The DOI matches its Crossref record; 93 of the 105 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 15 of the 77 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples
Open accessAbstract
A concise sketch of the self-model theory of subjectivity (SMT; Metzinger, 2003a), aimed at empirical researchers. Discussion of some candidate mechanisms by which self-awareness could appear in a physically realized information-processing system like the brain, using empirical examples from various scientific disciplines. The paper introduces two core-concepts, the "phenomenal self-model" (PSM) and the "phenomenal model of the intentionality relation" (PMIR), developing a representationalist analysis of the conscious self and the emergence of a first-person perspective.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
163 Own interpretation · 25 No full text of the sources · 15 Sources not found · 12 No basis given · 9 Supported · 6 Partly supported · 6 Own result · 5 Not checked yet · accuracy not yet measured
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“''Awareness of her phantom limbs is transiently disrupted only when some object or person invades their felt position or when she sees herself in a mirror.''”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step two: the self-model
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Brugger et al., 2000, p. 6168 source
The paper’s account of A.Z.’s phantom sensations (passage [1], labeled Abstract) states the cited sentence verbatim, including both circumstances that transiently disrupt her awareness. (LLM, conf=0.95)
plaindirectSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“In addition, premotor and parietal stimulation evoked similar phantom sensations, albeit in the absence of motor-evoked potentials in the stump.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step two: the self-model
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Brugger et al., 2000 source
The Abstract states the claim directly. The Results (TMS) also report phantom movement sensations after stimulation at a probable premotor site and two parietal locations without corresponding motor-evoked potentials. (LLM, conf=0.95)
plaindirectSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) of the sensorimotor cortex consistently elicited phantom sensations in the contralateral fingers and hand.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step two: the self-model
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Brugger et al., 2000 source
The Abstract states the claim directly. The Results (TMS) specify that the reported phantom finger and hand movements were exclusively contralateral to the stimulated hemisphere; the finding concerns one participant born without forearms and legs. (LLM, conf=0.95)
plaindirectSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“At the same time, it is possible to impair this mental transformation of the bodily self-model by interfering at this specific location with TMS.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step three: a representationalist analysis of the three target properties
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Blanke et al., 2005 source
The TMS study reports that stimulation of the right temporoparietal junction slowed responses during mental own-body transformation, relative to stimulation of a control site. The effect occurred for front-facing figures when TMS was applied 350–550 ms after stimulus onset; the claim says this transformation can be impaired, not that impairment occurs under all conditions. (LLM, conf=0.92)
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“The experience of seeing one's own body in a position that does not coincide with its felt position could therefore be caused by cerebral dysfunction at the TPJ, causing both types of functional disintegration and thereby leading to the representational configuration described above”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step three: a representationalist analysis of the three target properties
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Blanke et al., 2005 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
hedgedconditionaln = 5- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Partly supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Using evoked potential mapping, these authors also showed that a selective activation of the TPJ takes place 330-400 ms after healthy volunteers mentally imagined themselves being in a position and taking a visual perspective characteristic of an OBE.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step three: a representationalist analysis of the three target properties
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Blanke et al., 2005 source
Split into 2 atoms — 2 confirmed, 0 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“In an epileptic patient with OBEs caused by damage at the TPJ, it could be shown that by mimicking the OBE-PSM (i.e., by mentally simulating an OBE like the ones she had experienced before), there was a partial activation of the seizure focus (Blanke et al., 2005).”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step three: a representationalist analysis of the three target properties
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Blanke et al., 2005 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Patient study and Discussion report that mentally transforming her body to mimic her OBE activated the TPJ, with activity partly overlapping the epileptic seizure focus (Fig. 4, p. 557). The paper describes an epileptic seizure focus at the TPJ, but does not establish that TPJ damage caused her OBEs; it also reports overlapping task-related activity, not a seizure triggered by the task. (LLM, conf=0.88)
hedgeddirectSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“It was also possible, for the first time, to induce an OBE-type state by direct electrical stimulation.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step three: a representationalist analysis of the three target properties
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Blanke et al., 2005 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The TMS site and TMS intensity section reports that electrical stimulation of the right temporoparietal junction had been reported to induce OBEs, citing Blanke et al. (2002). It does not say this was the first such induction; its own stimulation experiment tested a mental-imagery task, not induction of an OBE. (LLM, conf=0.84)
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“In a recent study, Olaf Blanke and colleagues were able to localize the relevant brain lesion or dysfunction in the temporoparietal junction (TPJ) in five out of six patients.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step three: a representationalist analysis of the three target properties
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Blanke et al., 2005 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Discussion (page not specified in our copy) links TPJ activity to the epileptic focus in a patient who experienced an out-of-body experience. The paper supports TPJ involvement, but its patient study concerns one patient, not a localization in five out of six patients. (LLM, conf=0.88)
plaincorrelationaln = 5- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Partly supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“In our context, the perhaps most interesting observation in this experiment (see Carmena et al., 2003, for details) is how the monkey gradually begins to neglect his original arm, which is, after all, a part of his biological body.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step six: the PMIR -the phenomenal model of the intentionality relation
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Carmena et al., 2003 source
The Results (page not specified) say that during brain control the monkeys initially moved their arms, then ceased doing so for periods of time when the movements proved unnecessary. The Discussion says visual feedback about the movement goal, rather than arm movement, became the main guiding signal. These passages support the citing sentence’s description of the monkeys gradually setting aside use of their biological arms. (LLM, conf=0.91)
plaindirectSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
- It may state two separate claims as one. 67
- Probably not a substantial claim. 105
- The quote only partly states this claim. 3
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“For as long as she remembers, she has experienced mental images of forearms (including fingers) and legs (with feet and first and fifth toes) -but, as the figure below shows, these were not as realistic as the content of her non-hallucinatory PSM.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step two: the self-model
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Brugger et al., 2000 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The passage labeled Abstract (page unavailable) says that A.Z. had experienced mental images of forearms, hands and fingers, and legs, feet and first and fifth toes for as long as she could remember. It reports vividness ratings for her phantom sensations, but does not say that the mental images were less realistic than her non-hallucinatory phantom sensations. (LLM, conf=0.88)
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Functional magnetic resonance imaging of phantom hand movements showed no activation of the primary sensorimotor areas, but of the premotor and parietal cortex bilaterally.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step two: the self-model
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Brugger et al., 2000 source
The Abstract states the claim directly. The Results report bilateral premotor and posterior parietal activation during phantom finger movements, with no activation in the primary motor hand representation or postcentral gyrus. (LLM, conf=0.95)
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“A recent case study by Brugger and colleagues introduced a vividness rating on a 7-point scale that showed highly consistent judgments across sessions for their subject AZ, a 44-year-old university-educated woman born without forearms and legs.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step two: the self-model
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Brugger et al., 2000 source
The supplied passages report a structured interview using 7-point vividness ratings on three different days and describe the ratings as highly consistent across sessions. They also identify A.Z. as a 44-year-old university-educated woman born without forearms and legs. Both passages are labeled Abstract; no page numbers are provided. (LLM, conf=0.95)
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“unlike the phantom-limb patients presented in example no. 1 and no. 2 (and like most ordinary patients), it is able to restructure its body-representation following the loss of a limb.It can learn.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step two: the self-model
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Starfish not only synthesizes an internal selfmodel, but also uses this self-model to generate intelligent behavior.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step two: the self-model
plaindirectSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“part of its leg is removed, it adapts its self-model and generates alternative gaits -it learns to limp.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step two: the self-model
plaindirectSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This impression was less likely to occur in the ''object condition'' and in all of the asynchronous conditions.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step three: a representationalist analysis of the three target properties
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Does illusory self-localization to a position outside one's body mean that we have experimentally induced full-blown out-of-body experiences?No, this was only a first step.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step three: a representationalist analysis of the three target properties
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“What does exist is the experience of being a self, as well as the diverse and constantly changing contents of self-consciousness.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“One of the ontological claims of this theory is that the self is not a substance in the technical philosophical sense of something that could maintain its existence on its own, even if the body, the brain, or everything else disappeared.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As long as a phenomenal self exists, our consciousness is centered and bound to what philosophers call a ''firstperson perspective.''”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step one: what exactly is the problem?
