首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Frontiers in Human Neuroscience >Reporting dream experience: Why (not) to be skeptical about dream reports
【2h】

Reporting dream experience: Why (not) to be skeptical about dream reports

机译:报告梦想经历:为什么(不)对梦想报告持怀疑态度

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Are dreams subjective experiences during sleep? Is it like something to dream, or is it only like something to remember dreams after awakening? Specifically, can dream reports be trusted to reveal what it is like to dream, and should they count as evidence for saying that dreams are conscious experiences at all? The goal of this article is to investigate the relationship between dreaming, dream reporting and subjective experience during sleep. I discuss different variants of philosophical skepticism about dream reporting and argue that they all fail. Consequently, skeptical doubts about the trustworthiness of dream reports are misguided, and for systematic reasons. I suggest an alternative, anti-skeptical account of the trustworthiness of dream reports. On this view, dream reports, when gathered under ideal reporting conditions and according to the principle of temporal proximity, are trustworthy (or transparent) with respect to conscious experience during sleep. The transparency assumption has the status of a methodologically necessary default assumption and is theoretically justified because it provides the best explanation of dream reporting. At the same time, it inherits important insights from the discussed variants of skepticism about dream reporting, suggesting that the careful consideration of these skeptical arguments ultimately leads to a positive account of why and under which conditions dream reports can and should be trusted. In this way, moderate distrust can be fruitfully combined with anti-skepticism about dream reporting. Several perspectives for future dream research and for the comparative study of dreaming and waking experience are suggested.
机译:梦是睡眠中的主观经历吗?它像是在做梦的东西,还是只想唤醒后的梦?具体地说,梦想报告是否可以被信任以揭示梦想的感觉,它们是否可以作为说梦想完全是有意识经历的证据?本文的目的是研究梦,梦报告和睡眠期间主观体验之间的关系。我讨论了关于梦想报告的哲学怀疑论的不同变体,并认为它们都失败了。因此,出于梦想的原因,对梦想报告的可信度的怀疑怀疑被误导了。我建议对梦想报告的可信度做出另一种反怀疑的解释。根据这种观点,梦境报告在理想的报告条件下并根据时间接近原理收集时,对于睡眠期间的意识体验而言是可信赖的(或透明的)。透明性假设具有方法学上必要的默认假设的状态,并且在理论上是合理的,因为它提供了有关梦想报告的最佳解释。同时,它从讨论的关于梦想报告的怀疑论形式中继承了重要的见解,表明对这些怀疑论点的仔细考虑最终导致人们对为什么以及在什么条件下可以并且应该信任梦想报告做出积极的解释。通过这种方式,适度的不信任可以与对梦想报告的怀疑相结合。提出了未来梦研究以及梦和觉醒经验的比较研究的几种观点。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号