical study of unconscious processes; it is therefore devoid of the psychoanalytic and psychodynamic theories that typically accompany the meaning of the term "unconscious." See Alan Cowey, MacCurdy and Memories: The Origins of Implicit Processing and Covert Awareness, 50 BRAIN RES. BULL. 449, 449 (1999); Glyn W. Humphreys et al., Covert Processing in Different Visual Recognition Systems, in THE NEUROPSYCHOLOGY OF CONSCIOUSNESS 39, 39 (A.D. Milner & M.D. Rugg eds., 1992); see also Matthew Hugh Erdelyi, Psychodynamics and the Unconscious, 47 AM. PSYCHOLOGIST 784, 784 (1992) (explaining that "[alithough the unconscious need not be logically tied to the psychodynamic approach, in practice it usually is"); John F. Kihlstrom et al., The Psychological Unconscious: Found, Lost, and Regained, 47 AM. PSYCHOLOGIST 788, 788 (1992) (noting that "the psychological unconscious documented by latter-day scientific psychology is quite different from what Sigmund Freud and his psychoanalytic colleagues had in mind in fin de si6cle Vienna"). Modern research differentiates between the general concept of "unconscious cognitive processes" and the specific theories presented in Freud's idea of the dynamic unconscious (psychoanalytic theories) or in the ideas of those who adopt Freud's broad outline, but not necessarily all of its details (psychodynamic theories). Philip M. Merikle, Perception Without Awareness: CriticalAwareness, 47 AM. PSYCHOLOGIST 792, 792 (1992). In line with recent research and commentary, this Article uses the terms "conscious" and "unconscious" because increasingly they are interpreted more broadly and are not associated simply with psychoanalytic and psychodynamic theories. 4. Typically, Freud is credited with the "discovery" of the unconscious. Merikle, supra note 3, at 792. A general awareness of the unconscious mind, however, can be traced to antiquity. See LANCELOT LAW WHYTE, THE UNCONSCIOUS BEFORE FREUD 26 (1960). Historians credit the modern origin of the distinction between conscious and unconscious processes to philosophers responding to Ren6 Descartes's identification of the "mind" with conscious thinking. See id. at 26-28. "[T]he idea of unconscious mental processes was, in many aspects, conceivable around 1700, topical around 1800, and became effective around 1900, thanks to the imaginative efforts of a large number of individuals of varied interests and many lands." Id. at 63 (emphasis omitted); see also HENRI F. ELLENBERGER, THE DISCOVERY OF THE UNCONSCIOUS: THE HISTORY AND EVOLUTION OF DYNAMIC PSYCHIATRY 3 (1970) (noting that the origins of "the systematic investigation of the unconscious mind ... can be traced back in time through a long line of ancestors and forerunners"). After the 1868 publication of Eduard von Hartmann's bestseller, Philosophy of the 2002] CRIME AND CONSCIOUSNESS study.5 Consciousness was the "ghost in the machine," 6 an unobservable, immeasurable, phenomenon rendered irrelevant to objective science. 7 Starting in the 1970s,8 however, interest in the topic surged to the current point of "explosion."9 The scientific "race" to understand consciousness is on 10 and the potential for discovery seems boundless." This race within science has far-reaching legal implications. Criminal law, in particular, presumes that most human behavior is voluntary and that individuals are consciously aware of their acts. On the other hand, it also presumes that individuals who act unconsciously, such as sleepwalkers, are not "acting" at all.'2 Under the criminal law's voluntary act requirement, unconscious individuals can be totally acquitted even if their behavior causes serious harm. 13 In contrast to these legal "dichotomies" (voluntary/ Unconscious, the use of the term "unconscious" became fashionable. EDUARD VON HARTMANN, PHILOSOPHY OF THE UNCONSCIOUS (William Chatterton Coupland trans., Macmillan 1884) (1868). An 1877 article by the English philosopher and scientist George Henry Lewes reveals the sophisticated level of dialogue concerning the meaning and definition of these concepts. George Henry Lewes, Consciousness and Unconsciousness, 2 MIND 156, 157-63 (1877). 