IngentaConnect Unmasking Multiple Drafts

Author: Todd, Steven J.

Source: Philosophical Psychology, Volume 19, Number 4, August 2006 , pp. 477-494(18)

Publisher: Routledge, part of the Taylor & Francis Group

Abstract:

Any theoretician constructing a serious model of consciousness should carefully assess the details of empirical data generated in the neurosciences and psychology. A failure to account for those details may cast doubt on the adequacy of that model. This paper presents a case in point. Dennett and Kinsbourne's (Dennett, D., & Kinsbourne, M. (1992). Time and the observer: The where and when of consciousness in the brain. Behavioral and Brain Sciences , 15 , 183-243) assault on the materialist version of the Cartesian Theater model of the mind relies significantly on the superiority of their Multiple Drafts model of consciousness as an explanation of the phenomenon of metacontrast. However, their description of metacontrast is, in important ways, inadequate. The result is that their explanation of how the Multiple Drafts model handles this phenomenon fails to account for the actual data. In this paper I offer a more complete description of metacontrast, show how Dennett and Kinsbourne's explanation fails, and argue that there are good theoretical reasons for choosing the so-called Stalinesque model over the so-called Orwellian model.

Keywords: Consciousness; Dennett; Kinsbourne; Multiple Drafts; Stalinesque; Orwellian

Document Type: Research article

DOI: 10.1080/09515080600735261

The full text electronic article is available for purchase. You will be able to download the full text electronic article after payment.

$38.34 plus tax Refund Policy