Consciousness isn’t “hard”—it’s human psychology that makes it so!

IF 3.1 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, BIOLOGICAL Neuroscience of Consciousness Pub Date : 2024-04-05 DOI:10.1093/nc/niae016
Iris Berent
{"title":"Consciousness isn’t “hard”—it’s human psychology that makes it so!","authors":"Iris Berent","doi":"10.1093/nc/niae016","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Consciousness arguably presents a “hard problem” for scholars. An influential position asserts that the “problem” is rooted in ontology—it arises because consciousness “is” distinct from the physical. “Problem intuitions” are routinely taken as evidence for this view. In so doing, it is assumed that (i) people do not consider consciousness as physical and (ii) their intuitions faithfully reflect what exists (or else, intuitions would not constitute evidence). New experimental results challenge both claims. First, in some scenarios, people demonstrably view consciousness as a physical affair that registers in the body (brain). Second, “problem intuitions” are linked to psychological biases, so they cannot be trusted to reflect what consciousness is. I conclude that the roots of the “hard problem” are partly psychological. Accordingly, its resolution requires careful characterization of the psychological mechanisms that engender “problem intuitions.”","PeriodicalId":52242,"journal":{"name":"Neuroscience of Consciousness","volume":"52 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neuroscience of Consciousness","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/nc/niae016","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, BIOLOGICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Consciousness arguably presents a “hard problem” for scholars. An influential position asserts that the “problem” is rooted in ontology—it arises because consciousness “is” distinct from the physical. “Problem intuitions” are routinely taken as evidence for this view. In so doing, it is assumed that (i) people do not consider consciousness as physical and (ii) their intuitions faithfully reflect what exists (or else, intuitions would not constitute evidence). New experimental results challenge both claims. First, in some scenarios, people demonstrably view consciousness as a physical affair that registers in the body (brain). Second, “problem intuitions” are linked to psychological biases, so they cannot be trusted to reflect what consciousness is. I conclude that the roots of the “hard problem” are partly psychological. Accordingly, its resolution requires careful characterization of the psychological mechanisms that engender “problem intuitions.”
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
意识并不 "难"--是人类的心理使然!
可以说,意识给学者们提出了一个 "难题"。一种有影响力的观点认为,"问题 "的根源在于本体论--它的产生是因为意识 "是 "有别于物理的。"问题直觉 "通常被当作这一观点的证据。这样做的前提是:(i) 人们不认为意识是物理的;(ii) 他们的直觉忠实地反映了存在的事物(否则,直觉就不构成证据)。新的实验结果对这两种说法都提出了挑战。首先,在某些情况下,人们明显认为意识是一种在身体(大脑)中注册的物理现象。其次,"问题直觉 "与心理偏见有关,因此不能相信它们能反映意识是什么。我的结论是,"难题 "的根源部分在于心理学。因此,要解决这个问题,就必须仔细分析产生 "问题直觉 "的心理机制。
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
Neuroscience of Consciousness
Neuroscience of Consciousness Psychology-Clinical Psychology
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
2.40%
发文量
16
审稿时长
19 weeks
期刊最新文献
Phenomenology of auto-induced cognitive trance using text mining: a prospective and exploratory group study. More than words: can free reports adequately measure the richness of perception? Making sense of feelings. Within-subject comparison of near-death and psychedelic experiences: acute and enduring effects. Visual imagery vividness correlates with afterimage conscious perception.
×
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