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The PSM is exactly that part of the mental selfmodel that is currently embedded in a highest order integrated structure, the global model of the world (Yates, 1975;Baars, 1988; for a detailed analysis of the criteria for distinguishing different degrees of consciousness, see Metzinger, 2003a, Chapter 3).”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step two: the self-model
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Yates, 1975 source
- Not matchedcites Baars, 1988
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Metzinger, 2003a, Chapter 3
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
In the paper
“This means that there is not only a true representational and functional description of the human self-model, but also a true neurobiological description -for instance in terms of being a widely distributed, complex activation pattern in the brain (Damasio, 1999).”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step two: the self-model
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Damasio, 1999
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The human self-model will be predominantly a neurocomputational theory.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“SMT is predominantly a representational theory of consciousness, because it analyzes conscious states as representational states and conscious contents as representational contents.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step two: the self-model
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It is not an individual entity or a mysterious thing in the metaphysical sense.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It endows our phenomenal space with two particularly fascinating structural features: centeredness and perspectivalness.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step one: what exactly is the problem?
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In other words, what probably distinguishes human beings from most other animals is that we not only have a subjectively experienced inner perspective, but can also consciously conceptualize ourselves as beings that have such an inner perspective.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step one: what exactly is the problem?
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In our case, the self-model is an episodically active representational entity whose content is determined by the system's very own properties.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step two: the self-model
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Under SMT, this conscious experience of being a self is analyzed as the result of complex information-processing mechanisms and representational processes in the central nervous system.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The properties in question for the emergence of a conscious self are representational and functional brain properties.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Whenever such a self-representation is needed to regulate the system's interactions with the environment, it is transiently activated -for instance in the morning, when we wake up.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step two: the self-model
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“States inside this center of consciousness are experienced as my own states, because they are endowed with a sense of ownership that is prior to language or conceptual thought.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step one: what exactly is the problem?
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“According to SMT, what happens when you wake up in the morning -when you first come to yourself -is that the biological organism, which you are, boots up its PSM: it activates the conscious self-model.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step two: the self-model
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This is our first, preliminary answer: the system needs a coherent self-representation, a consistent internal model of itself as a whole.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step two: the self-model
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This is the decisive first step towards becoming an autonomous agent.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step two: the self-model
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The emergence of the bodily self-model is based on a subpersonal, automatic process of binding features together, of achieving coherence.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step two: the self-model
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It does so because you now need a conscious self-model in order to achieve sensorimotor integration, generate complex, flexible and adaptive behavior, and attend to and control your body as a whole.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step two: the self-model
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the self-model is a transient computational module that is episodically activated by the system in order to control its interactions with the environment.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step two: the self-model
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Third, a self-model supports planning and fast learning processes in a number of different ways.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step two: the self-model
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“If this global representational property is lost, this also changes the phenomenology and leads to the emergence of different neuropsychological deficits or altered states of consciousness.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step two: the self-model
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It clearly makes a system more intelligent.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step two: the self-model
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“a selfmodel allows a physical system to ''enslave'' its low-level dynamics with the help of a single, integrated, and internal whole-system model, thereby controlling and functionally ''owning'' it.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step two: the self-model
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“Their four-legged machine uses actuation-sensation relationships to indirectly infer its own structure and then uses this self-model to generate forward locomotion.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step two: the self-model
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Bongard et al. (2006) source
plaindirectSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In other words, certain parts of the self-model can be unconscious and functionally active at the same time.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step two: the self-model
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“When part of its leg is removed, it adapts its self-model and generates alternative gaits -it learns to limp.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step two: the self-model
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Bongard et al. (2006) source
plaindirectSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In other cases, the subjective experience of being able to move and control the phantom limb is lost.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step two: the self-model
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“First, a self-model can be entirely unconscious; i.e., it can frequently be seen as the product of an automatic ''bottom-up'' process of dynamical self-organization”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step two: the self-model
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“More precisely, a body-model has the function of integrating sensory impressions with motor output in a more intelligent and flexible manner.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step two: the self-model
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“An active self-model then can be seen as a subpersonal functional state: a set of causal relations of varying complexity that may or may not be realized at a given point in time.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step two: the self-model
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These alternative configurations may result from preamputational paralysis following peripheral nerve damage or from prolonged loss of proprioceptive and kinesthetic ''feedback'' that could confirm the occurrence of movement.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step two: the self-model
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Such mutually coupled selfmodels, in turn, are the fundamental representational resource for taking another person's perspective, for empathy and the sense of responsibility, but also for metacognitive achievements like the development of a concept of self and a theory of mind”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step two: the self-model
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Bischof-Ko¨hler, 1996, 1989
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Gallese and Goldman, 1998
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Metzinger and Gallese, 2003 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the subjectively experienced content of the phenomenal self is the representational content of a currently active, dynamic data structure in the system's central nervous system.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step two: the self-model
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“''Oh, my,'' he said, clearly disappointed.''It's frozen again.I feel my right hand moving, but there's no movement in the phantom.''”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step two: the self-model
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Ramachandran 1998, 47f.
