var xpapers_embed_buffer = '';
xpapers_embed_buffer += "<ol class='xpapers_entryList'> <li id='eBOUIAP' class='xpapers_entry'><span class=\"xpapers_citation\"><a class='xpapers_title' href=\"http://philpapers.org/rec/BOUIAP\">Intensional and Phenomenal Uses of Perceptual Verbs.</a><span class='xpapers_pubInfo'></span></span><div class=\"xpapers_extras\"><div class=\"xpapers_abstract\">In this paper I argue that perceptual ascriptions lend themselves to intensional readings, and that perceptual predicates can denote phenomenal states on such readings. I show that Montague's treatment of quantification in intensional contexts applies to intensional perceptual ascriptions.</div></div></li> ";
xpapers_embed_buffer += "<li id='eBOUPPA' class='xpapers_entry'><span class=\"xpapers_citation\"><a class='xpapers_title' href=\"http://philpapers.org/rec/BOUPPA\">Paperless Philosophy as a Philosophical Method.</a><span class='xpapers_pubInfo'> <em class='xpapers_pubName'>Journal of Social Epistemology</em>. forthcoming.</span></span><div class=\"xpapers_extras\"><div class=\"xpapers_abstract\">I discuss the prospects for novel communication methods in academic research. I describe communication tools which could enhance the practice of conceptual analysis.</div></div></li> ";
xpapers_embed_buffer += "<li id='eBOUCIU' class='xpapers_entry'><span class=\"xpapers_citation\"><a class='xpapers_title' href=\"http://philpapers.org/rec/BOUCIU\">Consciousness is underived intentionality.</a><span class='xpapers_pubInfo'> <em class='xpapers_pubName'>No&ucirc;s</em> 44 (1):32-58. 2010.</span></span><div class=\"xpapers_extras\"><div class=\"xpapers_abstract\">Representationalists argue that phenomenal states are intentional states of a special kind. This paper offers an account of the kind of intentional state phenomenal states are: I argue that they are underived intentional states. This account of phenomenal states is equivalent to two theses: first, all possible phenomenal states are underived intentional states; second, all possible underived intentional states are phenomenal states. I clarify these claims and argue for each of them. I also address objections which touch on a range of topics, including meaning holism and concept empiricism. I conclude with a brief discussion of the consequences of the proposed view for the project of naturalizing consciousness.  </div></div></li> ";
xpapers_embed_buffer += "<li id='eBOUTRT' class='xpapers_entry'><span class=\"xpapers_citation\"><a class='xpapers_title' href=\"http://philpapers.org/rec/BOUTRT\">The representational theory of consciousness.</a><span class='xpapers_pubInfo'> Dissertation, Australian National University 2010.</span></span><div class=\"xpapers_extras\"><div class=\"xpapers_abstract\">A satisfactory solution to the problem of consciousness would take the form of a simple yet fully general model which specifies the precise conditions under which any given state of consciousness occurs. Science has uncovered numerous correlations between consciousness and neural activity, but it has not yet come anywhere close to this. We are still looking for the Newtonian laws of consciousness. One of the main difficulties with consciousness is that we lack a language in which to formulate illuminating generalizations about it. Philosophers and scientists talk about &quot;what it’s like&quot;, sensations, feelings, and perceptual states such as seeing and hearing. This language does not allow a precise articulation of the internal structures of conscious states and their inter-relations. It is inadequate to capture relations of the kind we are looking for between conscious states and physical states. In this thesis I refine and defend a theory of consciousness which promises to solve this regimentation problem: the representational theory of consciousness. I argue that the representational theory can solve the regimentation problem and smooth out other important obstacles to a fruitful study of consciousness. I also make a case for the theory independently of its payoffs, and I discuss the leading opposing theories at some length. In the rest of this introduction, I will clarify what I mean by &quot;consciousness&quot;, provide an initial characterization of the representational theory, and outline my project in more detail.</div></div></li> ";
xpapers_embed_buffer += "<li id='eSEARAC' class='xpapers_entry'><span class=\"xpapers_citation\"><a class='xpapers_title' href=\"http://philpapers.org/rec/SEARAC\">Representationalism about consciousness.</a><span class='xpapers_pubInfo'> In Max Velmans &amp; Susan Schneider (eds.), <em>The Blackwell Companion to Consciousness</em>. Blackwell. 2007. <span class='xpapers_coauthors'>Co-authored with <span class='xpapers_name'>William E. Seager</span>.</span></span></span><div class=\"xpapers_extras\"><div class=\"xpapers_abstract\">A representationalist-friendly introduction to representationalism which covers a number of central problems and objections.</div></div></li> ";
xpapers_embed_buffer += "<li id='eBOUQLI' class='xpapers_entry'><span class=\"xpapers_citation\"><a class='xpapers_title' href=\"http://philpapers.org/rec/BOUQLI\">Quantum leaps in philosophy of mind.</a><span class='xpapers_pubInfo'> <em class='xpapers_pubName'>Journal of Consciousness Studies</em> 11 (12):17--42. 2004.</span></span><div class=\"xpapers_extras\"><div class=\"xpapers_abstract\">I discuss the quantum mechanical theory of consciousness and freewill offered by Stapp (1993, 1995, 2000, 2004). First I show that decoherence-based arguments do not work against this theory. Then discuss a number of problems with the theory: Stapp's separate accounts of consciousness and freewill are incompatible, the interpretations of QM they are tied to are questionable, the Zeno effect could not enable freewill as he suggests because weakness of will would then be ubiquitous, and the holism of measurement in QM is not a good explanation of the unity of consciousness for essentially the same reason that local interactions may seem incapable to account for it.</div></div></li> ";
function xpapers_embed_init() {
    if (arguments.callee.done) return;
    arguments.callee.done = true;
    var el = document.getElementById('xpapers_gadget');
    if (el) {
        el.innerHTML = xpapers_embed_buffer + "<div style='font-size:smaller;text-align:right'>powered by <a href='http://philpapers.org'>PhilPapers</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;|&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href='http://philpapers.org/profile/1/myworks.pl?refresh=1'>Refresh</a>";
    } 
}

if (document.addEventListener) {
    document.addEventListener('DOMContentLoaded', xpapers_embed_init, false);
}
(function() {
    /*@*/
    try {
        document.body.doScroll('up');
        return xpapers_embed_init();
    } catch(e) {}
    /* (false) @*/
    if (/loaded|complete/.test(document.readyState)) return xpapers_embed_init();
    /* @*/
    if (!xpapers_embed_init.done) setTimeout(arguments.callee, 30);
})();

if (window.addEventListener) {
    window.addEventListener('load', xpapers_embed_init, false);
} else if (window.attachEvent) {
    window.attachEvent('onload', xpapers_embed_init);
}
//v1.0
