Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences

, Volume 11, Issue 2, pp 251–286

Toward an explanatory framework for mental ownership

Article

Abstract

Philosophical and scientific investigations of the proprietary aspects of self—mineness or mental ownership—often presuppose that searching for unique constituents is a productive strategy. But there seem not to be any unique constituents. Here, it is argued that the “self-specificity” paradigm, which emphasizes subjective perspective, fails. Previously, it was argued that mode of access also fails to explain mineness. Fortunately, these failures, when leavened by other findings (those that exhibit varieties and vagaries of mineness), intimate an approach better suited to searching for an explanation. Having an alternative in hand, one that shows promise of achieving explanatory adequacy, provides an additional reason to suspend the search for unique constituents. In short, a negative and a positive thesis are developed: we should cease looking for unique constituents and should seek to explain mineness in accord with the model developed here. This model rejects attempts to explain the phenomenon in terms of either a narrative or a minimal sense of self; it seeks to explain at a “molecular” level, one that appeals to multiple, interacting dimensions. The molecular-level model allows for the possibility that subjective perspective is distinct from a stark perspective (one that does not imply mineness). It proposes that the confounding of tacit expectations plays an important role in explaining mental ownership and its complement, disownership. But the confounding of tacit expectations is not sufficient. Because we are able to be aware of the existence of mental states that do not belong to self, we require a mechanism for determining degree of self-relatedness. One such mechanism is proposed here, and it is shown how this mechanism can be integrated into a general model of mental ownership. In the spirit of suggesting how this model might be able to help resolve outstanding problems, the question as to whether inserted thoughts belong to the patient who reports them is also considered.

Keywords

Mineness Mental ownership Self-specificity Self-relatedness Principle of confounded expectations Levels of explanation Minimal self Disownership 

References

  1. Adolphs, R., et al. (2002). Impaired recognition of social emotions following amygdale damage. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 14, 1264–1274.Google Scholar
  2. Allen, P., et al. (2008). The hallucinating brain: a review of structural and functional neuroimaging studies of hallucinations. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 32(1), 175–191.Google Scholar
  3. Baars, B. J., et al. (2003). Brain, conscious experience, and the observing self. Trends in Neuroscience, 26(12), 671–675.Google Scholar
  4. Barnett, K. J., & Corballis, M. C. (2005). Speeded right-to-left information transfer: the result of speeded transmission in right-hemisphere axons? Neuroscience Letters, 380, 88–92.Google Scholar
  5. Bayne, T. (2010). The unity of consciousness. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Bermudez, J. L. (2007). Self-Consciousness. In M. Velmans & S. Schneider (Eds.), The Blackwell companion to consciousness (pp. 456–467). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  7. Bestman, S., et al. (2008). Mapping causal interregional influences with concurrent TMS-fMRI. Experimental Brain Research, 191, 383–402.Google Scholar
  8. Blanke, O., & Metzinger, T. (2008). Full-body illusions and minimal phenomenal selfhood. Trends in Cognitive Science, 13(1), 7–13.Google Scholar
  9. Bogdan, R. J. (2010). Our own minds: sociocultural grounds for self-consciousness. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  10. Bortolotti, L. (2010). Delusions and other irrational beliefs. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Bottini, G., et al. (2002). Feeling touches someone else’s hand. NeuroReport, 13(11), 437–443.Google Scholar
  12. Botvinick, M., & Cohen, J. (1998). Rubber hands ‘feel’ touch that eyes see. Nature, 391, 756.Google Scholar
  13. Brewer, B. (1995). Bodily awareness and the self. In J. L. Bermudez, A. Marcel, & N. Eilan (Eds.), The body and the self (pp. 291–305). Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  14. Buckner, R. L., et al. (2008). The brain’s default network: anatomy, function, and relevance to disease. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1124, 1–38.Google Scholar
  15. Carruthers, P. (2000). Phenomenal consciousness: a naturalistic theory. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Carruthers, P. (2009). How we know our own minds: the relationship between mindreading and metacognition. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 32, 121–182.Google Scholar
  17. Christoff, K., et al. (2011). Specifying the self for cognitive neuroscience. Trends in Cognitive Science, 15(3), 104–112.Google Scholar
  18. Churchland, P. S. (2002). Self-representation in nervous systems. Science, 296, 308–310.Google Scholar
  19. Clark, A. (2007). Curing cognitive hiccups: a defense of the extended mind. The Journal of Philosophy, 104(4), 163–192.Google Scholar
  20. Craig, A. D. (2010). The sentient self. Brain Structure & Function, 214, 563–577.Google Scholar
  21. Craver, C. F. (2007). Explaining the brain: mechanisms and the mosaic unity of neuroscience. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Crick, F., & Koch, C. (2003). A framework for consciousness. Nature Neuroscience, 6(2), 119–126.Google Scholar
  23. Dadds, M. R., et al. (2006). Attention to the eyes reverses fear—recognition deficits in child with psychopathy. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 189, 280–281.Google Scholar
  24. Dainton, B. (2008). The phenomenal self. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Damasio, A. (2010). Self comes to mind: constructing the conscious mind. New York: Pantheon.Google Scholar
  26. de Vignemont, F. (2010). Knowing other people’s mental states as if they were one’s own. In S. Gallagher & D. Schmicking (Eds.), Handbook of phenomenology and cognitive science (pp. 283–299). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  27. de Vignemont, F. (2011). Embodiment, ownership and disownership. Consciousness and Cognition, 20(1), 81–93.Google Scholar
  28. de Vignemont, F., & Fourneret, P. (2004). The sense of agency: a philosophical and empirical review of the “who” system. Consciousness and Cognition, 13, 1–19.Google Scholar
  29. Feinberg, T. E. (2009). From axons to identity: neurological explorations of the self. New York: W.W. Norton.Google Scholar
  30. Feinberg, T. E., & Keenan, J. K. (2005). Where in the brain is the self? Consciousness and Cognition, 14, 661–678.Google Scholar
  31. Flanagan, O. (1992). Consciousness reconsidered. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  32. Frith, C. (2005). The self in action: lessons from delusions of control. Consciousness and Cognition, 14, 752–770.Google Scholar
  33. Gallagher, S. (2010). Self-reference and schizophrenia: a cognitive model of immunity to error through misidentification. In D. Zahavi (Ed.), Exploring the self: philosophical and psychological perspectives on self-experience (pp. 203–239). Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  34. Gazzaniga, M. S., & Miller, M. B. (2009). The left hemisphere does not miss the right hemisphere. In S. Laureys & G. Tononi (Eds.), The neurology of consciousness: cognitive neuroscience and neuropathology. New York: Academic.Google Scholar
