Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-vsgnj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-21T00:39:25.988Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Descriptive Phenomenology and the Problem of Consciousness

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2020

Denis Fisette
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

What is phenomenology's contribution to contemporary debates in the philosophy of mind? I am here concerned with this question, and in particular with phenomenology's contribution to what has come to be called the problem of (intentional) consciousness. The problem of consciousness has constituted the focal point of classical phenomenology as well as the main problem, and indeed perhaps the stumbling block, of the philosophy of mind in the last two decades (Fisette and Poirier 2000). Many philosophers of mind, for instance, Thomas Nagel (1974), Ned Block (1995), Owen Flanagan (1977), Colin McGinn (1991) and David Chalmers (1996), have acknowledged the properly phenomenological character of this problem; Nagel is even willing to entrust the study of phenomenal consciousness to what he calls an “objective phenomenology.” Yet, the phenomenology to which these philosophers resort has little to do with the conceptual framework that was developed within the phenomenological tradition. They put forward an entity they term “phenomenal consciousness,” but only in the hope that it may be explained by means of the theories that currently prevail in the philosophy of mind or in cognitive sciences.

Type
Research Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Philosophy Supplementary Volume , Volume 29: The Problem of Consciousness - New Essays in Phenomenological Philosophy of Mind , 2003 , pp. 33 - 61
Copyright
Copyright © The Authors 2003

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anscombe, E. (1963). Intention. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Anscombe, E. (1979). “Under a Description,” Nous 13: 219–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bell, D. (1989) “A Brentanian Philosophy of Arithmetic,” Brentano Studien 2: 139–44.Google Scholar
Block, N. (1995). “On a confusion about the function of consciousness,” Behavioral and Brain Sciences 18: 227–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Block, N., Flanagan, O., and Güzeldere, G., eds. (1997). The Nature of Consciousness: Philosophical Debates. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Brentano, F. C. (1874). Psychologie vom empirischen Standpunkte. Leipzig: Meiner, 1924.Google Scholar
Brentano, F. (1890/1). Deskriptive Psychologie. Hamburg, Meiner, 1982.Google Scholar
Chisholm, R. (1964). “The Descriptive Element in the Concept of Action,” Journal of Philosophy 61: 613–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chalmers, D. J. (1996). The Conscious Mind. In Search of a Fundamental Theory. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Crick, F. and Koch, C. (1997). “Towards a Neurobiological Theory of Consciousness,“ In Block, N., Flanagan, O., and Güzeldere, G. (eds.), The Nature of Consciousness: Philosophical Debates, pp. 277–92. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Davidson, D. (1970). “Mental Events.” In Davidson, D., Essays on Actions and Events. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1980.Google Scholar
Davidson, D. (1980). Essays on Actions and Events. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dennett, D. C. (1987). The Intentional Stance. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Dennett, D.C. (1991) “Real Patterns,” Journal of Philosophy 88: 27–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dilthey, W. (1977). Descriptive Psyclwlogy and Historical Understanding. The Hague: Nijhoff.Google Scholar
Dreyfus, Hubert L. (1972). What Computers Can't Do: The Limits of Artificial Intelligence. New York: Harper Colophon Books.Google Scholar
Dreyfus, H. (2001). henomenological Description versus Rational Reconstruction, Revue internationale de philosophie, 181 96.Google Scholar
Dreyfus, H., and Hall, H., eds. (1982). Husserl, Intentionality and Cognitive Sciences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Fisette, D. (1996). “Davidson on Norms and the Explanation of Intentional Behavior.” In Marion, M. and Cohen, R. S., eds. Logic and Philosophy of Science in Québec, Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Boston, Dordrecht: Kluwer. 139–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fisette, D. (2002). “Erläuterungen: Logical Analysis vs. Phenomenological Descriptions.” In Feist, R., ed. Husserl and the Natural Sciences, Ottawa, Ottawa University Press (forthcoming).Google Scholar
Fisette, D., ed. (1999). Consciousness and Intentionality: Models and Modalities of Attribution. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fisette, D., and Poirier, P. (2000). La philosophie de l'esprit: état des lieux. Paris: Vrin.Google Scholar
Flanagan, O. (1997). “Prospects for a unified theory of consciousness or, what dreams are made of.” In Cohen, J. and Schooler, J., eds. Scientific Approaches to Consciousness. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Frege, G. (1980). Translations from the Philosophical Writings of Gottlob Frege. Edited by Geach, Peter and Black, Max. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Gibson, J. J. (1979). The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
Haugeland, J. (1998). Having Thought: Essays in the Philosophy of Mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Husserl, Edmund, Gesammelte Werke. Auf Grund des Nachlasses veröffentlicht in Gemeinschaft mit dem Husserl-Archiv an der Universität Köln vom Husserl Archiv (Leuven) unter Leitung von S. Ijsseling, Den Haag, 1950-, Husserliana. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Kim, J. (1998). Mind in a Physical World. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levine, J. (1997). “On leaving out what it's like.” In Block, N., Flanagan, O., and Güzeldere, G. (eds.), The Nature of Consciousness: Philosophical Debates, pp. 543–56. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
McGinn, C. (1991). The Problem of Consciousness: Essays Toward a Resolution. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Merleau-Ponty, M. (1942). La structure du comportement, 3d ed. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1953.Google Scholar
Nagel, T. (1974). “What is it like to be a bat?” Philosophical Review 83:435–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petitot, J., ed. (1995a). Sciences Cognitives et Phénoménologie. Archives de Philosophie 58 (Numéro spécial).Google Scholar
Petitot, J. (1995b). La réorientation naturaliste de la phénoménologie. Archives de Philosophie 58: 631–58.Google Scholar
Putnam, H. (1988). Representation and Reality. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Quine, W. V. (1960). Word and Object. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Rollinger, R.D. (1999). Husserl's Position in the School of Brentano. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Searle, J. (2000). “The Limits of Phenomenology,” Essays in Honor of Hubert Dreyfus, vol. 2, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 71-92.Google Scholar
Smith, B. (1995). Normal Ontology, Common Sense and Cognitive Science, International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 43:641 67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, E. (1995). Colour Vision. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Gelder, T. (1995). “What might cognition be if not computation,” Journal of Philosophy 92: 345–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Varela, F. J. (1995). “Neurophenomenology: A Methodological Remedy for the Hard Problem,” journal of Consciousness Studies 3(4): 330–49.Google Scholar
Varela, F. J. (1997). “The Naturalization of Phenomenology as the Transcendence of Nature. Searching for Generative Mutual Constraints,” Alter 5: 355–81.Google Scholar
Varela, F. J., Thompson, E., and Rosch, E. (1991). The Embodied Mind: Cognitive Science and Human Experience. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petitot, J., Varela, F.J., Pachoud, B., and Roy, J.M. (eds.) (1999). Naturalizing Phenomenology: Issues in Contemporary Phenomenology and Cognitive Science. Palo Alto: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Wundt, W. (1902). Grundzüge der physiologischen Psychologie, Leipzig: Engelmann.Google Scholar