The ins and outs of conscious belief.

What should advocates of phenomenal intentionality say about unconscious intentional states? I approach this question by focusing on a recent debate between Tim Crane and David Pitt, about the nature of belief. Crane argues that beliefs are never conscious. Pitt, concerned that the phenomenal intent...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Philosophical Studies Vol. 179; no. 2; pp. 517 - 549
Autor principal: Coleman, Sam
Formato: Artículo
Publicado: Springer Nature Feb2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=155466621&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: hlh
    uiTerm: 155466621
    longDbName: Humanities International Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        00318116
        4L8
      jtl: Philosophical Studies
      issn: 00318116
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Feb2022
      vid: 179
      iid: 2
      pid: 237
      pub: Springer Nature
    artinfo:
      ui:
        155466621
        10.1007/s11098-021-01669-2
      ppf: 517
      ppct: 32
      formats:
        fmt:
          – @attributes:
              type: T
          – @attributes:
              type: P
              size: 362KB
      tig:
        atl: The ins and outs of conscious belief.
      aug:
        au: Coleman, Sam
        affil: Department of Philosophy, University of Hertfordshire, AL10 9AB, Hatfield, Hertfordshire, UK
      su:
        Consciousness
        Belief & doubt
        Qualia
        Thought & thinking
        Intentionality (Philosophy)
      sug:
        subj:
          Consciousness
          Belief & doubt
          Qualia
          Thought & thinking
          Intentionality (Philosophy)
      keyword:
        Belief
        Intentionality
        Phenomenal intentionality
        Stream of consciousness
        Thought
        Unconscious content
      ab: What should advocates of phenomenal intentionality say about unconscious intentional states? I approach this question by focusing on a recent debate between Tim Crane and David Pitt, about the nature of belief. Crane argues that beliefs are never conscious. Pitt, concerned that the phenomenal intentionality thesis coupled with a commitment to beliefs as essentially unconscious embroils Crane in positing unconscious phenomenology, counter-argues that beliefs are essentially conscious. I examine and rebut Crane's arguments for the essential unconsciousness of beliefs, some of which are widely endorsed. On the way I sketch a model of how belief states could participate in the stream of consciousness. I then consider Pitt's position, arguing in reply, along Freudian lines, that we should posit not just dispositional but occurrent unconscious beliefs. This result, I argue, indeed requires advocates of phenomenal intentionality to posit unconscious qualia to fix these unconscious occurrent thoughts, and I defend the coherence of the notion of unconscious qualia against some common attacks. Ultimately, I claim, the combination of taking seriously the occurrent unconscious, and a commitment to phenomenal intentionality, should lead us to expand William James's conception of the stream of consciousness to encompass, additionally, a stream of unconscious mental life—or, perhaps better, to posit a single partly conscious partly unconscious qualia-stream of mental goings-on.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: Y
      custom: Philosophical Studies is a copyright of Springer, 2022. All Rights Reserved.
      item: Philosophical Studies
      holder: Springer Nature
      dt:
        @attributes:
          year: 2022
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N