Fore- and Background in Conscious Non-Demonstrative Inference

A. Nes
{"title":"Fore- and Background in Conscious Non-Demonstrative Inference","authors":"A. Nes","doi":"10.4324/9781315150703-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Philosophical discussion of conscious, personal-level inference has often focused on simple deductions, with only a small handful of premises, like modus ponens.1 Consciousness has, in this context, often been left as something of a global heading of the relevant inferences. Specifically, such questions as whether the different premises, or the conclusion, differently manifest in consciousness, or whether different notions, forms, or gradations of consciousness are apt for their respective characterization, have not been much explored. When philosophical discussion of inference has turned to unconscious cognition, the focus has often been on quite different, subpersonal processes. For example, it has been discussed whether the alleged unconscious inferences posited by some vision scientists to explain even low-level vision can qualify as genuine inferences.2 In these cases, none of the premises and, in some cases, not even the conclusion of the alleged inferences would be consciously entertained or even available to consciousness. In this chapter, I will look at a class of inferences that seem to fall somewhere between simple explicit deductions and subpersonal inferential processes on dimensions relevant to consciousness, viz. at certain non-demonstrative inferences. These are personal-level. They proceed from a consciously noticed fact, or apparent fact, to a similarly entertained conclusion. Yet they seem also to be sensitive to a rich stock of background information, not all of which seems to be consciously present in quite the same way as certain more explicitly noted or considered elements of the thinker’s overall perspective. These inferences suggest that consciousness can vary, in potentially interesting ways, across the body of assumptions from which a given conclusion is drawn The relevant sort of inferences may, I will assume, be exemplified by such cases as:","PeriodicalId":310207,"journal":{"name":"Inference and Consciousness","volume":"2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-12-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Inference and Consciousness","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315150703-9","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Philosophical discussion of conscious, personal-level inference has often focused on simple deductions, with only a small handful of premises, like modus ponens.1 Consciousness has, in this context, often been left as something of a global heading of the relevant inferences. Specifically, such questions as whether the different premises, or the conclusion, differently manifest in consciousness, or whether different notions, forms, or gradations of consciousness are apt for their respective characterization, have not been much explored. When philosophical discussion of inference has turned to unconscious cognition, the focus has often been on quite different, subpersonal processes. For example, it has been discussed whether the alleged unconscious inferences posited by some vision scientists to explain even low-level vision can qualify as genuine inferences.2 In these cases, none of the premises and, in some cases, not even the conclusion of the alleged inferences would be consciously entertained or even available to consciousness. In this chapter, I will look at a class of inferences that seem to fall somewhere between simple explicit deductions and subpersonal inferential processes on dimensions relevant to consciousness, viz. at certain non-demonstrative inferences. These are personal-level. They proceed from a consciously noticed fact, or apparent fact, to a similarly entertained conclusion. Yet they seem also to be sensitive to a rich stock of background information, not all of which seems to be consciously present in quite the same way as certain more explicitly noted or considered elements of the thinker’s overall perspective. These inferences suggest that consciousness can vary, in potentially interesting ways, across the body of assumptions from which a given conclusion is drawn The relevant sort of inferences may, I will assume, be exemplified by such cases as:
有意识非证明推理的前因后果与背景
哲学上关于有意识的、个人层面的推理的讨论通常集中在简单的演绎上,只有少量的前提,比如假设式在这种情况下,意识常常被视为相关推论的一个全局标题。具体地说,诸如不同的前提或结论在意识中的表现是否不同,或者不同的概念、形式或意识的层次是否适合于它们各自的表征等问题,还没有得到太多的探讨。当推理的哲学讨论转向无意识认知时,焦点往往放在完全不同的亚个人过程上。例如,有人讨论过,一些视觉科学家提出的所谓的无意识推理,甚至可以解释低水平的视觉,是否有资格作为真正的推理在这些情况下,没有一个前提,在某些情况下,甚至没有所谓推论的结论,会被有意识地接受,甚至被意识所接受。在本章中,我将研究一类推论,它们似乎介于简单的显性推论和与意识有关的次个人推论过程之间,即某些非论证性推论。这些都是个人层面的。它们从有意识地注意到的事实或明显的事实出发,得出类似的结论。然而,他们似乎对丰富的背景信息也很敏感,并不是所有的背景信息都像思想家整体观点中某些更明确地注意到或考虑到的元素一样有意识地呈现出来。这些推论表明,意识可以以一种潜在的有趣方式,在得出给定结论的一系列假设中发生变化。我认为,相关的推论可以通过以下案例来举例说明:
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信