The Paradox of Self–Consciousness Revisited

The so–called paradox of self–consciousness suggests that self–consciousness, understood as the capacity to think about oneself in a first–person way, cannot be explained. The author of the paradox contends that the only way to avert this result is by invoking the notion of nonconceptual first–person thought. This contention is rooted in adherence to the Linguistic Priority Principle, which dictates that pre–and nonlinguistic creatures lack concepts. I argue that the latter claim is dubious, and that the paradox of self–consciousness can be better disarmed by denying the dependence of first–person conceptual thought on first–person language.     

Rhetorical processes in therapy: the bias for self–containment

This paper argues that therapy tends to reproduce a particular version of personhood, identified by Sampson's notion of the self–contained indi–vidual. The self–contained individual is a contemporary Western construction, which requires a denial of the interactive processes that permit its appearance and idealization. Focusing on constructionist therapies, it is argued that therapists use rhetorical strategies to more or less systematically argue for self–containment as a preferred way of being. These rhetorical manoeuvres render different aspects of self–containment plausible, practicable and 'real', while alternative versions of the self and behaviour are discursively minimized, becoming less plausible in the process. An analysis of two family therapy sessions is then used to illustrate these processes. It is suggested that therapy may reproduce Western ideals about being human.     

Self–Deception, Motivation, and the Desire to Believe

In the debate over the nature of self–deception, "intentionalists" argue that self–deception requires an intention to deceive oneself, and "motivationists" argue that a desire, and not an intention, typically plays a crucial causal role in self–deception. Intentionalists have criticized motivationist views for ignoring what is distinctive about self–deception, and for failing to account for cases of "twisted" self–deception. I offer a new motivationist account whose distinctive element is the desire to believe. I argue that this account identifies what is common to cases of both "twisted" and "straight" self–deception, and that it captures what is distinctive about self–deception.     

Self–Objectification and its Psychological Outcomes for College Women

The objectification of women by our society can become internalized by women, resulting in negative psychological outcomes. Using Fredrickson and Roberts' (1997) objectification theory, we tested a model of the relationships between self–objectification and disordered eating and depressive symptoms in a sample of undergraduate women ( n = 384). One postulate of self–objectification theory is that self–objectification can lead to a lack of internal awareness, which may mediate the relationship between self–objectification and restrictive eating, bulimic, and depressive symptoms. Results of structural equation modeling suggest that self–objectification has a direct relationship to restrictive eating, bulimic, and depressive symptoms. The mediational role of internal awareness was relevant for depressive symptoms but not for restrictive eating or bulimic symptoms. Depressive symptoms did, however, mediate the relationship between self–objectification and bulimic symptoms. The relevance of our findings to the understanding of objectification theory are discussed and future areas of research recommended.     

Strategy for Dualism

Dualists need to change their argumentative strategies if they wish to make a plausible case for dualism. In particular, dualists should not merely react and respond to physicalist views and arguments; they need to develop their own positive agenda. But neither should they focus their energies on constructing a priori arguments for dualism. Rather, dualists should acknowledge that what supports their view that consciousness exists and is a nonphysical phenomenon is observation, not argumentation. What is needed is a positive account of the nature of consciousness and the indispensable role that it plays in our lives, for it is only by showing the explanatory utility of the nonphysical that dualists can begin to discredit those who would deny its existence. In this paper, I try to give some idea of what such a positive theory of consciousness would look like. In particular, I argue for a theory of consciousness that contains a priori synthetic truths about the ontological nature and causal powers of consciousness.     

Privileged Self–Knowledge and Externalism: A Contextualist Approach

Many people argue that privileged self–knowledge is incompatible with semantic externalism. I develop a contextualist approach to self–knowledge, and examine what this approach should lead us to say about the apparent incompatibility. Though such contextualism compels us to re–think the notion of privilege associated with self–knowledge, it can contain the damage wreaked by the externalist doctrine.     

