Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorHvorecký, Juraj
dc.date.accessioned2023-11-17T08:20:45Z
dc.date.available2023-11-17T08:20:45Z
dc.date.issued2024
dc.date.submitted2023-11-16T09:21:42Z
dc.identifierhttps://library.oapen.org/handle/20.500.12657/85152
dc.identifier.urihttps://directory.doabooks.org/handle/20.500.12854/121634
dc.description.abstractThis chapter evaluates some basic assumptions behind the “dual” theories of phenomenal consciousness and finds them problematic for at least some examples of conscious episodes. Because the dual theories claim to be universalist in nature, even small number of counterexamples damages their status. I will present evidence, both empirical and conceptual, that demonstrates untenability of the dualist assumptions that conscious phenomenality and its unconscious counterpart possess essentially the same qualities. In doing so, I will primarily attack the claim that is shared by many dual theorists that the procedure responsible for bringing phenomenal content into consciousness serves this sole function and does not influence phenomenal qualities of content. I use the term orthogonality, first introduced in Vosgerau et al. (2008), as a convenient shortcut for the conception in which consciousness and content come unproblematically apart. I will conclude by hinting at an alternative proposal that explains emergence of conscious phenomenality as a single step operation.
dc.languageEnglish
dc.rightsopen access
dc.subject.otherattention; higher-order theories of consciousness; inattentional blindness; masking; mental qualities; neurophenomenal structuralism; phenomenal content; unconscious mental states
dc.titleChapter 10 Troubles with the Orthogonality Thesis
dc.typechapter
oapen.identifier.doi10.4324/ 9781003409526- 13
oapen.relation.isPublishedByfa69b019-f4ee-4979-8d42-c6b6c476b5f0
oapen.relation.isPartOfBookConscious and Unconscious Mentality
oapen.relation.isbn9781032529790
oapen.relation.isbn9781032529745
oapen.imprintRoutledge
oapen.pages12
oapen.review.commentsTaylor & Francis open access titles are reviewed as a minimum at proposal stage by at least two external peer reviewers and an internal editor (additional reviews may be sought and additional content reviewed as required).
peerreview.review.typeProposal
peerreview.anonymitySingle-anonymised
peerreview.reviewer.typeInternal editor
peerreview.reviewer.typeExternal peer reviewer
peerreview.review.stagePre-publication
peerreview.open.reviewNo
peerreview.publish.responsibilityPublisher
peerreview.idbc80075c-96cc-4740-a9f3-a234bc2598f1
peerreview.titleProposal review


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

open access
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as open access