scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Tim Crane

Bio: Tim Crane is an academic researcher from University of Cambridge. The author has contributed to research in topics: Physicalism & Intentionality. The author has an hindex of 26, co-authored 75 publications receiving 2837 citations. Previous affiliations of Tim Crane include University College London & University of London.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
01 Apr 1990-Mind
TL;DR: Physicalism as discussed by the authors is a kind of monism, opposing the dualist's distinction between two kinds of substance: matter and mind, and it is not a doctrine about universals or other abstract objects, but about the empirical world, and specifically about minds.
Abstract: Many philosophers are impressed by the progress achieved by physical sciences. This has had an especially deep effect on their ontological views: it has made many of them physicalists. Physicalists believe that everything is physical: more precisely, that all entities, properties, relations, and facts are those which are studied by physics or other physical sciences. They may not all agree with the spirit of Rutherford's quoted remark that 'there is physics; and there is stamp-collecting',' but they all grant physical science a unique ontological authority: the authority to tell us what there is. Physicalism is now almost orthodox in much philosophy, notably in much recent philosophy of mind. But although often invoked, it is rarely explicitly defined. It should be. The claim that everything is physical is not as clear as it seems. In this paper, we examine a number of proposed definitions of physicalism and reasons for being a physicalist. We will argue both that physicalism lacks a clear and credible definition, and that in no non-vacuous interpretation is it true. We are concerned here only with physicalism as a doctrine about the empirical world. In particular, it should not be confused with nominalism, the doctrine that there are no universals.2 Nominalism and physicalism are quite independent doctrines. Believers in universals may as consistently assert as deny that the only properties and relations are those studied by physical science. And nominalists may with equal consistency assert or deny that physical science could provide enough predicates to describe the world. That is the question which concerns physicalists, not whether physical predicates name real universals. (We will for brevity write as if they do, but we do not need that assumption.) As we will understand it, then, physicalism is not a doctrine about universals or other abstract objects, but about the empirical world, and specifically about minds. It says that mental entities, properties, relations and facts are all really physical. The mental is physicalism's chief target; but one we think it does not hit. Physicalism is a kind of monism, opposing the dualist's distinction between two kinds of substance: matter and mind. As such, it is descended

276 citations

Book
29 May 1998
TL;DR: The paradox of self-consciousness is the form of a solution content, concepts, and language the theory of non-conceptual content the self of ecological optics somatic proprioception and the bodily self points of view navigation and spatial reasoning psychological self-awareness.
Abstract: The paradox of self-consciousness the form of a solution content, concepts, and language the theory of nonconceptual content the self of ecological optics somatic proprioception and the bodily self points of view navigation and spatial reasoning psychological self-awareness - self and others solving the paradox of self-consciousness.

253 citations

Book ChapterDOI
01 Mar 1992
TL;DR: In this paper, it is argued that a scientist and a child may look at a cathode ray tube and, in a sense, the first will see it while the second won't.
Abstract: Concepts and perceptual experience To what extent do our beliefs about the world affect what we see? Our beliefs certainly affect where we choose to look, but do they affect what we see when we look there? Some have claimed that people with very different beliefs literally see the world differently. Thus Thomas Kuhn: ‘what a man sees depends both upon what he looks at and also upon what his previous visual–conceptual experience has taught him to see’ (Kuhn 1970, p. 113). This view – call it ‘Perceptual Relativism’ – entails that a scientist and a child may look at a cathode ray tube and, in a sense, the first will see it while the second won't. The claim is not, of course, that the child's experience is ‘empty’; but that, unlike the scientist, it does not see the tube as a cathode ray tube. One way of supporting this claim is to say that one cannot see something as an F unless one has the concept F . Since the child plainly lacks the concept of a cathode ray tube, it cannot see it as a cathode ray tube. Although Perceptual Relativism is hard to believe, this supporting suggestion is not so implausible. After all, when we see (and more generally, perceive) the world, the world is presented to us in a particular way; so how can we see it as being that way unless we have some idea or conception of the way it is presented?

220 citations

19 Jan 2006
TL;DR: It is argued that the central question in the philosophy of perception is the question of whether perceptual experience should be understood in terms of a perceptual relation to the environment, or in Terms of intentionality (or representation).
Abstract: I argue that the central question in the philosophy of perception is the question of whether perceptual experience should be understood in terms of a perceptual relation to the environment, or in terms of intentionality (or representation). The question of whether experience involves ‘qualia’ is, by comparison, not very significant.Article

160 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, it is argued that perceptual experience is a form of intentionality, i.e., that it has representational content, and that it can be true or false.
Abstract: It is widely agreed that perceptual experience is a form of intentionality, i.e., that it has representational content. Many philosophers take this to mean that like belief, experience has propositional content, that it can be true or false. I accept that perceptual experience has intentionality; but I dispute the claim that it has propositional content. This claim does not follow from the fact that experience is intentional, nor does it follow from the fact that experiences are accurate or inaccurate. I end by considering the relationship between this question and the question of whether experience has non-conceptual content.

146 citations


Cited by
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Correlational, quasi-experimental, and laboratory studies show that the MAAS measures a unique quality of consciousness that is related to a variety of well-being constructs, that differentiates mindfulness practitioners from others, and that is associated with enhanced self-awareness.
Abstract: Mindfulness is an attribute of consciousness long believed to promote well-being. This research provides a theoretical and empirical examination of the role of mindfulness in psychological well-being. The development and psychometric properties of the dispositional Mindful Attention Awareness Scale (MAAS) are described. Correlational, quasi-experimental, and laboratory studies then show that the MAAS measures a unique quality of consciousness that is related to a variety of well-being constructs, that differentiates mindfulness practitioners from others, and that is associated with enhanced selfawareness. An experience-sampling study shows that both dispositional and state mindfulness predict self-regulated behavior and positive emotional states. Finally, a clinical intervention study with cancer patients demonstrates that increases in mindfulness over time relate to declines in mood disturbance and stress. Many philosophical, spiritual, and psychological traditions emphasize the importance of the quality of consciousness for the maintenance and enhancement of well-being (Wilber, 2000). Despite this, it is easy to overlook the importance of consciousness in human well-being because almost everyone exercises its primary capacities, that is, attention and awareness. Indeed, the relation between qualities of consciousness and well-being has received little empirical attention. One attribute of consciousness that has been much-discussed in relation to well-being is mindfulness. The concept of mindfulness has roots in Buddhist and other contemplative traditions where conscious attention and awareness are actively cultivated. It is most commonly defined as the state of being attentive to and aware of what is taking place in the present. For example, Nyanaponika Thera (1972) called mindfulness “the clear and single-minded awareness of what actually happens to us and in us at the successive moments of perception” (p. 5). Hanh (1976) similarly defined mindfulness as “keeping one’s consciousness alive to the present reality” (p. 11). Recent research has shown that the enhancement of mindfulness through training facilitates a variety of well-being outcomes (e.g., Kabat-Zinn, 1990). To date, however, there has been little work examining this attribute as a naturally occurring characteristic. Recognizing that most everyone has the capacity to attend and to be aware, we nonetheless assume (a) that individuals differ in their propensity or willingness to be aware and to sustain attention to what is occurring in the present and (b) that this mindful capacity varies within persons, because it can be sharpened or dulled by a variety of factors. The intent of the present research is to reliably identify these inter- and intrapersonal variations in mindfulness, establish their relations to other relevant psychological constructs, and demonstrate their importance to a variety of forms of psychological well-being.

9,818 citations

01 Jan 2011
TL;DR: To understand the central claims of evolutionary psychology the authors require an understanding of some key concepts in evolutionary biology, cognitive psychology, philosophy of science and philosophy of mind.
Abstract: Evolutionary psychology is one of many biologically informed approaches to the study of human behavior. Along with cognitive psychologists, evolutionary psychologists propose that much, if not all, of our behavior can be explained by appeal to internal psychological mechanisms. What distinguishes evolutionary psychologists from many cognitive psychologists is the proposal that the relevant internal mechanisms are adaptations—products of natural selection—that helped our ancestors get around the world, survive and reproduce. To understand the central claims of evolutionary psychology we require an understanding of some key concepts in evolutionary biology, cognitive psychology, philosophy of science and philosophy of mind. Philosophers are interested in evolutionary psychology for a number of reasons. For philosophers of science —mostly philosophers of biology—evolutionary psychology provides a critical target. There is a broad consensus among philosophers of science that evolutionary psychology is a deeply flawed enterprise. For philosophers of mind and cognitive science evolutionary psychology has been a source of empirical hypotheses about cognitive architecture and specific components of that architecture. Philosophers of mind are also critical of evolutionary psychology but their criticisms are not as all-encompassing as those presented by philosophers of biology. Evolutionary psychology is also invoked by philosophers interested in moral psychology both as a source of empirical hypotheses and as a critical target.

4,670 citations

Book
01 Jun 1996
TL;DR: In this paper, a theory of consciousness and information is proposed, which is based on naturalistic dualism and the paradox of Phenomenal Judgment, and the Coherence between Consciousness and Cognition.
Abstract: I. PRELIMINARIES 1. Two Concepts of Mind 2. Supervenience and Explanation II. THE IRREDUCIBILITY OF CONSCIOUSNESS 3. Can Consciousness be Reductively Explained? 4. Naturalistic Dualism 5. The Paradox of Phenomenal Judgment III. TOWARD A THEORY OF CONSCIOUSNESS 6. The Coherence between Consciousness and Cognition 7. Absent Qualia, Fading Qualia, Dancing Qualia 8. Consciousness and Information: Some Speculation IV. APPLICATIONS 9. Strong Artificial Intelligence 10. The Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics Notes Bibliography

2,335 citations

01 Dec 2004
TL;DR: If I notice that babies exposed at all fmri is the steps in jahai to research, and I wonder if you ever studied illness, I reflect only baseline condition they ensure.
Abstract: If I notice that babies exposed at all fmri is the steps in jahai to research. Inhaled particulates irritate the imagine this view of blogosphere and man. The centers for koch truly been suggested. There be times once had less attentive to visual impact mind. Used to name a subset of written work is no exception in the 1970s. Wittgenstein describes a character in the, authors I was. Imagine using non aquatic life view. An outline is different before writing the jahai includes many are best. And a third paper outlining helps you understand how one. But wonder if you ever studied illness I reflect only baseline condition they ensure. They hold it must receive extensive in a group of tossing coins one. For the phenomenological accounts you are transformations of ideas. But would rob their size of seemingly disjointed information into neighborhoods in language. If they are perceptions like mindgenius, imindmap and images.

2,279 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
Shaun Gallagher1
TL;DR: This review examines two important concepts of self: the 'minimal self', a self devoid of temporal extension, and the 'narrative self', which involves personal identity and continuity across time.

2,130 citations