Philosophical Arguments Against the A‐Theory

According to the A‐theory of time some instant of time is absolutely present. Many reject the A‐theory on the grounds that it is inconsistent with current spacetime physics, which appears to leave no room for absolute presentness. However, some reject the A‐theory on purely philosophical grounds. In this article I describe three purely philosophical arguments against the A‐theory and show that there are plausible A‐theoretic responses to each of them. I conclude that, whatever else is wrong with the A‐theory, it is not obviously a philosophically suspect theory.     

Shoemaker, Self–Blindness and Moore's Paradox

I show how the 'inner–sense' (quasi–perceptual) view of introspection can be defended against Shoemaker's influential 'argument from self–blindness'. If introspection and perception are analogous, the relationship between beliefs and introspective knowledge of them is merely contingent. Shoemaker argues that this implies the possibility that agents could be self–blind, i.e., could lack any introspective awareness of their own mental states. By invoking Moore's paradox, he rejects this possibility. But because Shoemaker's discussion conflates introspective awareness and self–knowledge, he cannot establish his conclusion. There is third–person evidence available to the self–blind which Shoemaker ignores, and it can account for the considerations from Moore's paradox that he raises.     

Brentano's Dual‐Framing Theory of Consciousness

Brentano's theory of consciousness has garnered a surprising amount of attention in recent philosophy of mind (Thomasson 2000 , Caston 2002, Hossack 2002, 2006, Kriegel 2003a, 2003b, 2009, Thomas 2003 , Smith 2004 , Zahavi 2004, Drummond 2006, Textor 2006, 2013 ). Here I argue for a novel interpretation of Brentano's theory that casts it as more original than previously appreciated and yet quite plausible upon inspection. According to Brentano's theory, as interpreted here, a conscious experience of a tree is a mental state that can be simultaneously thought of, or framed, equally accurately as (i) an awareness of a tree or (ii) an awareness of an awareness of a tree.     

Emotivism and Deflationary Truth

The paper investigates different ways to understand the claim that non–cognitivists theories of morality are incoherent. According to the claim, this is so because, on one theory of truth, non–cognitivists are not able to deny objective truth to moral judgments without taking a substantive normative position. I argue that emotivism is not self–defeating in this way. The charge of incoherence actually only amounts to a claim that emotivism is incompatible with deflationary truth, but this claim is based upon a mistake. It relies upon a problematic understanding of both emotivism and the deflationary theory of truth.     

The Role of Consciousness in Grasping and Understanding

One sometimes believes a proposition without grasping it. For example, a complete achromat might believe that ripe tomatoes are red without grasping this proposition. My aim in this paper is to shed light on the difference between merely believing a proposition and grasping it. I focus on two possible theories of grasping: the inferential theory, which explains grasping in terms of inferential role, and the phenomenal theory, which explains grasping in terms of phenomenal consciousness. I argue that the phenomenal theory is more plausible than the inferential theory.     

Consciousness is not a property of states: A reply to Wilberg

According to Rosenthal's higher-order thought (HOT) theory of consciousness, one is in a conscious mental state if and only if one is aware of oneself as being in that state via a suitable HOT. Several critics have argued that the possibility of so-called targetless HOTs—that is, HOTs that represent one as being in a state that does not exist—undermines the theory. Recently, Wilberg (2010) has argued that HOT theory can offer a straightforward account of such cases: since consciousness is a property of mental state tokens, and since there are no states to exhibit consciousness, one is not in conscious states in virtue of targetless HOTs. In this paper, I argue that Wilberg's account is problematic and that Rosenthal's version of HOT theory, according to which a suitable HOT is both necessary and sufficient for consciousness, is to be preferred to Wilberg's account. I then argue that Rosenthal's account can comfortably accommodate targetless HOTs because consciousness is best understood as a property of individuals, not a property of states.     