5. See infra notes 6-7, 119-30, 180-81 and accompanying text. 6. See generally GILBERT RYLE, THE CONCEPT OF MIND 15-18 (1966). "Ghost in the machine" is Gilbert Ryle's derisive phrase depicting the Cartesian view of the human body as an entirely physical thing (the machine) and the human mind as an entirely nonphysical thing (the ghost) that somehow resides within and controls the body. See id. at 11, 15-18. Ryle attempts to undermine academia's centuries-long reliance on the mind/body dualism, contending that the distinctions offered by Descartes are false. Id. 7. BERNARD J. BAARS, A COGNITIVE THEORY OF CONSCIOUSNESS 5 (1988) (noting that "the twentieth century so far has been remarkable for its rejection of the whole topic [of consciousness] as 'unscientific'); see also Anthony G. Greenwald, Unconscious Cognition Reclaimed, 47 AM. PSYCHOLOGIST 766, 766 (1992) (noting that until recently, academic psychologists' skeptical view of the empirical validity of unconscious cognition "partly explains the omission of the topic of unconscious cognition from many textbooks, and even the omission of the word unconscious from the vocabularies of many psychologists"). 8. There were a few exceptions to this paralysis. See, e.g., Cowey, Grasping, supra note 3, at 102 (discussing the work of John MacCurdy, lecturer in psychopathology at Cambridge, who developed a method of studying such dissociations objectively and quantitatively in the
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Journal of Philosophy, Inc
    Journal of Philosophy, Inc. The Harder Problem of Consciousness Author(s): Ned Block Source: The Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 99, No. 8 (Aug., 2002), pp. 391-425 Published by: Journal of Philosophy, Inc. Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3655621 Accessed: 04-08-2015 15:41 UTC Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/ info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Journal of Philosophy, Inc. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Journal of Philosophy. http://www.jstor.org This content downloaded from 128.122.149.154 on Tue, 04 Aug 2015 15:41:39 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions THE JOURNAL OF PHILOSOPHY VOLUME XCIX, NO. 8, AUGUST 2002 THE HARDER PROBLEM OF CONSCIOUSNESS* H. Huxley' famously said: "How it is that anything so re- T. markable as a state of consciousness comes about as a result of irritating nervous tissue, is just as unaccountable as the ap- pearance of Djin when Aladdin rubbed his lamp" (ibid., p. 19). We do not see how to explain a state of consciousness in terms of its neurological basis. This is the hard problemof consciousness.2 My aim here is to present another problem of consciousness.
    [Show full text]
  • Iv. Causal Interactions of Consciousness, Unconscious Mind and Brain1
    IV. CAUSAL INTERACTIONS OF CONSCIOUSNESS, UNCONSCIOUS MIND AND BRAIN1 MAX VELMANS 1. WHAT NEEDS TO BE EXPLAINED The potential effect of the mind on the body is also taken for granted in psychosomatic medicine. But how the conscious mind exercises its influ- ence is not easy to understand. In principle, there are four distinct ways in which body/brain and mind/consciousness might enter into causal relation- ships. There might be physical causes of physical states, physical causes of mental states, mental causes of mental states, and mental causes of physical states. Establishing which forms of causation are effective in practice is important, not just for a deeper understanding of mind/body interactions, but also for the proper treatment of some forms of illness and disease. Within conventional medicine, physicalÆphysical causation is taken for granted. Consequently, the proper treatment for physical disorders is assumed to be some form of physical intervention. Psychiatry takes the efficacy of physicalÆmental causation for granted, along with the assump- tion that the proper treatment for psychological disorders may