On a Confusion About Which Intuitions to Trust: From the Hard Problem to a Not Easy One

Topoi 36 (1):31-40 (2017)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Alleged self-evidence aside, conceivability arguments are one of the main reasons in favor of the claim that there is a Hard Problem. These arguments depend on the appealing Kripkean intuition that there is no difference between appearances and reality in the case of consciousness. I will argue that this intuition rests on overlooking a distinction between cognitive access and consciousness, which has received recently important empirical support. I will show that there are good reasons to believe that the intuition is misguided—at least on the reading that the conceivability arguments require—and hence that the arguments are unsupported. This, in turn, alleviates the Hard Problem but leaves us with what I think is a not easy problem.

Other Versions

No versions found

Analytics

Added to PP
2015-07-18

Downloads
651 (#40,307)

6 months
149 (#29,669)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Miguel Angel Sebastian
National Autonomous University of Mexico

Citations of this work

Zombies.Robert Kirk - 2003 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Naming and Necessity: Lectures Given to the Princeton University Philosophy Colloquium.Saul A. Kripke - 1980 - Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Edited by Darragh Byrne & Max Kölbel.
The character of consciousness.David John Chalmers - 2010 - New York: Oxford University Press.
Does conceivability entail possibility.David J. Chalmers - 2002 - In Tamar Gendler & John Hawthorne (eds.), Conceivability and Possibility. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 145--200.
The meaning of 'meaning'.Hilary Putnam - 1975 - Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science 7:131-193.

View all 55 references / Add more references