Repository | Journal | Volume | Articles
(2006) Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 5 (1).
Much of the difficulty in assessing theories of consciousness stems from their advocates not supplying adequate or convincing characterisations of the phenomenon (or data) they hope to explain. Yet, to make any reasonable assessment this is precisely what is required, for it is not as if our "pre-theoretical' intuitions are philosophically innocent. In what follows, I will attempt to reveal, using a recent debate between Chalmers and Dennett as a foil, why, in approaching this topic, we cannot characterise the data purely first-personally or third-personally nor, concomitantly, can we start such investigations using either first-personal or third-personal methods.
Publication details
DOI: 10.1007/s11097-005-9013-8
Full citation:
Hutto, D. (2006). Turning hard problems on their heads. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 5 (1), pp. 75-88.
This document is unfortunately not available for download at the moment.