involve psychoactive drugs, neurosurgery and so on. Many forms of psychotherapy take mentalÆmental causation for granted, and assume that psychological disorders can be alleviated by means of “talking cures”, guided imagery, hypnosis and other forms of mental intervention. Psychosomatic medicine assumes that mentalÆphysical causation can be effective. Consequently, under some circumstances, a physical disorder (for example, hysterical paralysis) may require a mental (psychotherapeutic) intervention. Given the extensive evidence for all these causal interactions (cf. readings in Velmans 1996a), how are we to make sense of them? 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Dancing at Lughnasa
    1 Dancing at Lughnasa ACT ONE When the play opens MICHAEL is standing downstage left in a pool of light. The rest of the stage is in darkness. Immediately MICHAEL begins speaking slowly bring up the lights on the rest of the stage. Around the stage and at a distance from MICHAEL the other characters stand motionless in formal tableau. MAGGIE is at the kitchen window (right). CHRIS is at the front door. KATE at extreme stage right. ROSE and GERRY sit on the garden seat. JACK stands beside ROSE. AGNES is upstage left. They hold these positions while MICHAEL talks to the audience. MICHAEL. When I cast my mind back to that summer of 1936 different kinds of memories offer themselves to me. We got our first wireless set that summer – well, a sort of set; and it obsessed us. And because it arrived as August was about too begin, my Aunt Maggie – She was the joker of the family – she suggested we give it a name. She wanted to call it Lugh* after the old Celtic God of the Harvest. Because in the old days August the First was La Lughnasa, the feast day of the pagan god, Lugh; and the days and weeks of harvesting that followed were called the Festival of Lughnasa. But Aunt Kate – she was a national schoolteacher and a very proper woman --she said it would be sinful to christen an inanimate object with any kind of name, not to talk of a pagan god. So we just called it Marconi because that was the name emblazoned on the set.
    [Show full text]
  • Philosophy of Mind
    From the Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy Philosophy of Mind Frank Jackson, Georges Rey Philosophical Concept ‘Philosophy of mind’, and ‘philosophy of psychology’ are two terms for the same general area of philosophical inquiry: the nature of mental phenomena and their connection with behaviour and, in more recent discussions, the brain. Much work in this area reflects a revolution in psychology that began mid-century. Before then, largely in reaction to traditional claims about the mind being non-physical (see Dualism; Descartes), many thought that a scientific psychology should avoid talk of ‘private’ mental states. Investigation of such states had seemed to be based on unreliable introspection (see Introspection, psychology of), not subject to independent checking (see Private language argument), and to invite dubious ideas of telepathy (see Parapsychology). Consequently, psychologists like B.F. Skinner and J.B. Watson, and philosophers like W.V. Quine and Gilbert Ryle argued that scientific psychology should confine itself to studying publicly observable relations between stimuli and responses (see Behaviourism, methodological and scientific; Behaviourism, analytic). However, in the late 1950s, several developments began to change all this: (i) The experiments behaviourists themselves ran on animals tended to refute behaviouristic hypotheses, suggesting that the behaviour of even rats had to be understood in terms of mental states (see Learning; Animal language and thought). (ii) The linguist Noam Chomsky drew attention to the surprising complexity of the natural languages that children effortlessly learn, and proposed ways of explaining this complexity in terms of largely unconscious mental phenomena. (iii) The revolutionary work of Alan Turing (see Turing machines) led to the development of the modern digital computer.
