Consciousness, complexity, and self in postmodern times
Janet Atkinson‐Grosjean
World Futures 1996 DOI: 10.1080/02604027.1996.9972579 (opens in new tab)
Study at a glance
AI-extracted from the abstract| Characteristics | Theoretical or philosophical paper Peer reviewed |
|---|---|
| Key points | Argues that functionalism, philosophy of mind, and the modern mindset are interrelated and inadequate explanations of human consciousness and personal identity, and proposes complexity theory and postmodernism as more useful, holistic, and interdisciplinary descriptions of what is really going on. |
Abstract
The purpose of this paper is twofold. One is rejecting and deconstructive—functionalism, philosophy of mind, and the modern mindset are presented as interrelated, inadequate explanations of human consciousness and personal identity. The other is accepting and reconstructive—complexity theory and postmodernism are offered as more useful descriptions of “what is really going on.” Modernism and functionalism belong to an age of increasingly narrow specialization. Indeed, philosophical and scientific discourse has become so specialized that even within different subspecialties of the same field, experts have difficulty understanding each other. In contrast, complexity theory, and the new field of consciousness studies, take a holistic, interdisciplinary approach, while postmodernism welcomes a plurality of voices.