Abstract
AbstractSosa (Proc Addresses Am Philos Assoc 79(2): 7–18, 2005) argues that we should reject the orthodox conception of dreaming—the view that dream states and waking states are “intrinsically alike, though different in their causes and effects” (2005: p. 7). The alternative he proposes is that “to dream is to imagine” (2005: p. 7). According to this imagination model of dreaming, our dreamt conscious beliefs, experiences, affirmations, decisions and intentions are not “real” insofar as they are all merely imagined beliefs, experiences, affirmations, decisions and intentions. This paper assesses the epistemic implications of Sosa’s imagination model of dreaming. Section 1 outlines and assesses the reasons Sosa gives for thinking that his imagination model of dreaming introduces a new dimension to debates about dream scepticism. Sosa argues that his imagination model of dreaming invites a more radical version of dream scepticism, and also makes available a novel and more powerful response to dream scepticism. Objections are raised to both of those claims. This leads to a challenge to Sosa’s imagination model of dreaming. This is the concern that Sosa’s imagination model of dreaming lacks the resources to accommodate the intuition that there is something illusory or misleading about one’s situation when one is dreaming, and as a result his account of dreams fails to accommodate the common intuition that there is a sceptical problem about dreaming but not about dreamless sleep. Section 2 of the paper elaborates a version of the imagination model of dreaming that can overcome that challenge. This version of the imagination model of dreaming goes beyond what Sosa explicitly commits to when he outlines his view of dreams, however, it exploits ideas that are integral to a key theme in Sosa’s recent writings on virtue reliabilism—namely his proposal that epistemic agency should be accorded a central place in that approach to knowledge, and his related proposal that agency is exercised in conscious judgement. An implication of this version of the imagination model of dreaming is that an elucidation of a connection between the wakeful condition and our capacity to exercise agency over our mental lives should be central to an account of the nature, and epistemic significance of, wakeful consciousness. The final section of the paper considers whether this version of the imagination model of dreaming has anything novel to contribute to debates about dream scepticism.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
General Social Sciences,Philosophy
Reference21 articles.
1. Ahlstrom, K. (2011). Dream skepticism and the conditionality problem. Erkenntnis, 75(1), 45–60.
2. Ballantyne, N., & Evans, I. (2010). Sosa’s dream. Philosophical Studies, 148(2), 249–252.
3. Brown, J. (2009). Sosa on scepticism. Philosophical Studies, 143(3), 397–405.
4. Crowther, T. (forthcoming). Experience, dreaming, and the phenomenology of wakeful consciousness. In F. Dorsch, F. MacPherson, & M. Nida-Rumelin (Eds.) Phenomenal presence. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
5. Descartes, R. (1984). Philosophical writings of descartes, volumes I–III, (J. Cottingham, R. Stoothoff, & D. Murdoch, Trans.). In J. Cottingham, R. Stoothoff, D. Murdoch, & A. Kenny (Vol. III ed.), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cited by
6 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献