Organized by Professor Søren Brier (CBS) - with lectures by Jesper Hoffmeyer, Fredrik Stjernfelt, Claus Emmeche, Torkild Thellefsen, Sara Cannizzaro
Your written contribution: You are expected to send us a 2 page description of your project plus 2 pages describing the methodological aspects/problems of your project that you would like to discuss with your peers. All contributions will be collected into a document which will be sent to everybody for sharing in order to feed the group’s methodological exchanges. It is important that you read the other participants projects in order to contribute to the discussion. These papers and your presentation and active participation in the course are necessary to get the course certificate.
The objective of the course is to
- Enable the student to critically examine the transdisciplinary practices in doing research in the area of information, cognition and communication.
- Understand communication research as providing an account of semiotic and autopoietic organization of meaning.
- Carry through analysis of various types of theories of cognition and communication in relation to key organisational processes such as decision making, development of meaningful practises and accountability.
You are expected to be engaged in a PhD or postdoctoral project, which can be inspired by or will use aspects of transdisciplinarity and Cybersemiotics. You are expected to contribute by bringing your interpretation of and questions to the framework in order to fuel our discussions. Every student will get 2o min to talk about methodological problems in their project using a Power Point show followed by a 25 min discussion with the other students and teachers present. We are expecting a lively interdisciplinary workshop environment giving insight into the other PhD researchers’ problems, finding commonalities and supplementing information about other projects and angles on the same interdisciplinary problems. We expect to get as much diversity as possible connected to this transdisciplinary field to be able to share as many perspectives as possible. Do not worry, therefore, if you have just started on your project or if you are at the end of it or you think you have a unique approach or problem. All contributions and questions are welcome.
We will do our best to recommend cheap accommodation nearby in order to make your stay in Copenhagen pleasant. Every day there will be lectures with questions, mixed with student presentations and discussion of projects. We will run from 9-17 with a lunch break and coffee breaks and a shared dinner and get together the first day.
The course is first of all an explanation and exploration of the integrative transdisciplinary framework Cybersemiotics. See a short description of Cybersemiotics in Glossarium-BITri: http://glossarium.bitrum.unileon.es/glossary/cybersemiotics. The primary curriculum is: Cybersemiotics: Why Information is not enough first published in 2008 at Toronto University Press and again in 2010 (find it cheapest on www.bookfinder.com ) . You can also find it as a Google book. You are expected to have read it carefully plus the following papers by Brier and the other speakers.
We will study the integrative synthesis in Cybersemiotics and how it is carried out in two steps: The first is to accept two major and very different transdisciplinary paradigms as both being legitimate: 1. The cybernetic-informational approach leading to cognitive science’s information processing paradigm and second order cybernetics, autopoiesis theory and Luhmann’s system science 2. The Peircean phaneroscopic, triadic, pragmaticistic, evolutionary, semiotic approach to meaning, leading to modern biosemiotics. Of these 1. is based on an entropic and mathematical definition of information and self-organization in a material and informational world or in autopoietic systems, but with no concepts of first-person conscious experience and meaningful linguistic intersubjective communication; 2. is based on a phenomenological intersubjective world of partly self-organizing triadic sign processes in an experiential embodied, meaningful world.
The second step involves following and explaining the development from first order cybernetics to second order cybernetic and autopoiesis theory from Gregory Bateson through Heinz von Foerster to Maturana and Varela, ending with Niklas Luhmann’s threefold autopoietic system theory. Furthermore, embodiment theory from Lakoff and Johnson plus Merleau-Ponty is discussed. An integration of these views with a Peircean biosemiotics is shown in a transdisciplinary philosophy of science model that will be explained and discussed. All this will be lectured on by Søren Brier during the first part of the week in interaction with the course participants. The second part of the week will bring in researchers who have contributed to the development and applications of the idea of Cybersemiotics.
The program will be as follows:
Cybersemiotics 2013: Course program August 12 -16
Monday August, 12:
9.00-10.30: Short presentation of the course and its idea. Five minutes presentation about where you come from personally, intellectually and your project?
11.00–12.15: Søren Brier (SB) 1: Why is objective information not enough to build a transdisciplinary theory of information, cognition and communication? The paradigmatic problem of physicalism and informationalism. Cybersemiotic star.
13.00-13.45: I. Student presentation and discussion of project and its methodological problems.
13.45-14.45: SB 2: The phenomenological-semiotic-intersubjective point of departure for transdisciplinarity.The Cybersemiotic star.
14.45-15.15 Coffee break.
15.15- 16.00: II. Student presentation and discussion of project its methodological problems.
16.00.-17.00: Torkild Thellefsen: C.S. Peirce’s theory of information.
18.00: We eat a buffet dinner together with meat, fish and pure vegetarian dishes right after the course at CBS.
Tuesday August, 13:
9.00-10.00: SB 3: Second order cybernetics from Bateson to von Foerster and Spencer Brown
10.30-11.30: Claus Emmeche: The research political problems of inter- and transdisciplinarity.
11.30-12.15: III. Student Presentation and discussion of project and its methodological problems.