    [Show full text]
  • Whole-Brain Models to Explore Altered States of Consciousness from the Bottom Up
    brain sciences Review Whole-Brain Models to Explore Altered States of Consciousness from the Bottom Up Rodrigo Cofré 1,* , Rubén Herzog 2 , Pedro A.M. Mediano 3 , Juan Piccinini 4,5, Fernando E. Rosas 6,7,8 , Yonatan Sanz Perl 4,9 and Enzo Tagliazucchi 4,5 1 CIMFAV-Ingemat, Facultad de Ingeniería, Universidad de Valparaíso, Valparaíso 2340000, Chile 2 Centro Interdisciplinario de Neurociencia de Valparaíso, Universidad de Valparaíso, Valparaíso 2360103, Chile; [email protected] 3 Department of Psychology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 3EB, UK; [email protected] 4 National Scientific and Technical Research Council, Buenos Aires C1033AAJ, Argentina; [email protected] (J.P.); [email protected] (Y.S.P.); [email protected] (E.T.) 5 Buenos Aires Physics Institute and Physics Department, University of Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires C1428EGA, Argentina 6 Centre for Psychedelic Research, Department of Brain Science, Imperial College London, London SW7 2DD, UK; [email protected] 7 Data Science Institute, Imperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, UK 8 Centre for Complexity Science, Imperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, UK 9 Departamento de Matemáticas y Ciencias, Universidad de San Andrés, Buenos Aires B1644BID, Argentina * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 26 July 2020; Accepted: 7 September 2020; Published: 10 September 2020 Abstract: The scope of human consciousness includes states departing from what most of us experience as ordinary wakefulness. These altered states of consciousness constitute a prime opportunity to study how global changes in brain activity relate to different varieties of subjective experience. We consider the problem of explaining how global signatures of altered consciousness arise from the interplay between large-scale connectivity and local dynamical rules that can be traced to known properties of neural tissue.
    [Show full text]
  • Velmans, Max and Nagasawa, Yujin. 2012. Introduction to Monist Alternatives to Physicalism
    Velmans, Max and Nagasawa, Yujin. 2012. Introduction to Monist Alternatives to Physicalism. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 19(9-10), pp. 7-18. ISSN 1355-8250 [Article] https://research.gold.ac.uk/id/eprint/26069/ The version presented here may differ from the published, performed or presented work. Please go to the persistent GRO record above for more information. If you believe that any material held in the repository infringes copyright law, please contact the Repository Team at Goldsmiths, University of London via the following email address: [email protected]. The item will be removed from the repository while any claim is being investigated. For more information, please contact the GRO team: [email protected] 1 Introduction to Monist Alternatives to Physicalism Max Velmans and Yujin Nagasawa In M. Velmans & Y. Nagasawa (eds.) (2012) Journal of Consciousness Studies: Special Issue on Monist Alternatives to Physicalism, Vol. 19, No. 9-10, 7-18. In the history of Western thought, attempts to understand the relationship of mind and consciousness to body and brain have largely been shaped by competing monist versus dualist convictions about whether these are different types of entity or process. Bodies and brains seem to be very different from minds and consciousness. Arms and legs for example seem to be made of completely different “stuff” to thoughts and feelings. Nor can one find qualia by examining bits of the brain. Consequently, dualists argue that body/brain and mind/consciousness are different types of thing. There is also extensive evidence that the body and brain affect mind and consciousness via the senses (for example that the visual system affects visual experience) and that mind and consciousness affect the body and brain (for example in the way that visual experiences, thoughts, and conscious choices influence subsequent actions).
    [Show full text]
  • Proposal for Contemporary Debates in Philosophy of Mind
    Proposal for Contemporary Debates in Philosophy of Mind Edited by Jonathan Cohen∗and Brian McLaughliny This volume will introduce the central debates in contemporary philosophy of mind. The volume will include ten pairs of newly commissioned essays ad- vocating opposing viewpoints | one for each of the ten topics listed below. In addition, the editors will provide a substantive introduction that will lay out the necessary background for the debates and locate the individual topics within philosophy of mind and in relation to one another. The essays will each be around 6000 to 8000 words in length, and will be accessible to upper-level undergraduates and graduate students. Consequently, we expect that the volume could be used as text for advanced courses in phi- losophy of mind. However, the essays will also represent the state of play in the areas, and will contain original argumentation by eminent philosophers, so it will also be an important text for academics working in philosophy of mind and adjoining areas. We have organized our questions under the three headings that, in our minds, structure the central debates in contemporary philosophy of mind: questions about the ontology of the mental, questions about the nature of mental content, and questions about the nature of consciousness. For many of the questions on our list, we have suggested a number of backup authors in case our first choices are unable to write the essays. Although some names appear more than once on our list (including appearances as backup authors) we would not allow more than one piece by a single author in the volume.
    [Show full text]
  • A Defense of a Sentiocentric Approach to Environmental Ethics
    University of Tennessee, Knoxville TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Doctoral Dissertations Graduate School 8-2012 Minding Nature: A Defense of a Sentiocentric Approach to Environmental Ethics Joel P. MacClellan University of Tennessee, Knoxville, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_graddiss Part of the Ethics and Political Philosophy Commons Recommended Citation MacClellan, Joel P., "Minding Nature: A Defense of a Sentiocentric Approach to Environmental Ethics. " PhD diss., University of Tennessee, 2012. https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_graddiss/1433 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Doctoral Dissertations by an authorized administrator of TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a dissertation written by Joel P. MacClellan entitled "Minding Nature: A Defense of a Sentiocentric Approach to Environmental Ethics." I have examined the final electronic copy of this dissertation for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the equirr ements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, with a major in Philosophy. John Nolt, Major Professor We have read this dissertation and recommend its acceptance: Jon Garthoff, David Reidy, Dan Simberloff Accepted for the Council: Carolyn R. Hodges Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School (Original signatures are on file with official studentecor r ds.) MINDING NATURE: A DEFENSE OF A SENTIOCENTRIC APPROACH TO ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS A Dissertation Presented for the Doctor of Philosophy Degree The University of Tennessee, Knoxville Joel Patrick MacClellan August 2012 ii The sedge is wither’d from the lake, And no birds sing.
    [Show full text]
  • Georges Rey, Philosophy, Univ of Maryland, College Park 20742; [email protected]
    Georges Rey, Philosophy, Univ of Maryland, College Park 20742; [email protected] NEW 2009 VERSION (an expansion of the version that appeared in Martin, R. and Kolak, D., The Experience of Philosophy, 6th ed., Oxford UP, 2005) 21 October 2009 Meta-atheism: Religious Avowal as Self-Deception (Long Version)1 1. Introduction I’m not a professional philosopher of religion and have no special knowledge of theology. However, I regularly teach an introductory course in philosophy in which I discuss the standard arguments for the existence of God. The exercise has produced in me a certain incredulity: I have come increasingly to wonder how such extremely smart people, like Aquinas or Descartes, could advance such patently bad arguments, as I think most philosophers (even those who claim to “believe”) would take those arguments to be. At any rate, I find it hard to believe that anyone really buys the “ontological argument,” or any of Aquinas’ “five ways.” Existence may or may not be a predicate, and there may or may not be unmoved movers, uncaused causers, and undesigned teleological systems, but these arguments don’t remotely establish their intended conclusion, the existence of anything like the traditional Christian God with His astounding properties of, e.g., eternality, omniscience, omnipotence and necessary benevolence (for brevity, I’ll refer to these latter properties as “omni” properties, a being possessing them as an “omni” being). And “religious experiences” or “intuitions” no matter how ecstatic or profound, could obviously be explained by any number of other far more modest hypotheses (I'll briefly discuss all these issues in §2 below).
    [Show full text]
  • Augustinian Values and Signs of the Times by Gary N. Mccloskey
    . Occasional Paper #2 Love of God and Love of Neighbor: Augustinian Values and Signs of the Times by Gary N. McCloskey O.S.A.* Presented at The O.S.A. Educators International Congress Rome, Italy July 2005 * All Rights Reserved 2005 for Text by Gary N. McCloskey, O.S.A. Rev. Gary N. McCloskey, O.S.A., is Chaired Professor of Augustinian Pedagogy and Dean of the College at Merrimack College, North Andover, Massachusetts. In these positions Dr. McCloskey directs the Saint Augustine Institute for Learning and Teaching as part of the college’s efforts to enhance its Augustinian distinctive competence. In addition to his Augustinian pedagogy he has provided leadership for social justice work in higher education. He has also served as Director of Justice and Peace for the Villanova Province. When I was asked to make a presentation on Augustinian educational values and the signs of the times, the scope was obviously daunting. One way to approach such a task was to find a lens through which I could focus my ideas. In the face of the amount of writings by and about Augustine as well as my not being an Augustine scholar by training I was unsure of a direction. Yet, the fact of the limitations of my study of Augustine led me to the one text with which I am most familiar, The Rule. Here I found at its beginning my starting point, “Before all else, dear brothers, love God and then your neighbor, because these are the chief commandments given to us.”1 No matter who is the author2 of these words, their Augustinian character is undeniable.
    [Show full text]
  • Global Workspace Theory: a Prominent Scientific Approach to the Nature of Consciousness
    RESEARCH PAPER Philosophy Volume : 3 | Issue : 9 | Sept 2013 | ISSN - 2249-555X Global Workspace Theory: A Prominent Scientific Approach to the Nature of Consciousness KEYWORDS Global work space, modularity, hard problem, multiple draft model Dr. Sheeja O.K Lecturer (on Contract), Dept. of Philosophy, University of Calicut, Calicut University P.O, Malappuram (Dt) Kerala-673 635. ABSTRACT The objective of this paper is to present one prominent scientific approach to consciousness by Bernard J. Baars- the Global workspace Theory (GWT). Global Workspace Theory holds the view that the brain has a fleeting integrative capacity that enables access between functions that are otherwise separate. Consciousness is the pri- mary agent of such a global access function in humans and other mammals. GW holds the view that the role of conscious- ness is to facilitate information exchange among multiple specialized unconscious processes in the brain. Consciousness is a state of global activation in a “workspace”. Somewhat similar idea has been introduced by Jerry Fodor. Fodor has placed greatest emphasis on information encapsulation. But there are some criticisms too. GWT does not answer the hard problem of consciousness. And Dennett doubts whether GWT is a “Cartesian Theatre”. However, Baar’s account of global workspace is a promising scientific approach in explaining consciousness. brain sources; unconscious sensory processing is much The problem of consciousness is not just one problem. Rather more limited. it is an ambiguous term referring to many different Phenome- 2. Consciousness perception, inner speech and visual Im- na. These problems can be divided under two headings hard agery enable working memory functions including ex- and easy problems.
    [Show full text]
  • On the Plausibility of Idealism: Refuting Criticisms
    On the Plausibility of Idealism: Refuting Criticisms Bernardo Kastrup DOI: 10.2478/disp-2017-0025 BIBLID [0873-626X (2017) 44; pp. 13–34] Abstract Several alternatives vie today for recognition as the most plausible ontology, from physicalism to panpsychism. By and large, these on- tologies entail that physical structures circumscribe consciousness by bearing phenomenal properties within their physical boundaries. The ontology of idealism, on the other hand, entails that all physical struc- tures are circumscribed by consciousness in that they exist solely as phe- nomenality in the first place. Unlike the other alternatives, however, idealism is often considered implausible today, particularly by analytic philosophers. A reason for this is the strong intuition that an objective world transcending phenomenality is a self-evident fact. Other argu- ments—such as the dependency of phenomenal experience on brain function, the evidence for the existence of the universe before the origin of conscious life, etc.—are also often cited. In this essay, I will argue that these objections against the plausibility of idealism are false. As such, this essay seeks to show that idealism is an entirely plausible ontology. Keywords Idealism, physicalism, panpsychism, cosmopsychism, mind-body problem. 1 Introduction The mainstream physicalist ontology posits that reality is constitut- ed by irreducible physical entities—which Strawson (2006: 9) has called ‘ultimates’—outside and independent of phenomenality. Ac- cording to physicalism, these ultimates, in and of themselves, do not instantiate phenomenal properties. In other words, there is nothing it is like to be an ultimate, phenomenality somehow emerging only at the level of complex arrangements of ultimates.
    [Show full text]