structure for 'Nature of Minds'    |     alphabetical list of themes    |     unexpand these ideas

15. Nature of Minds / B. Features of Minds / 1. Consciousness / b. Essence of consciousness

[the defining aspect of being conscious]

12 ideas
We can understand thinking occuring without imagination or sensation [Descartes]
     Full Idea: We can understand thinking without imagination or sensation, as is quite clear to anyone who attends to the matter.
     From: René Descartes (Principles of Philosophy [1646], I.53)
     A reaction: We may certainly take it that Descartes means if it is understandable then it is logically possible. To believe that thinking could occur without imagination strikes me as an astonishing error. I take imagination to be more central than understanding.
Consciousness is shaped dialectically, by opposing forces and concepts [Hegel, by Aho]
     Full Idea: In 'The Phenomenology of Spirit' Hegel offers a panoptic account of Western consciousness as a dialectical process shaped by opposing principles - such as subject/object, freedom/determinism, temporal/eternal, and particular/universal.
     From: report of Georg W.F.Hegel (Phenomenology of Spirit [1807]) by Kevin Aho - Existentialism: an introduction 2 'Subjective'
     A reaction: A helpful pointer, for us poor analytic philosophers, who stare in bewilderment at Hegel's stuff, despite its apparent importance. At moment it is the politics that strikes me as most interesting in Hegel. This is cultured consciousness, pre-Marx.
Pure consciousness is a sealed off system of actual Being [Husserl]
     Full Idea: Consciousness, considered in its 'purity', must be reckoned as a self-contained system of Being, a system of actual Being, into which nothing can penetrate, and from which nothing can escape.
     From: Edmund Husserl (Ideas: intro to pure phenomenology [1913], II.3.049)
     A reaction: Recorded without comment, to show that among phenomenologists there is a way of thinking about consciousness which is a long way from analytic discussions of the topic.
Sartre says consciousness is just directedness towards external objects [Sartre, by Rowlands]
     Full Idea: Sartre defends a view of consciousness as nothing but a directedness towards objects, insisting that these objects are transcendent with respect to that consciousness; hence Sartre is one of the first genuine externalists.
     From: report of Jean-Paul Sartre (Being and Nothingness [1943]) by Mark Rowlands - Externalism Ch.1
     A reaction: An ancestor here is, I think, Schopenhauer (Idea 4166). The idea is attractive, as we are brought up with idea that we have a thing called 'consciousness', but if you removed its contents there would literally be nothing left.
Consciousness always transcends itself [Sartre]
     Full Idea: It is of the essence of consciousness to transcend itself
     From: Jean-Paul Sartre (Sketch for a Theory of the Emotions [1939], §III)
     A reaction: As usual, I am a bit baffled by these sorts of pronouncement. Sounds like an oxymoron to me. Maybe it is a development of Schopenhauer's thought.
Consciousness and experience of qualities are not the same [Armstrong]
     Full Idea: Consciousness and experience of qualities are often run together - a serious mistake, I think.
     From: David M. Armstrong (Pref to new 'Materialist Theory' [1992], p.xvii)
     A reaction: A difficult claim to evaluate. Can we experience redness without being conscious of it? Could there be consciousness (e.g. of concepts) which didn't involve any qualities? I suspect that qualities are more basic than intentionality or consciousness.
Heidegger showed that passing time is the key to consciousness [Derrida]
     Full Idea: Heidegger showed us the importance of transient time for consciousness.
     From: Jacques Derrida (works [1990]), quoted by Barry Stocker - Derrida on Deconstruction
The mind experiences space, but it is not experienced as spatial [Searle]
     Full Idea: Although we experience objects both spatially and temporally, our consciousness itself is not experienced as spatial, though it is experienced as temporally extended.
     From: John Searle (The Rediscovery of the Mind [1992], Ch. 6)
     A reaction: This observation was made by Descartes. This seems to require that I experience objects spatially, AND experience my consciousness. Do I experience the time passing, as well as the river moving? Einstein says if it is in time, it must be in space.
An organism is conscious if and only if there is something it is like to be that organism [Nagel]
     Full Idea: An organism only has conscious mental states if and only if there is something that it is like to be that organism.
     From: Thomas Nagel (What is it like to be a bat? [1974], p.166)
     A reaction: It is hard to argue with this, but one should push on and ask what features of its consciousness make it such that there is a 'what it is like'. What is it like to have a subconscious mind, or be deeply asleep, or drive while daydreaming?
Is consciousness a type of self-awareness, or is being self-aware a way of being conscious? [Gulick]
     Full Idea: Is consciousness just a special type of self-awareness, or is being self-aware a special way of being conscious?
     From: Robert van Gulick (Mirror Mirror - Is That All? [2006], Intro)
     A reaction: This is a really good key question, which has hovered over the debate since Locke's definition of a person (as 'self-aware'). I take the self to be a mechanism of most brains, which is prior to consciousness. Maybe the two are inseparable.
Can we be aware but not conscious? [Chalmers]
     Full Idea: Consciousness is always accompanied by awareness, but awareness as I have described it need not be accompanied by consciousness.
     From: David J.Chalmers (The Conscious Mind [1996], 1.1.5)
     A reaction: One should consult Chalmers, but he is stretching the English word 'awareness' rather far. This road leads to saying that thermostats are 'aware', and information is aware of its content, which is probably very wrong indeed. Compare Idea 2415.
Consciousness is a process (of neural interactions), not a location, thing, property, connectivity, or activity [Edelman/Tononi]
     Full Idea: Consciousness is neither a thing, nor a simple property. ..The conscious 'dynamic core' of the brain is a process, not a thing or a place, and is defined in terms of neural interactions, not in terms of neural locations, connectivity or activity.
     From: G Edelman / G Tononi (Consciousness: matter becomes imagination [2000], Ch.12)
     A reaction: This must be of great interest to philosophers. Edelman is adamant that it is not any specific neurons. The nice question is: what would it be like to have your brain slowed down? Presumably we would experience steps in the process. Is he a functionalist?