Cited by 117Philosophy and Theoretical ScienceEpistemology, Ethics, and MetaphysicsMental Health and Psychiatry

How many kinds of consciousness?

Rosenthal, David M·2002·Consciousness and Cognition

Abstract

Ned Block's influential distinction between phenomenal and access consciousness has become a staple of current discussions of consciousness. It is not often noted, however, that his distinction tacitly embodies unargued theoretical assumptions that favor some theoretical treatments at the expense of others. This is equally so for his less widely discussed distinction between phenomenal consciousness and what he calls reflexive consciousness. I argue that the distinction between phenomenal and access consciousness, as Block draws it, is untenable. Though mental states that have qualitative character plainly differ from those with no mental qualities, a mental state's being conscious is the same property for both kinds of mental state. For one thing, as Block describes access consciousness, that notion does not pick out any property that we intuitively count as a mental state's being conscious. But the deeper problem is that Block's notion of phenomenal consciousness, or phenomenality, is ambiguous as between two very different mental properties. The failure to distinguish these results in the begging of important theoretical questions. Once the two kinds of phenomenality have been distinguished, the way is clear to explain qualitative consciousness by appeal to a model such as the higher-order-thought hypothesis.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s1053-8100(02)00017-x

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • This class describes many contemporary theories, including IIT, GNW, Predictive Processing, and Higher Order Thought Theory.

    “This class describes many contemporary theories, including leading theories such as IIT (Oizumi et al. 2014), GNW Theory (Dehaene and Changeux 2004), Predictive Processing [when applied to account for conscious experience (Hohwy 2012; Hobson et al. 2014; Seth 2014; Clark 2019; Dolega and Dewhurst 2020)], or Higher Order Thought Theory (Rosenthal 2002).”

    From Falsification and consciousness (2021) · cites this paper as Rosenthal 2002

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rosenthal, D. M.
Affiliations
The Graduate Center, CUNY (US)
Corresponding author
Rosenthal, David M
Venue
Consciousness and Cognition
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2002-12
Volume
11
Issue
4
Pages
653-665
ISSN
1053-8100 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1998824234
Cited by
117
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 4
FWCI
1.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Consciousness and Cognition (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Philosophy and Theoretical Science
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Mental Health and Psychiatry
Keywords
phenomenal consciousness, access consciousness, reflexive consciousness, Ned Block, phenomenality, mental states, theory of consciousness
MeSH terms
Consciousness, Humans, Models, Psychological, Perception, Mind-Body Relations, Metaphysical

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.

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