Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences

, Volume 6, Issue 1–2, pp 231–245

The critique of pure phenomenology



The topic of this paper is phenomenology. How should we think of phenomenology – the discipline or activity of investigating experience itself – if phenomenology is to be a genuine source of knowledge? This is related to the question whether phenomenology can make a contribution to the empirical study of human or animal experience. My own view is that it can. But only if we make a fresh start in understanding what phenomenology is and can be.

Key words

phenomenology epistemological autonomy first-person methodology theory introspection 


  1. Blackmore, S. J., Brelstaff, G., Nelson, K., & Troscianko, T. (1995). Is the richness of our visual world an illusion? Transsaccadic memory for complex scenes. Perception, 24, 1075–1081.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Chalmers, D. J. (1999). First-person methods in the science of consciousness. Arizona Consciousness Bulletin.Google Scholar
  3. Chalmers, D. J. (2006). Perception and the fall from eden. In T. S. Gendler, & J. Hawthorne (Eds.), Perceptual experience (pp. 49–125). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Campbell on color.Google Scholar
  4. Dennett, D. C. (1991). Consciousness explained. Boston: Little Brown.Google Scholar
  5. Dennett, D. C. (2001). Surprise, surprise. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24, 982.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dennett, D. C. (2002). How could I be wrong? How wrong could I be? In A. Noë (Ed.), Is the visual world a grand illusion. Thorverton, UK: Academic Imprint.Google Scholar
  7. Jack, A. I., & Roepstorff, A. (2002). Instropsection and cognitive brain mapping: from stimulus-response to script-report. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6, 333–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Lutz, A., & Thompson, E. (2003). Neurophenomenology: Integrating subjective experience the braind dynamics in the neuroscience of consciousness. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 10, 31–52.Google Scholar
  9. Martin, M. G. F. (2004). The limits of self-awareness. Philosophical Studies, 120(1–3), 37–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Noë, A. (2004). Action in perception. Cambridge: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  11. Noë, A., Pessoa, L., & Thompson, E. (2000). Beyond the grand illusion: what change blindness really teaches us about vision.Visual Cognition, 7, 93–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. O’Regan, J. K. (1992). Solving the “real” mysteries of visual perception: the world as an outside memory. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 46, 461–488.Google Scholar
  13. Pessoa, L., Thompson, E., & Noë, A. (1998). Finding out about filling-in: A guide to perceptual completion for visual science and the philosophy of perception. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 21, 723–802.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Rensink, R. A. (2000). The dynamic representation of scenes. Visual Cognition, 7.Google Scholar
  15. Simons, D. J., & Levin, D. T. (1997). Change blindness. Trends in cognitive sciences, 1(7), 261–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Thompson, E., & Varela, F. J. (2001). Radical embodiment: neural dynamics and consciousness. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 5, 418–425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Varela, F. J. (1996). Neurophenomenology: A methodological rmedy to the hard problem. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 3, 330–350.Google Scholar
  18. Zahavi, D. (2004). Husserl’s Noema and the Internalism-Externalism Debate. Inquiry, 47, 42–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyUniversity of CaliforniaBerkeleyUSA

Personalised recommendations