13.00-13.45: SB 4: Autopoiesis from Maturana to Luhmann. What’s the paradigmatic idea?
15.15-16.00: IV. Student Presentation and discussion of project and its methodological problems
16.00-17.00: SB 5: Ethology and the problem of a scientific theory of the animal mind and its evolution.
Wednesday August, 14:
9.00-10.00 SB 7: The ideas of the semiotic paradigms: Saussurian and Peircean
10.00-11.00: SB 8: Embodiment, consciousness and evolution.
11.00-11.30: Coffee and questions.
11.30-12.15: V. Student Presentation and discussion of project and its methodological problems.
13.00-14.00: Frederik Stjernfelt: C. S. Peirce’s view of inter- and transdisciplinarity.
14.00-14.30. Coffee and questions.
14.30-15.15: VI. Student presentation and discussion of project and its methodological problems.
15.15-16.15: SB. 9: Peircean synechism, tychism, agapism and hyloism and how it leads to pragmaticism.
16.15-17.00: VII. Student presentation and discussion of project and its methodological problems.
Thursday August, 15:
9.00-10.15: SB 10: The development of the biosemiotic idea. Uexkull, Sebeok, Hoffmeyer.
10.45- 11.30: VIII. Student presentation and discussion of project and its methodological problems.
11.30-12.15: IX. Student presentation and discussion of project and its methodological problems.
13.00- 14.30: Jesper Hoffmeyer: Biosemiotics as a bridge between science and humanities.
14.30-15.00: Coffee and questions.
15.00-15.45: X. Student presentation and discussion of project and its methodological problems
15.45-17.00: SB. 11: The importance of ontological and metaphysical deliberations.
Friday August, 16:
9.00-10.00: SB12. Science, semiotics and the religious dimension of meaning and rationality
10.00-10.45: XI. Student presentation and discussion of project and its methodological problems
10.45-11.15: Coffee and questions
11.15-12.15: XII. Student presentation and discussion of project and its methodological problems
13.00 -14.30: ‘Biosemiotics as Systems Theory’: steps towards a new form of cultural analysis.
14.30-15.00: Coffee and questions.
15.00-16.00: Collective discussion with Cannizzaro and Brier of the transdisciplinary knowledge and problems dealt with so far by participants.
16.00-1700: Evaluation and suggestions for improvements plus suggestions for follow up courses.
Brier, S. (2008). Cybersemiotics: Why Information is not enough first published in 2008 at Toronto University Press and again in 2010 with small corrections. READ THAT FIRST! YOU NEED TWO MONTH!
Cobley, Paul: “Second-order thinking, first-class reasoning”. Signs 3, pp. 69-107 (2010; ISSN: 1902-8822. (11,000 words) A deep review of: Cybersemiotics: Why Information is not Enough.
http://vip.db.dk/signs/Articles_Signs_International_Section/2010/Paul_%2...). This is a good overview and discussion of the book. The best review produced.
Thellefsen et al (2011): From First to Third via Cybersemiotics: A Festschrift Honoring Professor Søren Brier on the Occasion of his 60th Birthday (Scandinavian Book, 2011; 978-87-7071-028-3), Copenhagen: SL books. The book can be purchased http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keyw... (In this unique book there are chapters by Ole Nedergaard Thomsen, Paul Cobley, Winfried Nöth and Lucia Santaella, Gordana Dodig-Crnkovic, Philip Guddemi and Marcel Danesi developing and commenting on Cybersemiotics plus two chapters by Thellefsen and Bent Sørensen on Peirce’s philosophy.)
Each lecturer will present an article to every one for reading before the corse.
Brier, S (2004) Cybersemiotics and the problems of the information-processing paradigm as a candidate for a unified science of information behind library information science, Library Trends Wntr, 2004 , http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1387/is_3_52/ai_n6080408
Brier, S. (2006): “The foundation of LIS in information science and semiotics”, Libreas: Library Ideas 1 http://www.ib.hu-berlin.de/~libreas/libreas_neu/ausgabe4/pdf/001bri.pdf
Brier, S. (2008a): “Bateson and Peirce on the pattern that connects and the sacred”, Chapter 12 pp- 229-255 in Hoffmeyer, J. (ed.) (2008): 'A Legacy for Living Systems: Gregory Bateson as a precursor for biosemiotic thinking, Biosemiotics 2, London: Springer Verlag.
Brier, S. (2008b):“A Paradigm for Biosemiotics”, Signs 2008, pp. 30-81. http://vip.db.dk/signs/artikler/Brier%20(2008)%20the%20paradigm%20of%20peircean%20biosemiotics.pdf
Brier, S. (2008c). A Peircean Panentheist Scientific Mysticism. International Journal of Transpersonal Studies; vol. 27, p. 20-45 http://www.transpersonalstudies.org/ImagesRepository/ijts/Downloads/A%20...
