The Stream of Consciousness: XXIX. Does Consciousness Exist? (Second Part)
I continue to address W. James's intentions in his article of 1904 titled “Does ‘Consciousness’ Exist?” (DCE), and to raise critical questions concerning the direction his theory takes after The Principles of Psychology. Here, as in the preceding article of this series, I closely examine his article for what it tells us concerning his new conception of the stream of consciousness. James holds it to be constituted of “pure experiences,” which are neither mental nor physical but may be taken to be either mental or physical. An essential feature of this new conception is one's having a direct acquaintance with one's experiences. James considers consciousness, in this basic sense, to be a crucial part of how one knows anything one does know. Knowledge of the sun, for example, has a basis in direct acquaintance with certain experiences; that is, one takes some of one's experiences to be a certain physical object, the sun itself, because of their occurrence in a context consisting of certain other experiences that, too, are objects of inner awareness.