more from this thinker     |     more from this text


Single Idea 9318

[filed under theme 17. Mind and Body / D. Property Dualism / 6. Mysterianism ]

Full Idea

In Chalmers's non-reductive theory, phenomenal consciousness is treated as a fundamental feature of the world, that cannot be explained in nonphenomenal terms. Theory is still possible, in the regularities of interaction.

Gist of Idea

Phenomenal consciousness is fundamental, with no possible nonphenomenal explanation

Source

report of David J.Chalmers (The Conscious Mind [1996]) by U Kriegel / K Williford - Intro to 'Self-Representational Consciousness' n2

Book Ref

'Self-Representational Approaches to Consciousness', ed/tr. Kriegel,U /Williford,K [MIT 2006], p.7


A Reaction

I can't make much sense of this view without a backing of panpsychism. How could a 'fundamental' feature of reality only begin to appear when life evolves on one particular planet? But 'panpsychism' is a warning of big misunderstandings. See Idea 2424.

Related Idea

Idea 2424 It is odd if experience is a very recent development [Chalmers]


The 13 ideas with the same theme [we are incapable of explaining the mind-body link]:

There are no secure foundations to prove the separate existence of mind, in reason or experience [William of Ockham]
Thinking without matter and matter that thinks are equally baffling [Locke]
We can't begin to conceive what would produce some particular experience within our minds [Locke]
Thoughts moving bodies, and bodies producing thoughts, are equally unknowable [Locke]
Why are we not aware of the huge gap between mind and brain in ordinary life? [Wittgenstein]
Consciousness seems indefinable by conditions or categories [Searle]
Nagel's title creates an impenetrable mystery, by ignoring a bat's ways that may not be "like" anything [Dennett on Nagel]
We can't be objective about experience [Nagel]
Examining mind sees no brain; examining brain sees no mind [McGinn]
McGinn invites surrender, by saying it is hopeless trying to imagine conscious machines [Dennett on McGinn]
Phenomenal consciousness is fundamental, with no possible nonphenomenal explanation [Chalmers, by Kriegel/Williford]
Nothing external shows whether a mouse is conscious [Chalmers]
The 'explanatory gap' is used to say consciousness is inexplicable, at least with current concepts [Heil]