Brain waves and bridges: Comments on Hardcastle's “discovering the moment of consciousness?“
Philosophical Psychology June 1, 1996 DOI: 10.1080/09515089608573180 (opens in new tab)
Study at a glance
AI-extracted from the abstract| Characteristics | Commentary Peer reviewed |
|---|---|
| Key points | Argues that ERP components should be characterized functionally rather than neurophysiologically, and that selection pressure between ERP work and cognitive and neurophysiological theories is a more apt metaphor for intertheoretical relations than explanatory extension. Contends that the temporal characteristics of ERP components do not support Hardcastle's claim that they can fix timing in phenomenal consciousness, and that her ERP data are compatible with a multiple drafts model rather than refuting Dennett and Kinsbourne. |
Abstract
In this comment, a picture of ERP research is sketched that is slightly different from Hardcastle's account, in that it emphasises the functional characterisation of ERP components rather than the neurophysiological connections. It is suggested that selection pressure of ERP work on cognitive and neurophysiological theories and vice versa is a more apt metaphor for intertheoretical relations in this field than explanatory extension. Secondly, it is argued that the temporal characteristics of ERP components do not support Hardcastle's claim that they may be used to fix timing in phenomenal consciousness. Although I agree that ERP components, cautiously interpreted, can contribute to the identification of substages of information processing, rather than refuting Dennett and Kinsbourne, her ERP data seem compatible with a multiple drafts model.