Conscious Thought and the Limits of Restrictivism

Critica 47 (141):3-32 (2015)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
How should we characterize the nature of conscious occurrent thought? In the last few years, a rather unexplored topic has appeared in philosophy of mind: cognitive phenomenology or the phenomenal character of cognitive mental episodes. In this paper I firstly present the motivation for cognitive phenomenology views through phenomenal contrast cases, taken as a challenge for their opponents. Secondly, I explore the stance against cognitive phenomenology views proposed by Restrictivism, classifying it in two strategies, sensory restrictivism and accompanying states. On the one hand, I problematize the role of attention adopted by sensory restrictivism and I present and discuss in detail an argument that defends the limitation of sensory phenomenology so as to explain the distinction between visual and cognitive mental episodes on the basis of immediate experience. On the other hand, I address accompanying states views by discussing the empirical studies of Hurlburt et al. (2006, 2008) that defend the existence of “unsymbolized thinking”. I present how they can be construed as evidence for cognitive phenomenology views and I dispel some problems that have been raised against its acceptance. I thus conclude that cognitive phenomenology views hold up well against the restrictivist positions considered.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Revision history
Archival date: 2016-01-11
View upload history
References found in this work BETA

View all 6 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
The Nature of Unsymbolized Thinking.Vicente, Agustín & Martínez-Manrique, Fernando

Add more citations

Added to PP index

Total views
345 ( #12,882 of 50,114 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
33 ( #19,127 of 50,114 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks to external links.