  35. Gibson, J. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.Google Scholar
  36. Goldman, A. (1970). A theory of action. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Gott, P. S., et al. (1984). Voluntary control of two lateralized conscious states: validation by electrical and behavioral studies. Neuropsychologia, 22(1), 65–72.Google Scholar
  38. Grahek, N. (2007). Feeling pain and being in pain (2nd ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  39. Gusnard, D. A., et al. (2001). Medial prefrontal cortex and self-referential mental activity: relation to a default mode of brain function. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, 98, 4259–4264.Google Scholar
  40. Halligan, P. W. (2002). Phantom limbs: the body in the mind. Cognitive Neuropsychiatry, 7(3), 251–269.Google Scholar
  41. Hardcastle, V. G. (2008). Constructing the self. Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  42. Hempel, C. G. (1965). Aspects of scientific explanation. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  43. Hirstein, W. (2009). Confabulations. In J. Bickle (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of philosophy and the neurosciences (pp. 474–512). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  44. Humphrey, N. (2006). Seeing red: a study in consciousness. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  45. Hurley, S. (2006). Active perception and perceiving action: the shared circuits model. In T. S. Gendler & J. Hawthorne (Eds.), Perceptual experience (pp. 205–259). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  46. Ismael, J. T. (2007). The situated self. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  47. Jack, A. I., & Roepstorff, A. (2003). Why trust the subject? Journal of Consciousness Studies, 10(9–10), 5–20.Google Scholar
  48. Kriegel, U. (2009). Subjective consciousness: a self-representational theory. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  49. Lane, T., & Liang, C. (2010). Mental ownership and higher-order thought. Analysis, 70(3), 496–501.Google Scholar
  50. Lane, T., & Liang, C. (2011). Self-consciousness and immunity. The Journal of Philosophy, 108(2), 78–99.Google Scholar
  51. Legrand, D. (2007). Pre-reflective self-as-subject from experiential and empirical perspectives. Consciousness and Cognition, 16, 583–599.Google Scholar
  52. Legrand, D., & Ruby, P. (2009). What is self-specific? Theoretical investigations and critical review of neuroimaging results. Psychological Review, 116(1), 252–282.Google Scholar
  53. Levine, D. N. (1990). Unawareness of visual and sensorimotor defects: a hypothesis. Brain and Cognition, 13, 233–281.Google Scholar
  54. Marzi, C. A. (2010). Asymmetry of interhemispheric communication. WIREs Cognitive Science, 1(3), 433–438.Google Scholar
  55. McGilchrist, I. (2010). The master and his emissary. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  56. Metzinger, T. (2003). Being no one. Cambrdidge: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  57. Metzinger, T. (2008). Empirical perspectives from the self-model theory of subjectivity. Progress in Brain Research, 168, 215–245.Google Scholar
  58. Monti, M., et al. (2010). Willful modulation of brain activity in disorders of consciousness. The New England Journal of Medicine, 362(7), 579–589.Google Scholar
  59. Moore, J. W., & Haggard, P. (2010). Intentional binding and higher order agency experience. Consciousness and Cognition, 19(1), 490–491.Google Scholar
  60. Morris, J. S., et al. (2002). Human amygdale responses to fearful eyes. NeuroImage, 17, 214–222.Google Scholar
  61. Nelson, B., et al. (2008). The phenomenological critique and self-disturbance: implications for ultra-high risk (“prodrome”) research. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 34(2), 381–392.Google Scholar
  62. Nelson, B., et al. (2009). A disturbed sense of self in the psychosis prodrome: linking phenomenology and neurobiology. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 33, 807–817.Google Scholar
  63. Noe, A. (2004). Action in perception. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  64. Northoff, G. (2011). Neuropsychoanlaysis in practice: brain, self, and objects. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  65. Northoff, G., & Bermpohl, F. (2004). Cortical midline structures and the self. Trends in Cognitive Science, 8, 102–107.Google Scholar
  66. Northoff, G., & Panksepp, J. (2008). The trans-species concept of self and the subcortical–cortical midline system. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 12(7), 259–264.Google Scholar
  67. Northoff, G., & Qin, P. (2011). How can the brain’s resting state activity generate hallucinations? A ‘resting state hypothesis” of auditory verbal hallucinations. Schizophrenia Research, 127, 202–214.Google Scholar
  68. Northoff, G., et al. (2006). Self-referential processing in our brain: a meta-analysis of imaging studies on the self. NeuroImage, 28, 440–457.Google Scholar
  69. Northoff, G., et al. (2011). Brain imaging of the self—Conceptual, anatomical and methodological issues. Consciousness and Cognition, 20(1), 52–63.Google Scholar
