↓ Skip to main content

What makes you think you are conscious? An agnosticist manifesto

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
35 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
52 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
What makes you think you are conscious? An agnosticist manifesto
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2015
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2015.00170
Pubmed ID
Authors

Cees van Leeuwen

Abstract

The qualitative character of consciousness, its "what-it-is-likeness", is a contested issue, both in philosophy and psychology. I argue that, rather than by conceptual analyses, the status of "what-it-is-likeness" has to be decided by empirical investigation. Pending the outcome, we should maintain an agnostic stance, in order to remove the bias in favor of fictionalism from our study of consciousness,. I illustrate this with the notion of "ownership unity". People adhere to the belief of a single, unified self as the owner of their experiences, in spite of abundant dis-unities in the informational content of their experience. On one reading, this supports the notion that the unity of experience is no more than a convenient fiction, based on an illusory experience of unity. Cognitive neuroscience is slanted in favor of such understanding, insofar it emphasizes functional specialization and localization. To restore the balance, I present a complementary perspective: the view that the experience of unity is afforded by the intrinsic, multiscale brain dynamics. This approach offers a biological substrate for unity of experience as a regular scenario within certain boundary conditions, as well mechanisms that may let it go astray.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 35 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 2%
Italy 1 2%
Cuba 1 2%
Sweden 1 2%
Japan 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Unknown 46 88%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 23%
Researcher 10 19%
Student > Master 7 13%
Other 5 10%
Student > Bachelor 4 8%
Other 8 15%
Unknown 6 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 13 25%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 15%
Neuroscience 8 15%
Social Sciences 4 8%
Mathematics 2 4%
Other 5 10%
Unknown 12 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 23. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 31 May 2015.
All research outputs
#1,675,751
of 25,711,194 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#768
of 7,750 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,034
of 361,473 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#27
of 177 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,711,194 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,750 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 361,473 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 177 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.