• rei
    8
    What is everyone's stance on the topic? Personally, I feel as if it's quite interesting, and works well to connect other disciplines with philosophy (such as neuroscience). I do know that many don't find it to be that useful or necessary, though.
  • Fuzzball Baggins
    12
    I find it interesting to wonder about at what level of complexity consciousness arises. If you look at things from the subpersonal view, the separate parts of the brain don't seem to be conscious, there doesn't seem to be one particular brain activity that causes consciousness, and yet when you combine all the parts and look at a person as a whole they are conscious.
  • Terrapin Station
    5.2k
    Well, the only way I can really make sense of Dennett's distinction is that it's simply another term for third versus first-person perspectives.

    Maybe you have something else in mind for the distinction, though?
  • Terrapin Station
    5.2k
    If you look at things from the subpersonal view, the separate parts of the brain don't seem to be conscious,Fuzzball Baggins

    Well, although people can be conscious with parts of their brains removed or damaged. So that at least tells us that those parts, minus the missing/damaged bits, can be conscious.
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.