  70. Nunez, P. L. (2010). Brain, mind, and the structure of reality. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  71. Ochsner, K. N. (2008). Your pain or mine? Common and distinct neural systems supporting the perception of pain in self and other. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 3, 144–160.Google Scholar
  72. Parnas, J. (2003). Self and schizophrenia: a phenomenological perspective. In T. Kircher & A. David (Eds.), The self in neuroscience and psychiatry (pp. 217–242). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  73. Parnas, J., & Handest, P. (2003). Phenomenology of anomalous self-experience in early schizophrenia. Comparative Psychiatry, 44(2), 121–134.Google Scholar
  74. Platek, S. M., Keenan, J. P., Gallup, G. G., & Mohamed, F. B. (2004). Where am I? The neurological correlates of self and other. Cognitive Brain Research, 19(2), 114–122.Google Scholar
  75. Prinz, J. J. (2006). Putting the brakes on enactive perception. Psyche, 12(1), 1–19.Google Scholar
  76. Putnam, M. C., et al. (2010). Cortical projection topography of the human splenium: hemispheric asymmetry and individual differences. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 8, 1662–1669.Google Scholar
  77. Qin, P., & Northoff, G. (2011). How is our self related to midline regions and the default-mode network? NeuroImage, 57, 1221–1233.Google Scholar
  78. Raichle, M. E. (2010). Two views of brain function. Trends in Cognitive Science, 14(4), 180–190.Google Scholar
  79. Ramachandran, V. S. (1995). Anosognosia in parietal lobe syndrome. Consciousness and Cognition, 4, 22–51.Google Scholar
  80. Ramachandran, V. S. (2011). The tell-tale brain: a neuroscientist’s quest for what makes us human. New York: W.W. Norton and Company.Google Scholar
  81. Rosenthal, D. M. (2002). Explaining consciousness. In D. J. Chalmers (Ed.), Philosophy of mind (pp. 406–421). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  82. Rosenthal, D. M. (2005). Consciousness and mind. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  83. Rosenthal, D. M. (2010). Consciousness, the self, and bodily location. Analysis, 70(2), 270–276.Google Scholar
  84. Roser, M., & Gazzaniga, M. (2004). Automatic brains—Interpretive minds. Current Directions in Psychological Research, 13(2), 56–59.Google Scholar
  85. Sass, L. A., & Parnas, J. (2003). Schizophrenia, consciousness, and the self. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 29(3), 427–444.Google Scholar
  86. Schiffer, F., et al. (1998). Different psychological status in the two hemispheres of two split-brain patients. Neuropsychiatry, Neuropsychology, and Behavioral Biology, 11, 151–156.Google Scholar
  87. Shoemaker, S. (1968). Self-reference and self-awareness. The Journal of Philosophy, 65, 555–567.Google Scholar
  88. Shoemaker, S. (1994). Self-knowledge and “Inner sense”, lecture II: the broad-perceptual model. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, LIV, 271–290.Google Scholar
  89. Shoemaker, S. (1996). The first-person perspective and other essays. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  90. Sierra, M. (2009). Depersonalization: a new look at a neglected syndrome. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  91. Sierra, M., & David, A. S. (2011). Depersonalization: a selective impairment of self-awareness. Consciousness and Cognition, 20, 99–108.Google Scholar
  92. Strawson, G. (2009). Selves: an essay in revisionary metaphysics. Oxford: New York.Google Scholar
  93. Suhler, C., & Churchland, P. S. (2009). Control: conscious and otherwise. Trends in Cognitive Science, 13(8), 341–347.Google Scholar
  94. Tsakiris, M. (2010). My body in the brain: a neurocognitive model of body-ownership. Neuropsychologia, 48(3), 703–712.Google Scholar
  95. Tsakiris, M. (2011). The sense of body ownership. In S. Gallagher (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of self (pp. 180–203). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  96. Vocat, R., et al. (2010). Anosognosia for hemiplegia: a clinical–anatomical prospective study. Brain, 133(12), 3578–3597.Google Scholar
  97. Vuilleumier, P. (2004). Anosognosia: the neurology of beliefs and uncertainties. Cortex, 40, 9–17.Google Scholar
  98. Wegner, D. M. (2002). The illusion of conscious will. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  99. Wicker, B., et al. (2003). A relation between rest and the self in the brain? Brain Research Review, 43, 224–230.Google Scholar
  100. Wilkes, K. V. (1993). Real people: personal identity without thought experiments. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  101. Zahavi, D. (2005). Subjectivity and selfhood. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  102. Zahavi, D. (2006). Thinking about (self-) conscious: phenomenological perspectives. In U. Kriegal & K. Williford (Eds.), Self-representational approaches to consciousness. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  103. Zahn, R., Talazko, J., et al. (2008). Loss of the sense of self-ownership for perceptions of objects in a case of right inferior temporal, parieto-occipital and precentral hypometabolism. Psychopathology, 41, 397–402.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Neuroscience and Research Center for Mind, Brain, and LearningNational Chengchi UniversityTaipei CityTaiwan, Republic of China

Personalised recommendations