Acta Analytica

, Volume 18, Issue 1–2, pp 177–191 | Cite as

The new mysterianism and the thesis of cognitive closure

  • Uriah Kriegel
Philosophy Of Mind


The paper discusses Colin McGinn’s mysterianist approach to the phenomenon of consciousness. According to McGinn, consciousness is, in and of itself, a fully natural phenomenon, but we humans are just cognitively closed to it, meaning that we cannot in principle understand its nature. I argue that, on a proper conception of the relation between an intellectual problem and its solution, we may well not know what the solution is to a problem we understand, or we may not understand exactly what the problem is, but it is incoherent to suppose that we cannot understand what would count as a solution to a problem we can and do understand. The argument appeals to certain accepted assumption in the logic of questions, developed in the early sixties, mainly by Stahl. I close with a general characterization of mysterianism as such, and formulate a form of mysterianism which is in some sense more optimistic and in another more pessimistic than McGinn’s.


consciousness mysterianism cognitive closure logic of questions explanatory gap 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Chalmers, D.J. 1995, “Facing Up to the Problem of Consciousness”, in Journal of Consciousness Studies 2: 200–19.Google Scholar
  2. Fodor, J.A. 1975, The Language of Thought, Cambridge MAS: Harvard University.Google Scholar
  3. Hamblin, C. 1958, “Questions”, in Australasian Journal of Philosophy 36: 159–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Levine, J. 1983, “Materialism and Qualia: The Explanatory Gap”, in Pacific Journal of Philosophy 64: 354–61.Google Scholar
  5. McGinn, C. 1989, “Can We Solve the Mind-Body Problem?”, in Mind 98: 349–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. McGinn, C. 1995, “Consciousness and Space”, in Journal of Consciousness Studies 2: 220–30.Google Scholar
  7. Robinson, W.S. 1996, “The Hardness of the Hard Problem”, in Journal of Consciousness Studies 3: 14–25.Google Scholar
  8. Stahl, G. 1962, “Fragenfolgen”, in M. Kasbauer and F. Kutschera (eds.), Logik und Logikkalkul, Freiburg/Munich: Alber.Google Scholar
  9. Tichy, P. 1978, “Questions, Answers, and Logic”, American Philosophical Quarterly 15: 275–284.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Uriah Kriegel
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyUniversity of ArizonaTucsonUSA

Personalised recommendations