Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-kwt9d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-15T01:46:19.597Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Token-identity, consciousness, and the connection principle

Review products

Commentary on SearleJohn R. (1990) Consciousness, explanatory inversion, and cognitive science. BBS 13:585–642.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 February 2010

Jürgen Schröder*
Affiliation:
Centre de Recherche en Epistémologie 75005 Appliquée, Ecole Polytechnique, Paris, schroder@msh-paris.fr

Abstract

Searle's (1990) argument for the “Connection Principle” seems to rest on a confusion between ontological and epistemological claims. The potential consciousness of a mental state does not yield the same effect as does its actual consciousness, namely, the preservation of aspectual shape. Searle's distinction between the consciousness of an intentional object and that of a mental state, which is meant to counter the objection that deep unconscious rules cease to be deep once they become conscious, fails to do its appointed task.

Information

Type
Article Commentary
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1995

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable