Special Section: Mind the Methodology

Heterophenomenology and neurophenomenology are two different methodologies for studying consciousness. Both appear to allow the same range of experiments, making it difficult to choose between them. Heterophenomenology excludes conclusions drawn by neurophenomenology, so a choice may be necessary. Currently, there are no reasons to reject either methodology as unreliable or invalid, so both should be kept in consideration.

Study at a glance

Abstract

In this paper I compare heterophenomenology and neurophenomenology as methodologies for a science of consciousness. I give introductions of heterophenomenology (HP) and neurophenomenology (NP), respectively. Than I briefly relate HP and NP to mainstream cognitive science methodology and to each other. I claim that although HP and NP are indeed different methodologies for studying consciousness, in practice it will be very hard to decide on which methodology we should prefer since, given the research that is currently available, both methodologies seem to allow for the same range of experiments. Given the fact that HP excludes the validity of conclusions drawn by means of NP, it seems that we do have to choose between them, nonetheless. My goal is, however, to see whether there currently are reasons for rejecting HP or NP as unreliable or invalid across the board. I conclude that for the time being we had better keep both HP and NP in the running.