There is a more recent version of this eprint available. Click here to view it.

Full text available as:

[img] HTML


Dualists believe that experiences have neither location nor extension, while reductive and ‘non-reductive’ physicalists (biological naturalists) believe that experiences are really in the brain, producing an apparent impasse in current theories of mind. Enactive and reflexive models of perception try to resolve this impasse with a form of “externalism” that challenges the assumption that experiences must either be nowhere or in the brain. However, they are externalist in very different ways. Insofar as they locate experiences anywhere, enactive models locate conscious phenomenology in the dynamic interaction of organisms with the external world, and in some versions, they reduce conscious phenomenology to such interactions, in the hope that this will resolve the hard problem of consciousness. The reflexive model accepts that experiences of the world result from dynamic organism-environment interactions, but argues that such interactions are preconscious. While the resulting phenomenal world is a consequence of such interactions, it cannot be reduced to them. The reflexive model is externalist in its claim that this external phenomenal world, which we normally think of as the “physical world,” is literally outside the brain. Furthermore, there are no added conscious experiences of the external world inside the brain. In the present paper I present the case for the enactive and reflexive alternatives to more classical views and evaluate their consequences. I argue that, in closing the gap between the phenomenal world and what we normally think of as the physical world, the reflexive model resolves one facet of the hard problem of consciousness. Conversely, while enactive models have useful things to say about percept formation and representation, they fail to address the hard problem of consciousness.

Item Type:Preprint
Keywords:dualism, physicalism, enactive, reflexive, phenomenology, consciousness, externalism, internalism, reductionism, consciousness, mind, brain, world, perception, Noe, Thomson, Velmans, O’Regan, Myin, projection, space, phenomenal world, Lehar
Subjects:Psychology > Cognitive Psychology
Philosophy > Philosophy of Mind
Psychology > Perceptual Cognitive Psychology
ID Code:4742
Deposited By: Velmans, Professor Max,
Deposited On:27 Feb 2006
Last Modified:11 Mar 2011 08:56

Available Versions of this Item

References in Article

Select the SEEK icon to attempt to find the referenced article. If it does not appear to be in cogprints you will be forwarded to the paracite service. Poorly formated references will probably not work.

Blackmore, S.J. (2002) There is no stream of consciousness. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 9 (5-6), 17-28.

Dennett, D (2002) How could I be wrong? How wrong could I be? Journal of Consciousness Studies, 9 (5-6), 13-16.

Gray, J. (2004) Consciousness: Creeping Up On The Hard Problem. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Jack, A.I. and Prinz, J.J. (2004) Searching for a scientific experience. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 11(1), 51-55.

Lehar, S. (2003) Gestalt isomorphism and the primacy of subjective conscious experience: A gestalt bubble model. Behavioral & Brain Sciences 26(4), 375-444.

Miller, G. and Johnson-Laird, P. (1976) Language and Perception. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Noe, A. and Thomson, E. (2004a) Are there neural correlates of consciousness? Journal of Consciousness Studies 11(1), 3-28.

Noe, A. and Thomson, E. (2004b) Sorting out the neural basis of consciousness. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 11(1), 87-98.

O’Regan, J. K., Myin, E. and Noe, A. Towards an analytic phenomenology: the concepts of “bodiliness” and “grabbiness.” In A. Carsetti (Ed.) Proceedings of the International Colloquium : "Seeing and Thinking. Reflections on Kanizsa's Studies in Visual Cognition". Univ. Tor Vergata, Rome, June 8-9, 2001. Kluwer (in press).

Penfield, W. and Rassmussen, T.B. (1950) The Cerebral Cortex of Man, Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Pribram, K.H. (1971) Languages of the brain: experimental paradoxes and principles in neuropsychology. New York: Brandon House.

Pribram, K. (2004) Consciousness reassessed. Mind and Matter, 2(1), 7-35.

Revonsuo, A. (1995) Consciousness, dreams, and virtual realities. Philosophical Psychology, 8(1): 35-58.

Searle, J. (1992) The Rediscovery of the Mind, Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.

Simons, D.J. and Chabris, C. (1999) Gorillas in Our Midst: Sustained Inattentional Blindness for Dynamic Events. Perception, 28(9), 1059-1074.

Simons D.J and Levin D.T., (1998) Failure to detect changes to people in a real-world interaction" Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 5, 644 – 649.

Velmans, M. (1990) Consciousness, brain, and the physical world. Philosophical Psychology, 3, 77-99.

Velmans, M.(1993) A Reflexive Science of consciousness. In Experimental and Theoretical Studies of Consciousness. CIBA Foundation Symposium 174. Wiley, Chichester, pp 81-99.

Velmans, M. (1998) Goodbye to reductionism. In S.Hameroff, A.Kaszniak & A.Scott (eds) Towards a Science of Consciousness II: The Second Tucson Discussions and Debates. MIT Press, pp 45-52.

Velmans, M. (2000) Understanding Consciousness, London: Routledge/Psychology Press.

Velmans, M. (2001). Heterophenomenology versus critical phenomenology: a dialogue with Dan Dennett. Online at

Velmans, M. (2003a) How Could Conscious Experiences Affect Brains? Exeter: Imprint Academic.

Velmans, M (2003b) Is the brain in the world, or the world in the brain? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 26(4): 427-429.


Repository Staff Only: item control page