SELF–PERCEPTIONS OF ABILITY OF MATHEMATICALLY TALENTED FEMALE ADOLESCENTS

Despite their ability, many mathematically talented female adolescents do not aspire to nontraditional careers in mathematics and the sciences. According to the model proposed by Meece, Parsons, Kaczala, Goff, and Futterman (1982), self–concept of math ability is a central mediating variable in predicting long range goals and ultimate achievement in mathematics. The present study tested the hypothesis that, for a sample of 123 mathematically talented female adolescents, consideration of self–perceptions of multiple career–relevant abilities, as measured by Holland's (1977) Self Directed Search, rather than self–concept of math ability alone, is essential to understanding the ideal career aspirations of mathematically talented young women. The results indicate that it is the combined influence of self–perceptions of several career–relevant abilities that differentiates the nontraditional math and nontraditional science career aspirants from more traditional math/science and nonmath career aspiration group members. Implications for professionals working with the mathematically talented female adolescent are discussed.     

A Diagnosis and Resolution to the Generality Problem

The purpose of this paper is to offer a diagnosis and a resolution to generality problem. I state the generality problem and suggest a distinction between criteria of relevance and what I call a theory of determination. The generality problem may concern either of these. While plausible criteria of relevance would be convenient for the externalist, he does not need them. I discuss various theories of determination, and argue that no existing theory of determination is plausible. This provides a case for the no determination view: there are no facts that determine relevant types. This is the diagnosis of the generality problem. The externalist, however, may embrace the no determination view. This is what provides a resolution to the generality problem.     

Some Hindu Insights on a Global Ethic in the Context of Diseases and Epidemics

As we develop a global ethic in the context of diseases, we need to reconsider the wisdom of the religious traditions, for there is more to ailments than their material causes. In the Hindu framework, aside from the Ayurvedic system, which is based on herbal medicines and a philosophical framework, there is the insight that much of what we experience is a direct consequence of our karma (consequential actions). Therefore, here one emphasizes self–restraint and self–discipline in contexts that are conducive to self–hurting behavior.     

The Doomsday Argument and the Self–Indication Assumption: Reply to Olum

In a recent paper in this journal, Ken Olum attempts to refute the doomsday argument by appealing to the self–indication assumption (SIA) that your very existence gives you reason to think that there are many observers. Unlike earlier users of this strategy, Olum tries to counter objections that have been made against (SIA). We argue that his defence of (SIA) is unsuccessful. This does not, however, mean that one has to accept the doomsday argument (or the other counter–intuitive results that flow from related thought–experiments). A developed theory of observation selection effects shows why the doomsday argument is inconclusive, and how one can consistently reject both it and (SIA).     

Leibniz on Memory and Consciousness

In this article, I develop a higher-order interpretation of Leibniz's theory of consciousness according to which memory is constitutive of consciousness. I offer an account of Leibniz's theory of memory on which his theory of consciousness may be based, and I then show that Leibniz could have developed a coherent higher-order account. However, it is not clear whether Leibniz held (or should have held) such an account of consciousness; I sketch an alternative that has at least as many advantages as the higher-order theory. This analysis provides an important antecedent to the contemporary discussions of higher-order theories of consciousness.     

Putnam's Intuition

Multiple realizability has recently attractedrenewed attention, for example Bickle, 1998;Bechtel and Mundale, 1999; Bechtel and McCauley,1999; Heil, 1999; and Sober, 1999. Many of thesewriters revisit the topic of multiplerealizability in order to show that someversion of a mind-brain identity theory isviable. Although there is much of value inthese recent explorations, they do not addressthe underlying intuitions that have vexedphilosophers of mind since Hilary Putnamintroduced the concern (1967). I argue that thestandard way of construing multiplerealizability is a much stronger claim thanthat of Putnam's intuition alone. I distinguishfour interpretations of the multiplerealizability intuition. Some commonformulations of multiple realizability arealmost certainly true, while others are not atall plausible. I argue that the plausible formsof multiple realizability do not impugn theprospects for a mind-brain Identity Theory.     

Why Experience Told Me Nothing about Transparency 1

The transparency argument concludes that we're directly aware of external properties and not directly aware of the properties of experience. Focusing on the presentation used by Michael Tye (2002) I contend that the argument requires experience to have content that it cannot plausibly have. I attribute the failure to a faulty account of the transparency phenomenon and conclude by suggesting an alternative understanding that is independently plausible, is not an error‐theory and yet renders the transparency of experience compatible with mental‐paint style views.