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Ramachandran and Rogers-Ramachandran, 1996
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boostedSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“By now, it should be clear how these experimental findings illustrate the concept of a ''selfmodel'' that I introduced above; what is moving in this experiment is the PSM.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step two: the self-model
boosteddirectSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The unconscious precursor of the PSM clearly was a new form of intelligence.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step two: the self-model
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the moment of ''waking up'' is exactly the moment in which this new instrument of intelligent informationprocessing emerges in your brain.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step two: the self-model
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Fourth, it is what I called a virtual model or ''virtual organ'' above, and one of its major functions consists in appropriating a body by using a global morphological model to control it as a whole.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step two: the self-model
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The transition from stump to phantom limb is seamless; subjectively, they are both part of one and the same bodily self, because the quality of ownership is distributed evenly among them.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step two: the self-model
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“First, you do not have to be a living being in order to have a self-model.Non-biological SMT-systems are possible.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step two: the self-model
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Plastic and ever more complex self-models not only allowed somatosensory, perceptual, and cognitive functions to be continuously optimized, but also made the development of social cognition and cooperative behavior possible.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step two: the self-model
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Devinsky et al. (1989Devinsky et al. ( , p. 1080) ) have differentiated between autoscopy in the form of a complex hallucinatory perception of one's own body as being external with ''the subject's consciousness y usually perceived within his body'' and a second type, the classic OBE, which includes the feeling of leaving one's body and viewing it from another vantagepoint.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step three: a representationalist analysis of the three target properties
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Devinsky et al., 1989 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“On the other hand, the OBE clearly is something like a phenomenological prototype.There is a common core to the phenomenon, as can be seen from the simple fact that many readers will already have heard about this type of experience in one way or another.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step three: a representationalist analysis of the three target properties
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“The prevalence of OBEs ranges from 10% in the general population to 25% in students, with extremely high incidences in certain subpopulations like, to name just one example, 42% in schizophrenics (Blackmore, 1986; see also Blackmore, 1982; for an overview and further references see Alvarado, 1986Alvarado, , 2000, p. 18;, p. 18;Irwin, 1985, p. 174).”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step three: a representationalist analysis of the three target properties
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Blackmore, 1986
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Blackmore, 1982
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Alvarado, 1986
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“They frequently occur during extreme sports, for instance, in high-altitude climbers or marathon runners.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step three: a representationalist analysis of the three target properties
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This property, the sense of ownership, is not necessarily connected to these mental representations; i.e., it is not an intrinsic, but a relational property.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step three: a representationalist analysis of the three target properties
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The incidence of autoscopic seizures is possibly higher than previously recognized, and the authors found a 6.3% incidence in their patient population (Devinsky et al., 1989(Devinsky et al., , p. 1085)).”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step three: a representationalist analysis of the three target properties
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Devinsky et al., 1989 source
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Phenomenal selfhood corresponds to the existence of a single, coherent, and temporally stable self-model that constitutes the center of the representational state as whole.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step three: a representationalist analysis of the three target properties
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This may allow for a high degree of integrated processing, i.e., of ''mental clarity,'' by functionally encapsulating and thereby modularizing different functions like proprioception, attention, and cognition in order to preserve at least some of these functions in a life-threatening situation.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step three: a representationalist analysis of the three target properties
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“At the same time, the feeling of ''ownership'' or phenomenal ''mineness'' is transferred to the rubber hand.The subject experiences the rubber hand as her own hand and feels the strokes in this hand.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step three: a representationalist analysis of the three target properties
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Botvinick and Cohen, 1998 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There is a well-known class of phenomenal states in which the experiencing person undergoes the untranscendable and highly realistic conscious experience of leaving his or her physical body, usually in the form of an etheric double, and moving around outside of it.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step three: a representationalist analysis of the three target properties
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This structural feature of the global representational space leads to the episodic instantiation of a temporally extended and non-conceptual first-person perspective.It, too, can be lost.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step three: a representationalist analysis of the three target properties
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“OBEs frequently occur spontaneously while falling asleep, but also following severe accidents or during surgical operations.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step three: a representationalist analysis of the three target properties
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The OBE may be an instance of transient functional modularization, of a ''purposeful,'' i.e., functionally adequate, separation of levels of representational content in the PSM.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step three: a representationalist analysis of the three target properties
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, it would be false to assume that OBEs typically occur in people suffering from severe psychiatric disorders or neurological deficits.Quite the contrary, most OBE-reports come from ordinary people in everyday life situations.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step three: a representationalist analysis of the three target properties
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Instead, the concept of an OBE may turn out to be a cluster concept constituted by a whole range of diverging (and possibly overlapping) subsets of phenomenological constraints, each forming a set of sufficient, but not necessary, conditions.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step three: a representationalist analysis of the three target properties
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“While only 2 out of 120 subjects reported an actual pain sensation, many subjects drew back their real hands, opened their eyes up widely in surprise, or laughed nervously (Armel andRamachandran, 2003, p. 1503).”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step three: a representationalist analysis of the three target properties
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Armel and Ramachandran, 2003 source
plainn = 120- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“If the system is no longer able to integrate certain discrete representational contents into its self-model, it is lost.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step three: a representationalist analysis of the three target properties
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It could have been otherwise, in other phenomenological contexts, mineness disappears.Its distribution over the different elements of a conscious world-model can vary.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step three: a representationalist analysis of the three target properties
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Almost all necessary system-related information is still globally available, and higher order processes like attention and cognition can still operate on this information as it continues to be presented in an integrated manner, but its distribution across specific subregions of phenomenal space as a whole changes dramatically.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step three: a representationalist analysis of the three target properties
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“If this analysis is correct, it should be possible, at least in principle, to operationalize this property by searching for an empirically testable metrics for the coherence of the self-model in the respective areas of interest.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step three: a representationalist analysis of the three target properties
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Only one of the two self-models is truly ''situated'' in the overall scene; only one of them is immediately embodied and virtually self-present in the sense of being integrated into an internally simulated behavioral space.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step three: a representationalist analysis of the three target properties
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It has long been known that OBEs not only occur in healthy subjects, but in certain clinical populations (e.g., epileptics) as well.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step three: a representationalist analysis of the three target properties
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This second body-model is the locus of the phenomenal self.It not only forms the ''true'' focus of one's phenomenal experience, but also functions as an integrated representation of all kinesthetic qualia and all non-visual forms of proprioception.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step three: a representationalist analysis of the three target properties
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The classic OBE contains two self-models, one visually represented from an external perspective and one forming the center of the phenomenal world from which the first-person perspective originates.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step three: a representationalist analysis of the three target properties
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Phenomenal representations appear to be exactly that set of representations for which we cannot distinguish between representational content and representational carrier on the level of subjective experience.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step five: autoepistemic closure -transparency and the naı¨ve-realistic self-misunderstanding
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The phenomenal model of the intentionality relation (PMIR), is just another naturally evolved virtual organ, just like the PSM.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step six: the PMIR -the phenomenal model of the intentionality relation
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The selfmodel is the only representational structure that is anchored in a continuous source of internally generated input in the brain.Let us call this the ''persistent causal link hypothesis.''”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step four: the bodily self as a functional anchor of phenomenal space
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: There is a certain part of the human self-model that is characterized by a high degree of stimulus correlation and that depends exclusively on internally generated information.
