PhilArchive
open access
Perceiving and Thinking: Inquiry into Two Types of Phenomenology
I call the fact that there is an introspectable phenomenological difference between paradigmatic conscious perceptual states and paradigmatic conscious cognitive states, such that each ‘feel’ or ‘appear’ differently to the subject, the phenomenal datum. This dissertation addresses the datum in two parts. In the first part, I argue that the introspectable phenomenal difference between conscious states of perceiving and conscious cognitive states cannot be fully accounted for by differences in representational content, against so-called strong representationalism (see e.g., Dretske 1995; Tye 1995). Chapters 2 to 5 explore all the possible ways in which strong representationalism might explain the distinctive character of perception vis-à-vis thought. I will refer to these strategies as content or representational strategies. We can identify two kinds of content strategies: Object theories and Kinds-of-content theories (see Kriegel 2019a). Object theories (Chapters 2 and 3) claim that perceptual and cognitive states differ in terms of what they represent, i.e., in terms of the kinds of objects (broadly intended) they relate the subject to. Kinds-of content theories (Chapters 4 and 5) state that the crucial difference between perceptual and cognitive states is in terms of how they represent what they represent. I will argue that even in cases in which these theories identify features exclusively belong to perceptual or cognitive representational contents, these features eventually fail to account for the phenomenal datum. Given the failure of content strategies, in the second part of the dissertation I move to the attitude strategy. The attitude is the component of an intentional mental state that relates subject and content. The attitude strategy relies on the thesis that the attitude component makes a distinctive phenomenal contribution to the overall phenomenal character of the state. The strategy thus claims that the phenomenal datum can be accounted for in terms of attitudinal differences between typical perceptual and typical cognitive states. Depending on whether one regards attitude as a representational or a non-representational component of mental states, the attitude strategy may or may not be considered a kind of representational strategy. In Chapter 6 I will discuss the attitude strategy in detail and explain how it addresses the phenomenal datum. Finally, Chapter 7 will discuss two main obstacles to accepting the view.
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- Perception and Cognition Are Largely Independent, but Still Affect Each Other in Systematic Ways: Arguments from Evolution and the Consciousness-Attention Dissociation#754683
- Object Perception: Four Philosophical Arguments#101058
- On Whether the Higher-Order Thought Theory of Consciousness Entails Cognitive Phenomenology, or: What is it Like to Think that One Thinks that P?#703418
- Perceptual experiences of particularity#768593
- Bodily Core Knowledge#79296
Record · ID 115210
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive