Abstract

The use of expressions like `concepts of consciousness', `kinds ofconsciousness', and `meanings of `consciousness' ' interchangeablyis ubiquitous within the consciousness literature. It is arguedthat this practice can be made sense of in only two ways. The firstinvolves interpreting `concepts of consciousness' and `kinds ofconsciousness' metalinguistically to mean, roughly, conceptsexpressed by `consciousness' and kinds expressed by`consciousness'; and the second involves certain literal,though semantically deviant, interpretations of those expressions.The trouble is that researchers frequently use the above expressionsinterchangeably without satisfying either way of doing so coherently.The result is considerable error and confusion, which is demonstratedin the works of philosophers currently writing on consciousness.