‘What it is like’

References

• Aydede, M., and G. Güzeldere. 2005. “Cognitive Architecture, Concepts, and Introspection: An Information-Theoretic Solution to the Problem of Phenomenal Consciousness.” Nous (Detroit, Mich ) 39 (2): 197–255. doi:10.1111/j.0029-4624.2005.00500.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Balog, K. 2012. “Acquaintance and the Mind-Body Problem.” In New Perspectives on Type Identity: The Mental and the Physical, edited by S. Gozzano and C. S. Hill, 16–43. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bayne, T., and D. Chalmers. 2003. “What is the Unity of Consciousness?” In The Unity of Consciousness: Binding, Integration and Dissociation, edited by A. Cleeremans, 23–58. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Block, N. 1995. “On a Confusion About a Function of Consciousness.” Behavioral and Brain Sciences 18: 227–287. doi:10.1017/S0140525X00038188.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chalmers, D. J. 1996. The Conscious Mind: In Search of a Fundamental Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Chalmers, D. J. 2010. “Consciousness and its Place in Nature.” In The Character of Consciousness, edited by D. J. Chalmers, 103–139. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Chalmers, D. J. 2018. “The Meta-Problem of Consciousness.” Journal of Consciousness Studies 25 (no. 9-10): 6–61.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• D’Ambrosio, J., and D. Stoljar. Forthcoming. “Two Notions of Resemblance and the Semantics of ‘What It’s Like’.” Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy. doi:10.1080/0020174X.2022.2075453.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dehaene, S., and L. Naccache. 2001. “Towards a Cognitive Neuroscience of Consciousness: Basic Evidence and a Workspace Framework.” Cognition 79 (no. 1-2): 1–37. doi:10.1016/S0010-0277(00)00123-2.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dretske, F. 1995. Naturalizing the Mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Farrell, J. 2016. “'WIL’ Talk is not Technical Talk.” Journal of Consciousness Studies 23 (no. 9-10): 50–65.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fazekas, P., and Z. Jakab. 2016. “The Sensory Basis of the Epistemic gap: An Alternative to Phenomenal Concepts.” Philosophical Studies 173 (no. 8): 2105–2124. doi:10.1007/s11098-015-0599-6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fiala, B., A. Arico, and S. Nichols. 2012. “On the Psychological Origins of Dualism: Dual-Process Cognition and the Explanatory gap.” In Creating Consilience: Integrating the Sciences and the Humanities, edited by E. Slingerland and M. Collard, 88–110. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gaskin, R. 2019. “A Defence of the Resemblance Meaning of ‘What It’s Like’.” Mind 128 (no. 511): 673–698. doi:10.1093/mind/fzx023.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gray, H. M., K. Gray, and D. M. Wegner. 2007. “Dimensions of Mind Perception.” Science 315 (no. 5812): 619. doi:10.1126/science.1134475.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Graziano, M. S. 2013. Consciousness and the Social Brain. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hellie, B. 2004. “Inexpressible Truths and the Allure of the Knowledge Argument.” In There’s Something About Mary, edited by P. Ludlow, Y. Nagasawa, and D. Stoljar, 333–364. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hellie, B. 2007. “'There's Something It's Like' and the Structure of Consciousness.” The Philosophical Review 116 (no. 3): 441–463. doi:10.1215/00318108-2007-005.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hill, C. S. 1997. “Imaginability, Conceivability, Possibility and the Mind-Body Problem.” Philosophical Studies 87 (no. 1): 61–85. doi:10.1023/A:1017911200883.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jackson, F. 1986. “What Mary Didn’t Know.” The Journal of Philosophy 83 (5): 291–295. doi:10.2307/2026143.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Janzen, G. 2011. “IN DEFENSE OF THE WHAT-IT-IS-LIKENESS OF EXPERIENCE.” The Southern Journal of Philosophy 49 (3): 271–293. doi:10.1111/j.2041-6962.2011.00074.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kammerer, F. 2016. “The Hardest Aspect of the Illusion Problem—and how to Solve it.” Journal of Consciousness Studies 23 (no. 11-12): 124–139.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kriegel, U. 2006. “Consciousness, Theories of.” Philosophy Compass 1 (1): 58–64. doi:10.1111/j.1747-9991.2006.00008.x.
   Google Scholar
• Lau, H., and D. Rosenthal. 2011. “Empirical Support for Higher-Order Theories of Conscious Awareness.” Trends in Cognitive Sciences 15 (8): 365–373. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2011.05.009.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levin, J. 2007. “What is a Phenomenal Concept?” In Phenomenal Concepts and Phenomenal Knowledge: New Essays on Consciousness and Physicalism, edited by T. Alter and S. Walter, 87–110. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Levine, J. 1983. “Materialism and Qualia: The Explanatory gap.” Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 64 (4): 354–361. doi:10.1111/j.1468-0114.1983.tb00207.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levine, J. 2001. Purple Haze: The Puzzle of Consciousness. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Loar, B. 1997. “Phenomenal States.” In The Nature of Consciousness: Philosophical Debates, edited by N. Block, O. Flanagan, and G. Güzeldere, 597–616. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lormand, E. 2004. “The Explanatory Stopgap.” The Philosophical Review 113 (3): 303–357. doi:10.1215/00318108-113-3-303.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mehta, N. 2022. “The Fragmentation of Phenomenal Character.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 104 (1): 209–231. doi:10.1111/phpr.12755.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nagel, T. 1974. “What is it Like to be a bat?” The Philosophical Review 83 (4): 435–450. doi:10.2307/2183914.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Papineau, D. 2002. Thinking About Consciousness. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pereboom, D. 2011. Consciousness and the Prospects of Physicalism. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Snowdon, P. 2010. “On the What-it-is-like-Ness of Experience.” The Southern Journal of Philosophy 48 (1): 8–27. doi:10.1111/j.2041-6962.2010.01003.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stoljar, D. 2016. “The Semantics of ‘What It’s Like’ and the Nature of Consciousness.” Mind 125 (no. 500): 1161–1198. doi:10.1093/mind/fzv179.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tononi, G., M. Boly, M. Massimini, and C. Koch. 2016. “Integrated Information Theory: From Consciousness to its Physical Substrate.” Nature Reviews Neuroscience 17 (7): 450–461. doi:10.1038/nrn.2016.44.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tye, M. 1995. Ten Problems of Consciousness: A Representational Theory of the Phenomenal Mind. Cambridge, MA: Bradford Books/MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Tye, M. 2009. Consciousness Revisited. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar