Skip to content

The Stream of Consciousness: II. William James's Specious Present

Thomas Natsoulas

Imagination, Cognition and Personality June 1, 1993 DOI: 10.2190/1d0y-mlax-a1tv-l85u (opens in new tab)

Study at a glance

AI-extracted from the abstract
Characteristics Theoretical or philosophical paper Peer reviewed
Key points Argues that James's implicit account of the stream of consciousness is not consistent with his own advertised metaphor: the stream is more like a train of tightly adjacent successive components than a stream of water. Further argues that James's account of time perception is not perceptual but a kind of inner, second-order consciousness whose objects are durations comprised of successive instances of consciousness intuited to occur in the present.

Abstract

In this second article of a series that examines from various perspectives the phenomenon that James called “the stream of consciousness,” I continue to argue that James's implicit account of the stream was not consistent with how he advertised it in The Principles. James's stream was more analogous to a train, with tightly adjacent successive components, than to a stream of water. Additional material supporting this contention comes from James's account of time perception, specifically, the specious present and how it is intuited. I argue that his account is not perceptual, that time perception amounts to a kind of inner (second-order) consciousness. When engaged in “perceiving” time, we repeatedly have inner (second-order) consciousness whose objects are durations comprised of a set of successive instances of consciousness intuited to occur in the present. They then become past one or more after another, depending on the frequency of inner (second-order) consciousness.

Citations in the library

Explore topics