Montemayor Carlos
Department of Philosophy, San Francisco State University, San Francisco, CA, United States.
Front Syst Neurosci. 2021 Nov 22;15:747797. doi: 10.3389/fnsys.2021.747797. eCollection 2021.
Consciousness research has a cognitive-diversity problem. Any view that holds that attention is either necessary for consciousness or that attention precedes conscious awareness confronts the difficulty that the theoretical categorization of attention is as diverse as the categorization of intelligent cognition, but consciousness is typically referred to as a single and unified capacity. On the one hand, we have a multiplicity of kinds of attention. On the other hand, we use a monolithic "phenomenal" notion of consciousness to define the dependency of consciousness on all these diverse kinds of attention. Since attention is defined in terms of a diverse variety of functions, a lot more needs to be said with respect to the claim that attention is either necessary for consciousness or that attentional processing precedes conscious awareness. Is this dependency based on the diverse cognitive functions of attention? If so, why conceive of consciousness as a single informationally unified cognitive capacity? What does the multiplicity of kinds of attention entail for consciousness research? This is the "diversity problem." This article argues that consciousness should be also considered as a diverse set of capacities, based on the diversity of attention. While we have the intuition that consciousness is a unified perspective, the article shows that consistency demands this diverse approach. Since research on attention distinguishes a wide range of functions and levels of cognitive processing, the dependency of consciousness on attention entails diverse conscious capacities and diverse types of awareness beyond the distinctions between being awake, dreaming, and being minimally conscious.
意识研究存在认知多样性问题。任何认为注意力对意识而言是必要条件或者注意力先于意识觉知的观点,都会面临这样一个难题:注意力的理论分类与智能认知的分类一样多样,但意识通常被视为一种单一且统一的能力。一方面,我们有多种类型的注意力。另一方面,我们用一种单一的“现象学”意识概念来界定意识对所有这些不同类型注意力的依赖。由于注意力是依据各种各样的功能来定义的,所以对于注意力对意识而言是必要条件或者注意力加工先于意识觉知这一主张,还有很多需要探讨的地方。这种依赖是基于注意力的多种认知功能吗?如果是这样,为什么将意识构想为一种单一的信息统一认知能力呢?注意力的多种类型对意识研究意味着什么?这就是“多样性问题”。本文认为,基于注意力的多样性,意识也应被视为一组多样的能力。虽然我们直觉上认为意识是一种统一的视角,但本文表明,从一致性角度来看需要这种多样的方法。由于对注意力的研究区分了广泛的功能和认知加工水平,意识对注意力的依赖意味着除了清醒、做梦和最低限度意识之间的区别之外,还存在多样的意识能力和多样的觉知类型。