The Nature of Consciousness: A Channel of a Frequency Wavelength

This article attempts to theoretically outline the nature of consciousness in Paul C. Mocombe’s consciousness field theory (CFT). Mocombe posits that consciousness is a channel of; or on; a frequency wavelength; which is both local and nonlocal. According to Mocombe; consciousness; is tied to an emergent fifth force of nature with an elementary particle; psychion; that arises from beings (subjects of experience) experiencing superimposed and entangled worlds; with Schumann waves tied to the (nonlocal) absolute vacuum; which gives rise to local consciousness fields the phenomenal properties; qualia; of which emerge as psychons and psychions in brains.

D. Chalmers and J. Perry on Zombie Problem and the Content of Phenomenal Concepts

David Chalmers and John Perry both construe phenomenal concepts as irreducible to descriptive concepts of physical properties or properties, which logically supervene on them. But they draw different conclusions from this point. D. Chalmers in The Conscious Mind argues that the epistemic gap between phenomenal and physical properties shows that the former cannot be ontologically identified with the latter. J. Perry in Knowledge, Possibility and Consciousness claims that we can identify phenomenal properties with physical ones without being committed to reductionism. In this paper I am going to examine Chalmers and Perrys views on meaning and necessity, especially with respect to identity statements, in order to find where exactly their ways of thinking about the content of phenomenal concepts.

Of maps and grids

Neuroscience has made remarkable advances in accounting for how the brain performs its various functions. Consciousness, too, is usually approached in functional terms: the goal is to understand how the brain represents information, accesses that information, and acts on it. While useful for prediction, this functional, information-processing approach leaves out the subjective structure of experience: it does not account for how experience feels. Here, we consider a simple model of how a “grid-like” network meant to resemble posterior cortical areas can represent spatial information and act on it to perform a simple “fixation” function. Using standard neuroscience tools, we show how the model represents topographically the retinal position of a stimulus and triggers eye muscles to fixate or follow it. Encoding, decoding, and tuning functions of model units illustrate the working of the model in a way that fully explains what the model does. However, these functional properties have nothing to say about the fact that a human fixating a stimulus would also “see” it—experience it at a location in space. Using the tools of Integrated Information Theory, we then show how the subjective properties of experienced space—its extendedness—can be accounted for in objective, neuroscientific terms by the “cause-effect structure” specified by the grid-like cortical area. By contrast, a “map-like” network without lateral connections, meant to resemble a pretectal circuit, is functionally equivalent to the grid-like system with respect to representation, action, and fixation but cannot account for the phenomenal properties of space.

Carnap und die Farben

In the analytical colour debate there are currently two positions facing each other: color objectivism and color subjectivism. For color objectivists, colors are purely physical properties, whereas for color subjectivists they are phenomenal properties that are ontologically dependent on subjects. Although both positions have strong arguments, a stalemate and idleness in the debate has been evident for decades that requires explanation. In this essay I will show, on the basis of some considerations of Carnap's color view, what causes the stalemate and idleness situation structurally and how it is 'solved' after Carnap.

Metaphorics of phenomenal judgments and the problem of social verification

The article describes the basic semantic principles of generating phenomenal judgments. Phenomenal judgments are considered as linguistic representations of the phenomenal properties of consciousness and indirect descriptions of subjective experience that occur in a private subjective semantic space. Linguistic representation in propositional and conceptual forms creates a special area of metaphorical connections that are involved to the process of social verification in the communicative interaction. The most important component of phenomenal judgments is the speakers conviction that the recipient has similar properties of mental content. The mechanisms behind the emergence of phenomenal judgments are not entirely clear. In this case an interdisciplinary approach seems to be the most promising. The paper examines the results of methodological interferences of the body-oriented paradigm in cognitive sciences with the analytic philosophy of mind (consciousness). The problem of phenomenal judgments is an interaction area of ontology and semantics and requires a comprehensive linguo-philosophical research, a step on the path to which this article is made.

Intentional and Phenomenal Properties: How not to be Inseparatists

In this paper I give an overview of the recent developments in the phenomenalism – intentionalism debate and try to show that the proposed solutions of neither sides are satisfying. The claims and arguments of the two parties are rather vague and attribute to intentional and phenomenal properties either a too weak or a too strong relationship: too weak in the sense that they establish only mere coexistence, or too strong in the sense that they attribute some a priori conceptual connection to intentional and phenomenal properties. I also compare these theories to other theories developed for solving the mind–body problem and argue that these former are much less elaborated. In the end of the paper I try to explain that all of this is not just a contingent feature of the topic, but has deep conceptual roots: intentionality and phenomenal consciousness are two quite distinct concepts on two quite distinct levels.

Illusionism about Phenomenal Consciousness: Explaining the Illusion

According to illusionism, phenomenal consciousness is an introspective illusion. The illusion problem (Frankish 2016) is to explain the cause of the illusion, or why we are powerfully disposed to judge—erroneously—that we are phenomenally conscious. I propose a theory to solve the illusion problem. I argue that on the basis of three hypotheses about the mind—which I call introspective opacity, the infallibility intuition, and the justification constraint—we can explain our disposition, on introspection, to draw erroneous unconscious inferences about our sensory states. Being subject to the illusion of phenomenal consciousness consists in having this disposition. I explain our ‘problem intuitions’ about consciousness (Chalmers 2018)—that our sensory states bear phenomenal properties that are qualitatively like something with which we are directly acquainted that is ineffable, atomic, intrinsic (non-relational), private, and non-physical. I also address the illusion meta-problem (Kammerer 2019a), which is to explain why illusionism seems especially counterintuitive.

Why I Am Not a Dualist

cI argue that dualism does not help assuage the perceived explanatory failure of physicalism. I begin with the claim that a minimally plausible dualism should only postulate a small stock of fundamental phenomenal properties and fundamental psychophysical laws: it should systematize the teeming mess of phenomenal properties and psychophysical correlations. I then argue that it is dialectically odd to think that empirical investigation could not possibly reveal a physicalist explanation of consciousness, and yet can reveal this small stock of fundamental phenomenal properties and psychophysical laws. I go on to consider a couple of different forms the dualist’s laws could take, and argue that one version makes no progress on the hard problem of consciousness, and the other replaces the hard problem with a different problem that is just as hard.

A multidimensional phenomenal space for pain: structure, primitiveness, and utility

Pain is often used as the paradigmatic example of a phenomenal kind with a phenomenal quality common and unique to its instantiations. Philosophers have intensely discussed the relation between the subjective feeling, which unites pains and distinguishes them from other experiences, and the phenomenal properties of sensory, affective, and evaluative character along which pains typically vary. At the center of this discussion is the question whether the phenomenal properties prove necessary and/or sufficient for pain. In the empirical literature, sensory, affective, and evaluative properties have played a decisive role in the investigation of psychophysical correspondence and clinical diagnostics. This paper addresses the outlined philosophical and empirical issues from a new perspective by constructing a multidimensional phenomenal space for pain. First, the paper will construe the phenomenal properties of pains in terms of a property space whose structure reflects phenomenal similarities and dissimilarities by means of spatial distance. Second, philosophical debates on necessary and sufficient properties are reconsidered in terms of whether there is a phenomenal space formed of dimensions along which all and only pains vary. It is concluded that there is no space of this kind and, thus, that pain constitutes a primitive phenomenal kind that cannot be analyzed entirely in terms of its varying phenomenal properties. Third, the paper addresses the utility of continued reference to pain and its phenomenal properties in philosophical and scientific discourses. It is argued that numerous insights into the phenomenal structure of pain can be gained that have thus far received insufficient attention.