'Reflexive Monism' versus 'Complementarism': An analysis and criticism of the conceptual groundwork of Max Velmans's 'reflexive model' of consciousness

Hoche, Prof. em. Dr. Hans-Ulrich (2006) 'Reflexive Monism' versus 'Complementarism': An analysis and criticism of the conceptual groundwork of Max Velmans's 'reflexive model' of consciousness. [Journal (Paginated)] (In Press)

Full text available as:



From 1990 on, the London psychologist Max Velmans developed a novel approach to (phenomenal) consciousness according to which an experience of an object is phenomenologically identical to an object as experienced. On the face of it I agree; but unlike Velmans I argue that the latter should be understood as comparable, not to a Kantian, but rather to a noematic ‘phenomenon’ in the Husserlian sense. Consequently, I replace Velmans’s reflexive model with a complementaristic approach in a strict sense which leaves no room for either monistic or dualistic views (including Velmans’s ontological monism and his dual-aspect interpretation of complementarity) and hence requires us to radically reinterpret the concept of psychophysical causation.

Item Type:Journal (Paginated)
Keywords:Consciousness, mind-body problem, complementarity, dual-aspect theory, phenomenology, psychophysical causation, pure noematics, reflexive monism, Velmans.
Subjects:Philosophy > Philosophy of Mind
ID Code:4748
Deposited By: Hoche, Prof. em. Dr. Hans-Ulrich
Deposited On:06 Mar 2006
Last Modified:11 Mar 2011 08:56

Commentary/Response Threads

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.

Bohr, N. 1927. Das Quantenpostulat und die neuere Entwicklung der Atomistik [The quantum postulate and the recent development of atomistics; Bohr’s lecture delivered at the Como congress on September 16, 1927]. Reprinted in: W. Heisenberg / N. Bohr, Die Kopenhagener Deutung der Quantentheorie (3661). Stuttgart: Battenberg, 1963.

Chalmers, D. J. 1996. The Conscious Mind. In Search of a Fundamental Theory. New York: Oxford University Press.

Drieschner, M. 1974. Objekte der Naturwissenschaft [Objects of natural science]. In: Tendenzen der Wissenschaftstheorie (Neue Hefte für Philosophie, No. 6/7): 104128. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.

Drieschner, M. 1981. Einführung in die Naturphilosophie [Introduction to the philosophy of nature]. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.

Drieschner, M. 1984. Physik a priori? [Physics (as a science) a priori?]. In: B. Kanitscheider (ed.), Moderne Naturphilosophie (4161). Würzburg: Königshausen & Neumann.

Edwards, P. (ed.) 1967. The Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Vol. 18. New York & London: Macmillan. (Reprint edition 1972.)

Frege, G. 1884/1950. Die Grundlagen der Arithmetik. Eine logisch-mathematische Untersuchung über den Begriff der Zahl / The Foundations of Arithmetic. A logico-mathematical enquiry into the concept of number. English translation by J. L. Austin. Oxford: Blackwell, repr. 1974.

Held, C. 1994. The meaning of complementarity. Studies in the History of the Philosophy of Science 25: 871893.

Hoche, H. U. 1973a. Handlung, Bewusstsein und Leib. Vorstudien zu einer rein noematischen Phänomenologie [Action, consciousness, and (the functioning) body. Preliminary studies concerning a purely noematic phenomenology]. Freiburg & Munich: Alber.

Hoche, H. U. 1973b. Review of Prauss 1971. Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 55: 96100.

Hoche, H. U. 1975/1983. Über die Rolle von Substanzbegriffen beim Zeigen und Zählen von Gegenständen. Zeitschrift für philosophische Forschung 29 (1975): 337348. English translation (by Gerhard Heyer): How substance-concepts function in indicating and counting objects. In: Darrel E. Christensen et al. (eds.), Contemporary German Philosophy, Vol 2 (200211). University Park & London: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1983.

