Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-lpg2g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-15T12:55:07.183Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

What's really doing the work here? Knowledge representation or the Higher-Order Thought theory of consciousness?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 October 1999

Gerard O'Brien
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia 5005, Australia {gobrien; jopie}@arts.adelaide.edu.au arts.adelaide.edu.au/Philosophy/{gobrien; jopie}.htm
Jonathan Opie
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia 5005, Australia {gobrien; jopie}@arts.adelaide.edu.au arts.adelaide.edu.au/Philosophy/{gobrien; jopie}.htm
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the 'Save PDF' action button.

Dienes & Perner offer us a theory of explicit and implicit knowledge that promises to systematise a large and diverse body of research in cognitive psychology. Their advertised strategy is to unpack this distinction in terms of explicit and implicit representation. But when one digs deeper one finds the “Higher-Order Thought” theory of consciousness doing much of the work. This reduces both the plausibility and usefulness of their account. We think their strategy is broadly correct, but that consensus on the explicit/implicit knowledge distinction is still a fair way off.

Information

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Copyright
© 1999 Cambridge University Press