In the paper
“In other words, recent neuroscientific data clearly support the view that tools not only enable us to extend our reaching space.They show that any successful extension of behavioral space is also mirrored in the neural substrate of the body image in the brain.The brain constructs an ''internalized'' image of the tool by swiftly assimilating it into the existing body image as a whole.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step six: the PMIR -the phenomenal model of the intentionality relation
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Maravita and Iriki, 2004 source
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The intentionality relation is primarily an epistemic relation between subject and object.A mental state becomes a carrier of knowledge in virtue of being directed at something other than itself -like an arrow pointing from a person's mind to an object in the real or even just in a possible world.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step six: the PMIR -the phenomenal model of the intentionality relation
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The interesting point, however, is that cognitive availability alone is not sufficient to dissolve the naı¨ve realism of phenomenal experience.You cannot simply ''think'' yourself out of your phenomenal model of reality by changing your opinions about this model: the transparency of phenomenal representations is cognitively impenetrable; here, phenomenal knowledge is not the same as conceptual/pro”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step five: autoepistemic closure -transparency and the naı¨ve-realistic self-misunderstanding
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Phenomenal transparency in general, however, means that the representational character of the contents of conscious experience itself is not accessible to subjective experience.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step five: autoepistemic closure -transparency and the naı¨ve-realistic self-misunderstanding
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Phenomenologically, a transparent world-model gives rise to a reality.A transparent system-model gives rise to a self that is embedded in this reality.If there is also a transparent model of the transient and constantly changing relations between the perceiving and acting self and the objects and persons in this reality, this results in what I called a ''phenomenal first-person perspective'' above”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step six: the PMIR -the phenomenal model of the intentionality relation
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Now, there is not only a neurobiologically anchored core self, a self-presentation, but also a dynamic phenomenal simulation of the self as subject embedded in the world via constantly changing epistemic relations and agentive interactions.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step six: the PMIR -the phenomenal model of the intentionality relation
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“I believe that an additional necessary condition involved in generating full-blown out-of-body experiences and the complete transfer of selfhood to the illusory body is a transient episode of visual-vestibular disintegration.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step three: a representationalist analysis of the three target properties
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A genuine inner perspective arises if only and only if the system represents itself as currently interacting with the world to itself, and if it does not recognize this representation as a representation.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step six: the PMIR -the phenomenal model of the intentionality relation
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Second, in a much larger explanatory time-window, there apparently was no evolutionary pressure on the respective parts of our functional architecture in the process of natural selection.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step five: autoepistemic closure -transparency and the naı¨ve-realistic self-misunderstanding
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Naı¨ve realism is not a belief or an intellectual attitude, but a feature of phenomenal experience itself.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step five: autoepistemic closure -transparency and the naı¨ve-realistic self-misunderstanding
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“When a food pellet is dispensed beyond the reach of their hands and they skillfully use a rake to pull it closer, one can observe a change in their bodily self-model in the brain.In fact, it looks as if their conscious model of their hand had been expanded towards the tip of the tool.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step six: the PMIR -the phenomenal model of the intentionality relation
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Maravita and Iriki, 2004 source
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Monkeys have the conscious experience of ownership rather than only the unconscious mechanism.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In standard situations, the consciously experienced first-person perspective is the content of a transparent PMIR.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step six: the PMIR -the phenomenal model of the intentionality relation
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Many phenomenal representations are transparent because their content and its very existence appear to be fixed in all possible contexts.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step five: autoepistemic closure -transparency and the naı¨ve-realistic self-misunderstanding
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In standard phenomenological configurations, however, the entity that looks at the book in its hands is itself a form of transparent phenomenal content.And this is also true of the ''at''-ness inherent in this act of visual attention, of the relation that seems to connect subject and object.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step five: autoepistemic closure -transparency and the naı¨ve-realistic self-misunderstanding
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The virtual self-moving through the phenomenal world does not have a brain, a motor system, or sensory organs: certain parts of the environment appear directly in its mind; the perceptual process is experienced as effortless and immediate.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step six: the PMIR -the phenomenal model of the intentionality relation
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“First, in a very small time-window, the neural data structures in question are activated so quickly and reliably that the system is no longer able to recognize them as such, for instance due to the comparatively slow temporal resolution of metarepresentational functions.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step five: autoepistemic closure -transparency and the naı¨ve-realistic self-misunderstanding
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Clearly, the transition form biological to cultural evolution is intimately connected with the appearance of new and specific functional properties in the primate-PSM.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step six: the PMIR -the phenomenal model of the intentionality relation
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Some elementary building block of human tool-use abilities already existed in the brains of our ancestors.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For instance, opaque phenomenal representations arise when the information that their content is the result of an internal representational process suddenly becomes globally available.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step five: autoepistemic closure -transparency and the naı¨ve-realistic self-misunderstanding
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Whenever conscious experience arises (i.e., whenever a stable, integrated model of reality is activated), this continuous source of internal proprioceptive input also exists.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step four: the bodily self as a functional anchor of phenomenal space
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: There is a certain part of the human self-model that is characterized by a high degree of stimulus correlation and that depends exclusively on internally generated information.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For biological systems like us, naı¨ve realism was a functionally adequate background assumption.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step five: autoepistemic closure -transparency and the naı¨ve-realistic self-misunderstanding
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“During successful tool-use, changes in specific neural networks in their brains take place -a finding that suggests that the tools are temporarily integrated into their body schema.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step six: the PMIR -the phenomenal model of the intentionality relation
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Maravita and Iriki, 2004 source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“But the core idea is as follows: a conscious human being is a system that is capable of dynamically co-representing the representational relation while representational acts are taking place, and the instrument it uses for this purpose is the PMIR.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step six: the PMIR -the phenomenal model of the intentionality relation
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The conscious self-model is a virtual organ that allows us to own feedback loops, to initiate, sustain, and flexibly adapt control processes.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step six: the PMIR -the phenomenal model of the intentionality relation
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This general principle should hold for our experimental setup as well as for OBEs in epileptic patients or ''gifted subjects'' in the healthy population.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step three: a representationalist analysis of the three target properties
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The PSM is the interface that the system uses to functionally appropriate its own hardware, to control its own low-level dynamics and to become autonomous.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step six: the PMIR -the phenomenal model of the intentionality relation
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Basically, there are four different types of internally generated information that during conscious episodes, constitute a persistent functional link between the PSM and its bodily basis in the brain”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step four: the bodily self as a functional anchor of phenomenal space
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. The quote only partly states this claim.
- The authors state this as an assumption: There is a certain part of the human self-model that is characterized by a high degree of stimulus correlation and that depends exclusively on internally generated information.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The self-model is the functional window through which the brain can interact with the body as a whole, and vice versa.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step six: the PMIR -the phenomenal model of the intentionality relation
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A self-presentation is exactly that part of the phantom limb that remains conscious independently of the occurrence of movement.If this part is lost, you also lose the subjective experience of bodily presence -you turn into a ''disembodied being.''”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step four: the bodily self as a functional anchor of phenomenal space
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: There is a certain part of the human self-model that is characterized by a high degree of stimulus correlation and that depends exclusively on internally generated information.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Second, at least according to certain modal intuitions, there appears to be no necessary connection between the fundamental functional and representational properties on the one hand and the phenomenal target properties of ''mineness,'' ''prereflexive/ preagentive selfhood,'' and ''perspectivalness'' on the other hand.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step five: autoepistemic closure -transparency and the naı¨ve-realistic self-misunderstanding
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Out-of-body experiences are characterized by disembodiment of the self to an extracorporeal location, an extracorporeal visuo-spatial perspective, and seeing of one's own body from this extracorporeal self-location.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step three: a representationalist analysis of the three target properties
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The weaker degree of phenomenological ''vividness'' or ''realness'' in her phantom limbs may reflect exactly the absence of permanent bottom-up stimulation that in normal situations is caused by existing physical limbs.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step four: the bodily self as a functional anchor of phenomenal space
hedgedconditionalSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- The authors state this as an assumption: There is a certain part of the human self-model that is characterized by a high degree of stimulus correlation and that depends exclusively on internally generated information.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“My hypothesis is that the constant self-organizing activity of those regions of the bodily self that are independent of external input constitutes the functional center of phenomenal representational space.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step four: the bodily self as a functional anchor of phenomenal space
hedgeddirect- Asserted: fails — The authors may not put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The authors may not put it forward as true. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: There is a certain part of the human self-model that is characterized by a high degree of stimulus correlation and that depends exclusively on internally generated information.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The phenomenal self is the part of this interface that the system uses to experience itself as a whole, to represent itself as a thinking self and an agent.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step six: the PMIR -the phenomenal model of the intentionality relation
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The experience of selfhood is intimately related not only to the sense of ownership, but also to the experience of agency; it is not only a question of having a transparent self-model, but also of directedness, of being dynamically related to target objects and goal states.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step six: the PMIR -the phenomenal model of the intentionality relation
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In standard situations, and as opposed to all other conscious model of aspects of reality, the human PSM is anchored in the brain through a continuous flow of self-generated input.There exists a persistent causal link into the physical body itself.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step three: a representationalist analysis of the three target properties
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Of course, the way we subjectively experience this subject-object relation is a simplified version of the actual processes -in a sense, it is a functionally adequate confabulation.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step six: the PMIR -the phenomenal model of the intentionality relation
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The representational carrier of your conscious experience is a particular brain process.This process -that itself is in no way ''book-like''is not consciously experienced; it is transparent in the sense that phenomenologically, you look right through it.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step five: autoepistemic closure -transparency and the naı¨ve-realistic self-misunderstanding
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“By logical necessity, a phenomenally transparent selfmodel will create the experience of being infinitely close to yourself.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step five: autoepistemic closure -transparency and the naı¨ve-realistic self-misunderstanding
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The classical RHI (example no.4) only tells us something about the target property of ''ownership'' (for body parts), but not about ''selfhood'' (ownership for the whole body).”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step three: a representationalist analysis of the three target properties
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“If many of these arrows are consciously available, represented by the brain on the functional level of global availability, this results in a temporally extended first-person perspective.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step six: the PMIR -the phenomenal model of the intentionality relation
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Transparency, as defined in this context, is exclusively a property of conscious states.Unconscious states are neither transparent nor opaque.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step five: autoepistemic closure -transparency and the naı¨ve-realistic self-misunderstanding
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The contents of phenomenal experience not only create a world; they also create a present (see Metzinger, 2003a, Section 3.2.2).”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step six: the PMIR -the phenomenal model of the intentionality relation
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Metzinger, 2003a
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“At least two spatial frames of reference must be functionally dissociated, in order to not only have a ''teleportation-OBE,'' but a realistic exit phenomenology, a gradual motion path through phenomenal space.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step three: a representationalist analysis of the three target properties
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A necessary precondition of expanding your space of action and your capabilities by using tools clearly seems to be the ability to integrate them into a preexisting self-model.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step six: the PMIR -the phenomenal model of the intentionality relation
boostedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The human self-model possesses an enduring causal link in the brain.It has parts, which in turn are realized by permanent forms of information processing on permanent forms of self-generated input and low-level autoregulation.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step four: the bodily self as a functional anchor of phenomenal space
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: There is a certain part of the human self-model that is characterized by a high degree of stimulus correlation and that depends exclusively on internally generated information.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The core of the self-model theory is that this is how the basic sense of selfhood arises and how a phenomenal self that is untranscendable for the respective system comes about.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step five: autoepistemic closure -transparency and the naı¨ve-realistic self-misunderstanding
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Truth and falsity, reality and illusion do not exist for biological information-processing systems at the developmental stage in question.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step six: the PMIR -the phenomenal model of the intentionality relation
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: unclear — It is unclear whether it could be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Speaking of illusions presupposes someone having them.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step six: the PMIR -the phenomenal model of the intentionality relation
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Subjectivity in an epistemic sense, an epistemic firstperson perspective is yet another step.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step six: the PMIR -the phenomenal model of the intentionality relation
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It means repeatedly and continuously binding discrete events that have already been represented as such into temporal gestalts, into a consciously experienced moment.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step six: the PMIR -the phenomenal model of the intentionality relation
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Very obviously, the PSM is an important part of a control hierarchy; it is a means to monitor certain critical aspects of the”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Additional information
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the author of this chapter holds that subjective, first-person knowledge is precisely knowledge associated with a specific inner mode of presentation, namely as knowledge under a PMIR.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step six: the PMIR -the phenomenal model of the intentionality relation
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“experience and our subjective sense of presence are transparent as well.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step six: the PMIR -the phenomenal model of the intentionality relation
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The realism of phenomenal experience arises because it represents a possibility -the best hypothesis there is at a given moment -as an untranscendable reality, or an actuality.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step six: the PMIR -the phenomenal model of the intentionality relation
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“as the referent of this representation never existed, this obviously is also a form of misrepresentation.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step six: the PMIR -the phenomenal model of the intentionality relation
boostedSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“On the level of phenomenology, as well as on the level of neurobiology, the conscious self is neither a form of knowledge nor an illusion.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step six: the PMIR -the phenomenal model of the intentionality relation
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Psychology is self-model research.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step six: the PMIR -the phenomenal model of the intentionality relation
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In this ongoing process on the subpersonal level there is no agent -no evil demon that could count as the creator of an illusion.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step six: the PMIR -the phenomenal model of the intentionality relation
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: There is a subpersonal level of self-organization in the brain.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Of course, the phenomenology of selfhood, of non-conceptual self-consciousness, is the most important precondition for this step, because it is the precondition for genuinely reflexive, conceptual self-consciousness.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step six: the PMIR -the phenomenal model of the intentionality relation
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“On the level of body-representation, selfpresentation is what AZ lacks in her phantom limbs, whereas self-representation is what she actually has”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step six: the PMIR -the phenomenal model of the intentionality relation
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It is also maximally parsimonious, as it allows us to account for the emergence of self-consciousness without assuming the existence of a substantial self.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step six: the PMIR -the phenomenal model of the intentionality relation
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It is the scientific discipline that focuses on the representational content, the functional profile and the neurobiological realization of the human self-model, including its evolutionary history and its necessary social correlates.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step six: the PMIR -the phenomenal model of the intentionality relation
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“So far, we only have a theory of the phenomenology of selfhood, not a theory of self-knowledge.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step six: the PMIR -the phenomenal model of the intentionality relation
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“Remarkably, after these animals started to control the actuator directly using their neuronal activity, their limbs eventually stopped moving, while the animals continued to control the actuator by generating proper modulations of their cortical neurons.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Additional information
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Lebedev and Nicolelis, 2006 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“And this finally helps understand what it means to say that phenomenal space is a virtual space: its content is a possible reality.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step six: the PMIR -the phenomenal model of the intentionality relation
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“But something that is not an epistemic subject in a strong sense of conceptual/propositional knowledge is simply unable to confuse itself with anything else.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step six: the PMIR -the phenomenal model of the intentionality relation
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Ultimately, and obviously, every single instance of the PSM/PMIR is identical with a specific time-slice in the continuous, dynamical self-organization of coherent activity taking place in an individual biological brain.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step six: the PMIR -the phenomenal model of the intentionality relation
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: There is a subpersonal level of self-organization in the brain.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Subjectivity in the epistemological sense can be naturalized as well -but only if we can tell a convincing evolutionary and neuroscientific story about how this representational architecture, this highly specific, indexical inner mode of presentation, could actually have developed in a selforganizing physical universe in the first place.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step six: the PMIR -the phenomenal model of the intentionality relation
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The brain is a self-organizing physical system.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the virtual character of both the self-model and the window of presence are not available on the level of subjective experience itself”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Step six: the PMIR -the phenomenal model of the intentionality relation
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“once the monkey has successfully embedded an internal representation of this new actuator into his conscious self-model, the representations of his old body parts lose certain functional properties, they transiently becomes less and less available for attentional processing and gradually recede from conscious experience.”
§ Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity: a brief summary with examples > Additional information
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The authors state this as an assumption.
The properties in question for the emergence of a conscious self are representational and functional brain properties.
“The self-model theory assumes that the properties in question are representational and functional brain properties.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
The human self-model will be predominantly a neurocomputational theory.
“Personally, I assume that this will be a predominately neurocomputational theory (see for instance, Churchland, 1989).”
The authors state this as an assumption.
The development and activation of the self-model computational module plays a role for the system, and the functional self-model possesses a true evolutionary description.
“The obvious fact that the development of our self-model has a long biological, evolutionary, and (a somewhat shorter) social history can now be accounted for by introducing a teleofunctionalist background assumption, as it is often called in philosophy of mind”
“The development and activation of this computational module plays a role for the system: the functional self-model possesses a true evolutionary description, i.e., it was a weapon that was invented and continuously optimized in the course of a ''cognitive arms race'' (Clark, 1989, p. 61).”
The paper relies on this without support.
First-person reports about the experiential content of the OBE state-class are accurate and sincere.
“accurate and sincere first-person reports about the experiential content of this specific neurophenomenological state-class.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The Starfish robot's internal model qualifies as a self-model in the sense of the self-model theory.
“Starfish not only synthesizes an internal selfmodel, but also uses this self-model to generate intelligent behavior.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
There is a certain part of the human self-model that is characterized by a high degree of stimulus correlation and that depends exclusively on internally generated information.
“Philosophically, it is not as much the neurobiological details that are crucial as the highly plausible assumption that there is a certain part of the human self-model that is characterized by a high degree of stimulus correlation and that depends exclusively on internally generated information.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
Some elementary building block of human tool-use abilities already existed in the brains of our ancestors.
“One may plausibly assume that some elementary building block of human tool-use abilities already existed in the brains of our ancestors.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
Monkeys have the conscious experience of ownership rather than only the unconscious mechanism.
“Of course, we do not know if monkeys actually have the conscious experience of ownership or only the unconscious mechanism.But we do know about several similarities between macaques and humans that make this assumption seem plausible.”
The paper relies on this without support.
There is a physical flow of time.
“within the physical flow of time”
The paper relies on this without support.
There is a subpersonal level of self-organization in the brain.
“In this ongoing process on the subpersonal level there is no agent”
The paper relies on this without support.
The brain is a self-organizing physical system.
“selforganizing physical universe”
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“and that this remarkable capacity has developed quite late (phylo- and ontogenetically, Metzinger, 2003, 2008).”
From 'Seeing the Dark': Grounding Phenomenal Transparency and Opacity in Precision Estimation for Active Inference (2018) · cites this paper as Metzinger, 2008
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Metzinger (2008) extends the traditional transparency notion by the claim that not (only) the carrier, but the ‘construction process’ of a phenomenally transparent mental representation is inaccessible to introspective attention”
From 'Seeing the Dark': Grounding Phenomenal Transparency and Opacity in Precision Estimation for Active Inference (2018) · cites this paper as Metzinger, 2008
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“This capacity enables us to reflect on ourselves and also on other selves, which is one of our essential distinctions from most (in its complexity, probably from all) other animals (cf. Metzinger, 2008).”
From 'Seeing the Dark': Grounding Phenomenal Transparency and Opacity in Precision Estimation for Active Inference (2018) · cites this paper as Metzinger, 2008
Citations
Cites
A default mode of brain function
Raichle, M. E., MacLeod, A. M., Snyder, A. Z., Powers, W. J., Gusnard, D. A., & Shulman, G. L. (2001) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.98.2.676 · Cited by 12,190
The feeling of what happens: body and emotion in the making of consciousness
(2000) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.37-6553 · Cited by 6,001
Language, Thought, and Other Biological Categories: New Foundations for Realism
Millikan, R. G. (1984) · doi:10.7551/mitpress/4124.001.0001 · Cited by 4,758
Rubber hands ‘feel’ touch that eyes see
Botvinick, M., & Cohen, J. (1998) · Nature · doi:10.1038/35784 · Cited by 4,410
(1987) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 4,269
(1988) · Cited by 3,656
The Feeling of What Happens: Body and Emotion in the Making of Consciousness
Panksepp, J., & Modell, A. H. (2000) · Neuropsychoanalysis · doi:10.1080/15294145.2000.10773287 · Cited by 3,421
Gallagher, S. (2005) · doi:10.1093/0199271941.001.0001 · Cited by 3,311
Mirror neurons and the simulation theory of mind-reading
Gallese, V (1998) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/s1364-6613(98)01262-5 · Cited by 3,201
Brain–machine interfaces: past, present and future
Lebedev, M. A., & Nicolelis, M. A. L. (2006) · Trends in Neurosciences · doi:10.1016/j.tins.2006.07.004 · Cited by 1,875
Learning to control a brain–machine interface for reaching and grasping by primates
Carmena, J. M., Lebedev, M. A., Crist, R. E., O'Doherty, J. E., Santucci, D. M., Dimitrov, D. F., Patil, P. G., Henriquez, C. S., & Nicolelis, M. A. L. (2003) · PLoS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0000042 · Cited by 1,761
Explaining Behavior: Reasons in a World of Causes
Dretske, F. (1988) · doi:10.7551/mitpress/2927.001.0001 · Cited by 1,512
That's my hand! Activity in premotor cortex reflects feeling of ownership of a limb
Ehrsson, H. H., Spence, C., & Passingham, R. E. (2004) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1097011 · Cited by 1,348
Coding of modified body schema during tool use by macaque postcentral neurones
lriki, A., Tanaka, M., & Iwamura, Y. (1996) · NeuroReport · doi:10.1097/00001756-199610020-00010 · Cited by 1,274
Video ergo sum: manipulating bodily self-consciousness
Lenggenhager, B., Tadi, T., Metzinger, T., & Blanke, O. (2007) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1143439 · Cited by 1,265
Self-citationSynaesthesia in phantom limbs induced with mirrors
(1996) · Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rspb.1996.0058 · Cited by 1,246
Maravita, A., & Iriki, A. (2004) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2003.12.008 · Cited by 1,214
Explaining behavior: reasons in a world of causes
(1988) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.26-0865 · Cited by 1,196
Rowan, J. R. (1997) · Self & Society · doi:10.1080/03060497.1997.11085777 · Cited by 1,038
Embodied simulation: from neurons to phenomenal experience
Gallese, V. (2005) · Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1007/s11097-005-4737-z · Cited by 947
White Queen Psychology and Other Essays for Alice
Millikan, R. G. (1993) · The MIT Press eBooks · doi:10.7551/mitpress/7224.001.0001 · Cited by 898
(2003) · Cited by 885
Self-citationProjecting sensations to external objects: evidence from skin conductance response
Armel, K. C., & Ramachandran, V. S. (2003) · Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rspb.2003.2364 · Cited by 854
Being No One: The Self-Model Theory of Subjectivity
Metzinger, T. (2003) · MIT Press · doi:10.7551/mitpress/1551.001.0001 · Cited by 789
Self-citationOut-of-body experience and autoscopy of neurological origin
Blanke, O., Landis, T., Spinelli, L., & Seeck, M. (2004) · Brain · doi:10.1093/brain/awh040 · Cited by 747
(2020) · The MIT Press eBooks · doi:10.7551/mitpress/12143.003.0004 · Cited by 716
Resilient Machines Through Continuous Self-Modeling
Bongard, J., Zykov, V., & Lipson, H. (2006) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1133687 · Cited by 709
The Remembered Present; A Biological Theory of Consciousness.
Berger, G., & Edelman, G. M. (1994) · Noûs · doi:10.2307/2216056 · Cited by 692
The Nature of Psychological Explanation.
Harré, R., & Cummins, R. (1985) · Noûs · doi:10.2307/2214959 · Cited by 610
The Remembered Present: A Biological Theory of Consciousness
(1990) · Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience · doi:10.1162/jocn.1990.2.4.385 · Cited by 574
A Neurocomputational Perspective
Churchland, P. M. (1992) · The MIT Press eBooks · doi:10.7551/mitpress/4940.001.0001 · Cited by 571
Blanke, O., Mohr, C., Michel, C. M., Pascual-Leone, A., Brugger, P., Seeck, M., Landis, T., & Thut, G. (2005) · The Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.2612-04.2005 · Cited by 567 · cited 1×
“was a partial activation of the seizure focus (Blanke et al., 2005).”
BackgroundFranz Brentano: Psychologie vom empirischen Standpunkt.
Caldwell, W., & Kraus, O. (1926) · The Philosophical Review · doi:10.2307/2179180 · Cited by 534
White Queen Psychology and Other Essays for Alice.
Tanney, J., & Millikan, R. G. (1995) · The Philosophical Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2219870 · Cited by 502
Microcognition: Philosophy, Cognitive Science, and Parallel Distributed Processing.
Higginbotham, J., & Clark, A. (1994) · The Philosophical Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2220153 · Cited by 457
Bermúdez, J. L., Marcel, A. J., & Eilan, N. (1995) · Cited by 450
(1991) · Cited by 434
The Nature of Psychological Explanation
Baatz, C. W. (1988) · International Studies in Philosophy · doi:10.5840/intstudphil198820113 · Cited by 362
Varieties of anomalous experience: Examining the scientific evidence.
(2000) · American Psychological Association eBooks · doi:10.1037/10371-000 · Cited by 360
Human Body Perception From The Inside Out
(2005) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780195178371.001.0001 · Cited by 339
Blakeslee, S., & Ramachandran, V. S. (1998) · Cited by 316
Phantom limbs in people with congenital limb deficiency or amputation in early childhood
Melzack, R. (1997) · Brain · doi:10.1093/brain/120.9.1603 · Cited by 291
Neural correlates of consciousness : empirical and conceptual questions
Metzinger, T. K. (2000) · Cited by 268
Self-citationMelzack, R. (1992) · Scientific American · doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0492-120 · Cited by 268
Phantom limbs, the self and the brain: The D.O. Hebb memorial lecture
Melzack, R. (1989) · Canadian Psychology / Psychologie canadienne · doi:10.1037/h0079793 · Cited by 260
White Queen Psychology and Other Essays for Alice.
WEDGWOOD, R. J. P., & Millikan, R. G. (1995) · The Philosophical Review · doi:10.2307/2186029 · Cited by 260
Beyond re-membering: Phantom sensations of congenitally absent limbs
Brugger, P., Kollias, S. S., Müri, R. M., Crelier, G., Hepp-Reymond, M.-C., & Regard, M. (2000) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.100510697 · Cited by 258
Are There Neural Correlates of Consciousness
Noë, A., & Thompson, E. T. (2004) · Journal of Consciousness Studies · Cited by 244
Autoscopic phenomena with seizures
Devinsky, O., Feldmann, E., Burrowes, K., & Bromfield, E. (1989) · Archives of Neurology · doi:10.1001/archneur.1989.00520460060015 · Cited by 230
Naturalism and the First-Person Perspective
Baker, L. R. (2013) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199914722.001.0001 · Cited by 228
Illusory reduplication of one's own body: phenomenology and classification of autoscopic phenomena
Brugger, P., Regard, M., & Landis, T. (1997) · Cognitive Neuropsychiatry · doi:10.1080/135468097396397 · Cited by 207
Probing the neural basis of body ownership
Botvinick, M. (2004) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1101836 · Cited by 181
Phenomenal transparency and cognitive self-reference
Metzinger, T. (2003) · Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1023/b:phen.0000007366.42918.eb · Cited by 162 · cited 10×
“The solution has to do with what philosophers call ' ' phenomenal transparency ' ' ( for a short explanation of the concept of ' ' phenomenal transparency , ' ' see Metzinger , 2003c ; Metzinger , 2003b is the German precursor ) .”
BackgroundInfluentialSelf-citationConsciousness, dreams and virtual realities
Revonsuo, A. (1995) · Philosophical Psychology · doi:10.1080/09515089508573144 · Cited by 149
Psychologie vom empirischen Standpunkt. Erster Band
Franz, F. (1973) · Felix Meiner Verlag eBooks · doi:10.28937/978-3-7873-2608-2 · Cited by 148
The architecture of representation
Grush, R. (1997) · Philosophical Psychology · doi:10.1080/09515089708573201 · Cited by 144 · cited 1×
“…parietal lobe and — since there is no contradictory feedback from the amputated limb — are subsequently integrated into the part of the self-model that serves as a motor emulator (related ideas are discussed by Grush 1997, 1998, p. 174; see also Ramachandran and Rogers-Ramachandran, 1996, p. 378).”
