Natural attitude of consciousness: the scheme of universality and the scheme of experience

Abstract

A.V. Smirnov’s theory of the Logic-of-sense is based on the difference between two lo­gics: the logic of substance and the logic of process. Their difference can be examined us­ing the theory of preconceptual experience based on the notion of scheme. A.V. Smirnov has formulated the natural setting of consciousness: existence of the outside world and the Self, their uniqueness and their permanency. As the result of analysis of the natural setting of consciousness the authors singled out two main schemes: the experience scheme and the universality scheme. The schemes are discussed using a thought experi­ment: the treatment of pneumonia by doctors who understand their own actions using different logics. It is demonstrated that each scheme is valid in both logics. Still, the psychological and objective-practical content of the schemes changes. Experience in process logic is the process which is naturally given to consciousness. Perception of the course of an ailment by a doctor is an example. This perception can be empiri­cally wrong but it cannot be confused with another process, such as remembrance of the manifestations of the disease known to the doctor from literature. Experience in the substance logic, by contrast, is just one of the properties of the disease known from the literature: “it is possible to perceive it by senses in a given situation”. Experi­ence that is conceived substantially is often denoted as qualia. The universality scheme in process logic is often realized as a universality of the process: the course of the dis­ease is not changing if the observer is changed, though the experience of the course can be different. Universality scheme in the substance logic is realized as universality of the result of the observation: “I see the same thing that any other doctor would see”. It follows that the universality scheme understood substantially is a generalization of the results of observations of different observers. Realizations of both schemes can be empirically correct but both have their limitations.