Hoche, H. U. 1986. Subjektivität [Subjectivity]. In: Julie Kirchberg and Johannes Müther (eds), Philosophisch-Theologische Grenzfragen (5163). Essen: Ludgerus.

Hoche, H. U. 1987. Das Leib-Seele-Problem: Dualismus, Monismus, Perspektivismus [The mind-body-problem: dualism, monism, perspectivism]. Philosophia Naturalis 24: 218236.

Hoche, H. U. 1990. Einführung in das sprachanalytische Philosophieren [Introduction to Doing Philosophy in a Linguistic Key]. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.

Hoche, H. U. 1995a. Anthropologische Komplementarität und die ‘Einheit der Sache’. Versuch einer skeptischen Lösung eines skeptischen Zweifels [Anthropological complementarity and the ‘unity of man’. An attempt at a sceptical solution of a sceptical problem]. In: L. Kreimendahl et al. (eds.), Aufklärung und Skepsis. Studien zur Philosophie und Geistesgeschichte des 17. und 18. Jahrhunderts (107129). Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt: frommann-holzboog.

Hoche, H. U. 1995b. Was kann die logische Analyse von Identitätsaussagen zur Lösung des Leib-Seele-Problems beitragen? [How to contribute to solving the mind-body problem by logically analysing identity-statements]. Circulated manuscript (lecture, delivered at the University of Freiburg, Germany, on June 13, 1995).

Hoche, H. U. 1995c. Verteilte Repräsentation, neurophysiologische Selbstversuche und Komplementarität [Distributed representation, neurophysiological self-experiments, and complementarity]. Ethik und Sozialwissenschaften 6 (1): 9396.

Hoche, H. U. and Strube, W. 1985. Analytische Philosophie [Analytic philosophy]. Freiburg & Munich: Alber (Handbuch Philosophie, Vol. 6).

Holton, G. 1981. Zur Genesis des Komplementaritätsgedankens [On the genesis of the conception of complementarity]. In: G. Holton, Thematische Analyse der Wissenschaft. Die Physik Einsteins und seiner Zeit, translated into German by H. Huber (144202). Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.

Hume, D. 1748. An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, London. New edition by L. A. Selby-Bigge: Enquiries concerning Human Understanding and concerning the Principles of Morals, Oxford: Clarendon, 1888, 3rd ed. 1975.

Husserl, E. 1913. Ideen zu einer reinen Phänomenologie und phänomenologischen Philosophie [Ideas concerning a pure phenomenology and phenomenological philosophy]. First Volume, ed. by W. Biemel (Husserliana, Vol. III). The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1950.

Husserl, E. 1931. Ideas. General Introduction to Pure Phenomenology. Translated [from Husserl 1913] by W. R. Boyce Gibson. New York: Collier Books.

Husserl, E. 19341937. Die Krisis der europäischen Wissenschaften und die transzendentale Phänomenologie [The crisis of European science, and transcendental phenomenology]. Ed. by W. Biemel (Husserliana, Vol. VI). The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1954.

Kripke, S. A. 1982. Wittgenstein on Rules and Private Language. An Elementary Exposition. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

Popper, K. R. 1972. Objective Knowledge. An Evolutionary Approach. Oxford: Clarendon.

Prauss, G. 1971. Erscheinung bei Kant. Ein Problem der ‘Kritik der reinen Vernunft’ [Kant on appearance(s). A problem of the ‘Critique of Pure Reason’]. Berlin: de Gruyter.

Ryle, G. 1949. The Concept of Mind. London: Hutchinson.

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

Velmans, M. 1990. Consciousness, brain and the physical world. Philosophical Psychology 3: 7799.

Velmans, M. 2000. Understanding Consciousness. London & Philadelphia: Routledge.

Velmans, M. 2002. How Could Conscious Experiences Affect Brains? Journal of Consciousness Studies 9: 329.


Repository Staff Only: item control page