Posted by: Xhyra Graf | 25 January 2007

Multiple Drafts Model

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_Drafts_Model

You know, I basically agree with Dennett on a lot of things, especially the center of gravity analogy…maybe it’s just that he’s annoying, very annoying.[I laughed out loud at this.]

Besides the center of gravity is a useful fiction – not ignored in or by theory.

_________________________________

Check reference ‘Time and observer’

Dennett, D. and Kinsbourne, M. (1992). “Time and the Observer: the Where and When of Consciousness in the Brain.”. Behavioral and Brain Sciences (15): 183-247.

Abstract: Compared the ways in which the Cartesian Theater model (CTM) and the Multiple Drafts model (MDM) of consciousness treat subjective timing. According to CTM, there is a place in the brain where discriminations in all modalities are put into registration and presented for subjective judgment. The timing of events is thought to determine subjective order. According to the MDM, discriminations are distributed in space and time in the brain. These events are thought to have temporal properties, but those properties do not determine subjective order because there is no single, definitive stream of consciousness, only a parallel stream of conflicting and continuously revised contents. MDM does a better job of explaining such puzzling phenomena as backwards referral in time and gradual apparent motion phenomena involving abrupt color change. 29 comments follow, and the authors respond. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2006 APA, all rights reserved)

______________________

Unmasking Multiple Drafts  
 
Author   Todd, Steven J1  
 
Affiliation   (1)University of Connecticut, Department of Philosophy, Storrs, CT, US  
 
Source   Philosophical Psychology. Vol 19(4), Aug 2006, pp. 477-494  
 
ISSN   0951-5089  
 
Electronic ISSN   1465-394X  
 
 
   
 
Descriptors  
*Consciousness States *Models *Neurosciences *Psychology *Theory of Mind
 
 
 
Abstract   Any theoretician constructing a serious model of consciousness should carefully assess the details of empirical data generated in the neurosciences and psychology. A failure to account for those details may cast doubt on the adequacy of that model. This paper presents a case in point. Dennett and Kinsbourne’s (Dennett, D., & Kinsbourne, M. (1992). Time and the observer: The where and when of consciousness in the brain. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 15, 183-243) assault on the materialist version of the Cartesian Theater model of the mind relies significantly on the superiority of their Multiple Drafts model of consciousness as an explanation of the phenomenon of metacontrast. However, their description of metacontrast is, in important ways, inadequate. The result is that their explanation of how the Multiple Drafts model handles this phenomenon fails to account for the actual data. In this paper I offer a more complete description of metacontrast, show how Dennett and Kinsbourne’s explanation fails, and argue that there are good theoretical reasons for choosing the so-called Stalinesque model over the so-called Orwellian model. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2006 APA, all rights reserved) (journal abstract)  
 
Email Address   steven.todd@uconn.edu  
 
Contact Individual   Todd, Steven J, University of Connecticut, Department of Philosophy, 101 Manchester Hall, 344 Mansfield Road, Storrs, CT, US, steven.todd@uconn.edu  
 
Journal Volume   19  
 
Journal Issue   4  
 
Journal Pages   477-494
Advertisements

Categories

%d bloggers like this: