Skip Navigation


The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science Advance Access originally published online on June 23, 2009
The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 2009 60(3):497-520; doi:10.1093/bjps/axp023
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
60/3/497    most recent
axp023v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Todd, S. J.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author (2009). Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of British Society for the Philosophy of Science. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

A Difference That Makes a Difference: Passing through Dennett's Stalinesque/Orwellian Impasse

Steven J. Todd

Lone Star College – Kingwood, Department of Philosophy Kingwood, TX. 77339, USA, stevenjtodd{at}gmail.com


  Abstract

Dennett and Kinsbourne ([1992]) argue that metacontrast backward visual masking provides a clear illustration that ‘there is really only a verbal difference’ between two versions of the Cartesian Theater model of the mind. This alleged lack of a distinction is both the crucial premise of their main argument against the Cartesian Theater and a motivator for accepting their own Multiple Drafts model. I argue that metacontrast reveals a difference between the two versions of the Cartesian Theater that meets criteria found in (Dennett and Kinsbourne [1992]) for determining such a difference. This difference undermines the soundness of their argument against the Cartesian Theater, and exerts pressure on Dennett and Kinsbourne to offer a more detailed articulation of their model.

  1. Introduction
  2. Brief Explanation of Metacontrast Backward Visual Masking
  3. The Stalinesque and Orwellian Models of Metacontrast
    3.1 Criteria for determining a difference

  4. A Difference That Makes a Difference
    4.1 Skeptical hypothesis objection

  5. Other Objections and Replies
    5.1 Straw person objection
    5.2 Corroborative issues objection

  6. Conclusion


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.