Pragmatics & Cognition - Volume 18, Issue 3, 2010

This paper introduces the background to the debate addressed by the papers of this Special Issue of Pragmatics & Cognition. Starting with a definition of consciousness it traces some ways in which the term is applied; from clinical medicine, where it relates somewhat crudely to responsiveness to external stimuli, to more cognitive and philosophical aspects such as higher order consciousness and its content. It then discusses the relation of consciousness to brain anatomy, the neural correlates of consciousness, and its possible evolution. In the meeting which forms the basis for Frith’s core paper, Christof Koch also made important contributions, here précised. A discussion of the origins of consciousness in relation to the top-down and bottom-up models brought to the fore follows suit.

In the first talk I discuss recent experiments designed to elucidate the neural correlates of consciousness. Implicit in this discussion are operational definitions of what I mean by consciousness. In the second talk I explore the extent to which we are conscious of being in control of our actions, our sense of agency. I raise the question of why we need to be aware of actions at all since we can achieve so much without such awareness. In the final talk I propose that consciousness has a critical role in social interactions. Consciousness of action allows us to assign responsibility and develop culturally acceptable justifications for action. Furthermore, consciousness enables us to share our experiences in a manner that is optimal for group decisions.

I review the problem of how to define consciousness. I suggest that rather than continuing that debate, we should turn to phenomenological description of experience to discover the common aspects of consciousness. In this way we can say that consciousness is characterized by intentionality, phenomenality, and non-reflective self-awareness. I explore this last characteristic in detail and I argue against higher-order representational theories of consciousness, with reference to blindsight and motor control processes.

Phenomenal awareness, the ability to be aware of one’s sensations and feelings, emerges from the capacity of evolved brains to represent their own cognitive processes by iterating and self-reapplying the cortical operations that generate representations of the outer world. Search for the neuronal substrate of awareness therefore converges with the search for the neuronal code through which brains represent their environment. The hypothesis is put forward that the mammalian brain uses two complementary representational strategies. One consists of the generation of neurons responding selectively to particular constellations of features, and is based on selective recombination of inputs in hierarchically structured feed-forward architectures. The other relies on the dynamic association of large numbers of distributed neurons into functionally coherent cell assemblies which as a whole represent a content of cognition. Arguments and data are presented in favor of the second strategy as the one according to which meta-representations that support awareness are established. My hypothesis is that such distributed representations self-organize through transient synchronization of the oscillatory activity. Evidence showing that similar brain states are required both for the occurrence of these synchronization phenomena and for awareness is provided.

Chris Frith’s target chapters contain a wealth of interesting experiments and striking theoretical claims. In these comments I begin by drawing out some of the key themes in his discussion of action and the sense of agency. Frith’s central claim about conscious action is that what we are primarily conscious of in acting is our own agency. I will review some of the experimental evidence that he interprets in support of this claim and then explore the following three questions about the awareness of agency:(1) Should we locate the phenomena that Frith describes as awareness of agency at the personal level or at the subpersonal level?(2) If we are indeed operating at the personal level, then should we think about awareness of agency as something we experience, or as something that we believe?(3) If awareness of agency is to be understood experientially, is there what some authors have called “a sense of agency”, where this is understood to be a distinctive type of experience that accompanies agentive behaviors but is absent in behaviors that are not under the control of the agent?In what follows I argue that awareness of agency should be located at the personal level, and that we should think of it as something we experience . But I will reject the claim that there is a distinctive sense of agency.

In this review article I examine Michel Tye’s recent reassessment of the phenomenal concept strategy. The phenomenal concept strategy is employed in the attempts to respond to the classical arguments that challenge materialism. I examine Tye’s reasons for abandoning the phenomenal concept strategy (a strategy that he himself advocated in his earlier writings), and I examine the elements of his new position according to which the materialist response should involve ‘singular when filled’ content schema, as well as a version of the Russellian distinction between knowledge by acquaintance and knowledge by description. In the final part I criticize the adequacy of Tye’s theory not as a response to the dualists but rather as a response to opponents of representationalism from the materialist camp.

In How the Mind Uses the Brain Ralph Ellis and Natika Newton develop a novel embodied, enactive theory of consciousness, according to which consciousness has its basis in neural systems that prepare the system to perform actions of emotional significance to the organism. Consciousness emerges out of self-organising processes which function in such a way as to contribute to, and maintain, the organism’s overall wellbeing. I’ll begin this review by reconstructing Ellis and Newton’s view of consciousness as a self-organising process, and then go on to compare and contrast the enactive theory with the model of consciousness Chris Frith has outlined in his lectures.