Preserving the Normative Significance of Sentience

IF 1.6 4区 心理学 0 PHILOSOPHY Journal of Consciousness Studies Pub Date : 2024-02-01 DOI:10.53765/20512201.31.1.008
Leonard Dung
{"title":"Preserving the Normative Significance of Sentience","authors":"Leonard Dung","doi":"10.53765/20512201.31.1.008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"According to an orthodox view, the capacity for conscious experience (sentience) is relevant to the distribution of moral status and value. However, physicalism about consciousness might threaten the normative relevance of sentience. According to the indeterminacy argument, sentience\n is metaphysically indeterminate while indeterminacy of sentience is incompatible with its normative relevance. According to the introspective argument (by François Kammerer), the unreliability of our conscious introspection undercuts the justification for belief in the normative relevance\n of consciousness. I defend the normative relevance of sentience against these objections. First, I demonstrate that physicalists only have to concede a limited amount of indeterminacy of sentience. This moderate indeterminacy is in harmony with the role of sentience in determining moral status.\n Second, I argue that physicalism gives us no reason to expect that introspection is unreliable with respect to the normative relevance of consciousness.","PeriodicalId":47796,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Consciousness Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Consciousness Studies","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.53765/20512201.31.1.008","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

According to an orthodox view, the capacity for conscious experience (sentience) is relevant to the distribution of moral status and value. However, physicalism about consciousness might threaten the normative relevance of sentience. According to the indeterminacy argument, sentience is metaphysically indeterminate while indeterminacy of sentience is incompatible with its normative relevance. According to the introspective argument (by François Kammerer), the unreliability of our conscious introspection undercuts the justification for belief in the normative relevance of consciousness. I defend the normative relevance of sentience against these objections. First, I demonstrate that physicalists only have to concede a limited amount of indeterminacy of sentience. This moderate indeterminacy is in harmony with the role of sentience in determining moral status. Second, I argue that physicalism gives us no reason to expect that introspection is unreliable with respect to the normative relevance of consciousness.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
维护知觉的规范意义
根据正统观点,有意识体验的能力(智识)与道德地位和价值的分配相关。然而,关于意识的物理主义可能会威胁到知觉的规范相关性。根据不确定性论证,知觉在形而上学上是不确定的,而知觉的不确定性与其规范相关性是不相容的。根据内省论证(弗朗索瓦-卡默勒著),我们有意识的内省的不可靠性削弱了相信意识的规范相关性的理由。针对这些反对意见,我为有知觉的规范相关性进行了辩护。首先,我证明物理主义者只需承认有知觉的有限不确定性。这种适度的不确定性与有知觉在决定道德地位方面的作用是一致的。其次,我认为物理主义没有理由让我们认为内省在意识的规范相关性方面是不可靠的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
14.30%
发文量
58
期刊最新文献
Depersonalization, Meditation, and the Experience of (No-)Self Being You — Or Not: A Challenge for Garfield and Seth Selves Beyond the Skin: Watsuji, 'Betweenness', and Self-Loss in Solitary Confinement and Dementia Selfless Minds, Unlimited Bodies?: Homeostatic Bodily Self-Regulation in Meditative Experiences Is it Possible to Imagine Being No One?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1