Background(1983) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 136
The content of awareness is a model of the world
Yates, J. (1985) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.92.2.249 · Cited by 133
The emergence of a shared action ontology: building blocks for a theory
Metzinger, T., & Gallese, V. (2003) · Consciousness and Cognition · doi:10.1016/s1053-8100(03)00072-2 · Cited by 132
Self-citationAlvarado, C. S. (2004) · American Psychological Association eBooks · doi:10.1037/10371-006 · Cited by 132
Being a self: considerations from functional imaging
Gusnard, D. A. (2005) · Consciousness and Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.concog.2005.04.004 · Cited by 116
Metzinger, T. K. (2000) · The MIT Press eBooks · doi:10.7551/mitpress/4928.003.0026 · Cited by 100
Self-citationNaturalism and the First-Person Perspective
Baker, L. R. (2008) · De Gruyter eBooks · doi:10.1515/9783110328950.203 · Cited by 89
Depp, S. W., & Howard, W. E. (1993) · Scientific American · doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0393-90 · Cited by 88
(2006) · The MIT Press eBooks · doi:10.7551/mitpress/2457.001.0001 · Cited by 82
Metzinger, T. K. (1999) · Brill | mentis eBooks · doi:10.30965/9783969751770 · Cited by 74
Self-citationProprioception and the Body Image
O'Shaughnessy, B. (2003) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/0199256721.003.0024 · Cited by 71
Bischof-Köhler, D. (1989) · Open access LMU (Ludwid Maxmilian's Universitat Munchen) · doi:10.5282/ubm/epub.2919 · Cited by 69
Windt, J., & Metzinger, T. K. (2007) · Cited by 67
Self-citation(2005) · Cited by 64
Self-citationBarrett, D. J., & McNamara, P. (2007) · Cited by 56
Awareness of One's Own Body: An Attentional Theory of Its Nature, Development, and Brain Basis
(1995) · The MIT Press eBooks · doi:10.7551/mitpress/1640.003.0011 · Cited by 54
(1993) · Cited by 53
Self-citationVarieties of anomalous experience: examining the scientific evidence
(2000) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.38-2434 · Cited by 53
The first-person perspective : A test for naturalism
Baker, L. R. (1998) · ScholarWorks@UMassAmherst (University of Massachusetts Amherst) · Cited by 50
The projection of the astral body
Muldoon, S. J., & Carrington, H. (1956) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 47
Natanson, M. (1969) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-87984-5_2 · Cited by 39
Prospects for a Scientific Research Program on Consciousness
Revonsuo, A. (2000) · The MIT Press eBooks · doi:10.7551/mitpress/4928.003.0006 · Cited by 35
Transzendentale oder evolutionäre Erkenntnistheorie
Lütterfelds, W. (1987) · Cited by 29
Conscious Volition and Mental Representation: Toward a More Fine-Grained Analysis
Metzinger, T. (2006) · Disorders of Volition · doi:10.7551/mitpress/2457.003.0003 · Cited by 23
Self-citationReply to Gallagher: Different conceptions of embodiment
Metzinger, T. K. (2006) · PhilPapers (PhilPapers Foundation) · Cited by 22
Self-citationBewusstsein : Philosophie, Neurowissenschaften, Ethik
Herrmann, C. S. (2005) · Cited by 18
Maravita, A. (2005) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780195178371.003.0004 · Cited by 18
Pawelzik, M., & Prinz, A. (2004) · De Gruyter eBooks · doi:10.1515/9783110905762 · Cited by 15
(1997) · PubMed · Cited by 10
Why Are Identity Disorders Interesting for Philosophers?
Metzinger, T. K. (2004) · De Gruyter eBooks · doi:10.1515/9783110905762.311 · Cited by 10
Self-citationIdentität, Leiblichkeit, Normativität : neue Horizonte anthropologischen Denkens
Barkhaus, A. (1996) · Cited by 9
Naturalismus : philosophische Beiträge
Keil, G., & Schnädelbach, H. (2000) · PhilPapers (PhilPapers Foundation) · Cited by 7
Bewusstsein und Repräsentation
Esken, F., & Heckmann, H.-D. (1998) · F. Schöningh eBooks · Cited by 6
Perspektivische Fakten? Die Naturalisierung des „Blick von nirgendwo“
Metzinger, T. K. (2013) · De Gruyter eBooks · doi:10.1515/9783110816266.103 · Cited by 6
Self-citationMetzinger, T. K. (2003) · Cited by 4
Self-citationPhänomenale Transparenz und Kognitive Selbstbezugnahme
Metzinger, T. K. (2003) · Brill | mentis eBooks · doi:10.30965/9783969751732_017 · Cited by 3
Self-citationIch-Störungen als pathologische Formen mentaler Selbstmodellierung
Metzinger, T. K. (1997) · Sammelpunkt - Elektronisch archivierte Theorie · Cited by 2
Self-citation
Research works printed but not linked: 8
- Alvarado, 1986, Research on spontaneous out-of-body experiences: a review of modern developments, 1960–1984
- Blackmore, 1986, Spontaneous and deliberate OBEs: a questionnaire survey, J. Soc. Psych. Res., 53, 218
- Brugger, 2001, Hand movement observation in a person born without hands: is body scheme innate?, J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiatry, 70, 276
- Irwin, H. (1985) Flight of mind. Scarecrow Press, Metuchen, NJ and London.
- Metzinger, T. (Ed.) (1995b). Conscious Experience. Imprint Academic, Thorverton, UK.
- Metzinger, T. (2005a). Précis of “Being No One”. In: PSYCHE: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Research on Consciousness, 11(5): 1–35. URL: www.psyche.cs.monash.edu.au/
- Ruhnau, E. (1995). Time-Gestalt and the observer. In: Metzinger T., (Ed.), Conscious Experience. Imprint Academic, Thorverton.
- Vuilleumier, 1997, Héautoscopie, exta-se et hallucinations expérientielles d’origine épileptique, Rev. Neurol., 153, 115
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The Sense of Embodiment in Virtual Reality
Kilteni, K., Groten, R., & Slater, M. (2012) · PRESENCE Virtual and Augmented Reality · doi:10.1162/pres_a_00124 · Cited by 1,901
“From the philosophical perspective it is a part of the general discussion on how one defines and experiences one’s self (Blanke & Metzinger, 2009; Metzinger, 2008).”
BackgroundFull-body illusions and minimal phenomenal selfhood
Blanke, O., & Metzinger, T. (2009) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2008.10.003 · Cited by 1,060
“If the integration processes leading to the phenomenal self-model[6, 8 ] are disturbed (if certain states are isolated from global control), then disturbances of bodily self-consciousness will appear and these might affect certain body parts, in addition to the entire body.”
BackgroundSelf-citationBanakou, D., Groten, R., & Slater, M. (2013) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1306779110 · Cited by 695
“The issue of how the brain represents the body has been approached extensively in philosophy (1, 2), cognitive neuroscience (3–5), robotics (6, 7), and virtual environments (8, 9).”
BackgroundMethodRecommendations for Good Scientific Practice and the Consumers of VR-Technology
Madary, M., & Metzinger, T. K. (2016) · Frontiers in Robotics and AI · doi:10.3389/frobt.2016.00003 · Cited by 435
Self-citationThe Senses of Agency and Ownership: A Review
Braun, N., Debener, S., Spychała, N., Bongartz, E., Sörös, P., Müller, H., & Philipsen, A. (2018) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00535 · Cited by 367
“For a concrete example of a how limb-ownership may arise according to the SMT, consider Ramachandran’s mirror box experiments with phantom limb patients (Ramachandran and Rogers-Ramachandran, 1996; Metzinger, 2007a; Ramachandran and Altschuler, 2009).”
Influential
Metadata
- Authors
- Metzinger, T.
- Affiliations
- Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz (DE)
- Corresponding author
- Metzinger, Thomas
- ORCID
- Metzinger, Thomas
- Venue
- Progress in Brain Research
- Publisher
- Elsevier
- Published
- 2007
- Volume
- 168
- Pages
- 215-278
- ISSN
- 0079-6123 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1482860377
- Cited by
- 123
- References
- 105
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 9
- FWCI
- 16.36
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- philarchive.org
- Locations
- Progress in brain research (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PhilPapers (PhilPapers Foundation) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Philosophy and Theoretical Science
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Embodied and Extended Cognition
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Free Will and Agency
- Keywords
- self-awareness, first-person perspective, consciousness, representationalism, intentionality
- MeSH terms
- Consciousness, Ego, Humans, Self Concept, Self Psychology, Intention, Empirical Research
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-11, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-11 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