Brier, S. (2010): Cybersemiotic Pragmaticism and Constructivism, Constructivist Foundations 5(1): 19-39. http://www.univie.ac.at/constructivism/journal/5/1/019.brier
Brier, S. (2001d): Cybersemiotics: An Evolutionary World View Going Beyond Entropy and Information into the Question of Meaning, in Wheeler, W. (ed.) Biosemiotics: Nature/Culture/Science/Semiosis. JISC, Open Humanities Press. http://www.livingbooksaboutlife.org/books/Biosemiotics
Sørensen, B., Brier, S. and Thellefsen, T. (2011): Cosmos and creativity: Man in an evolving universe as a creative, aesthetical agent —some Peircean remarks, Semiotica 187–1/4 (2011), 213–227.
Brier, S. (2011): “Cybersemiotics: A New Foundation for Transdisciplinary Theory of Information, Cognition, Meaning, Communication and Consciousness” Signs, vol. 5 (2011): pp. 75-120, 2011 ISSN: 1902-8822, http://vip.iva.dk/signs/Articles_Signs_International_Section/2011/Brier%...
Cobley, Paul: “Cybersemiotics and Human Modelling”. Entropy 2010, 12(9), pp. 2045-2066. http://www.mdpi.com/1099-4300/12/9/2045/
Johansson, K. E. L. (2012) “Instances of Consciousness - An essay on the signs of evolution” approved for Cybernetic & Human Knowing, Vol. 19, no.4.
Sørensen, B., Brier, S. and Thellefsen, T. (2011): “Cosmos and creativity: Man in an evolving universe as a creative, aesthetical agent —some Peircean remarks”. Semiotica 187-1/4 (2011), pp. 213–227.
Bateson, G. (1973): Steps to an ecology of mind, Paladin, USA, Great Britain.
— (1980): Mind and Nature: a Neces¬sary Unit. USA: Bantam Books.
Bateson, F. and Bateson, M. C. (2005/1987): Angels Fear: Towards an Epistemology of the Sacred, New Jersey: Hampton Press.
Hoffmeyer, J. (ed.)(2008): A Legacy for Living Systems: Gregory Bateson as a precursor for biosemiotic thinking, Biosemiotics 2, London: Springer Verlag.
C. S. Peirce and theories based on his semiotics:
Bertilsson, T. M. (2009): Peirce’s theory of inquiry and beyond, Berlin, New York: Peter lang.
Sherif, J.K.(1994): Charles Peirce’s Guess at the riddle: Grounds for human significance, Blomington: Indiana University Press.
Colapietro, V.M (1989): Peirce’s Approach to the Self: A Semiotic view on Human Subjectivity, New York: State University of New York Press.
Esposito, J.L. (1980): Evolutionary Metaphysics: The development of Peirce’s Categories, Ohio: Ohio University Press.
Murphy, M. G. (1993). The development of Peirce’s Philosophy, Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company.
Kultgen, J.K. (1959-60). The “future metaphysics” of Peirce and Whitehead”. Kant-Studien 5 (1959-60): 285-293.
Liszka, J. J. (1996). A General Introduction to the Semeiotic of Charles Sanders Peirce. Bloom-ington: Indiana University Press.
Nöth, W. (2002). Semiotic Machines. Cybernetics and Human Knowing, Vol.9, No. 1, pp 3-22.
Nöth, W. (2009): On The Instrumentality And Semiotic Agency of Signs, Tools, and Intelligent Machines”, Cybernetics & Human Knowing, Vol. 17, No. 3-4.
Parker, K. A. (1998). The Continuity of Peirce’s Thought. Nashville and London: Vanderbilt University Press.
Peirce, C. S.(1892a). The Doctrine of Neces¬sity Exami¬ned. The Monist, Vol. II, No. 3, April 1892. (April 1982):321-337.
Peirce, C. S. (1892b). The Law of Mind. The Monist, Vol. II, n. 4, July, pp. 533-559
Peirce, C. S. (1893). Evolutionary Love. The Monist, Vol. III, No.2, January 1893, 176 p.
Peirce, C. S. (1931-58): Collected Papers vol. I-VIII. (eds.) Hartshorne and Weiss. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
Peirce, C. S. (1955): Philosophical Writings of Peirce: Selected and Edited With an introduction by Justus Buchler, New York Dover Publications.
Peirce, C. S. (1958): Selected writings: Values in a universe of chance, ed. with an introduction and notes by Philip P. Wiener, New York: Dover Publications.
Peirce, C. S. (1980). New Elements of Mathematics. Amsterdam: Walter De Gruyter Inc.
Peirce, C. S. (1992). The Essential Peirce: Selected Philosophical, Volume 1 (1867-1893). (Eds.) Houser, N. and Kloesel, C., Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Peirce, C. S. (1994 [1866-1913]): The Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce. Electronic edition reproducing Vols. I-VI ed. Charles Hartshorne & Paul Weiss (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1931-1935), Vols. VII-VIII ed. Arthur W. Burks (same publisher, 1958). Charlottesville: Intelex Corporation.
Potter, V. (1997): Charles Sanders Peirce: On Norms and Ideals, New York: Fordham University Press.
Raposa, M. (1989): Peirce’s Philosophy of Religion, Peirce Studies number 5, Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.
Turrisi, P. A. (Ed.) (1997): Pragmatism as a Principle and Method of Right Thinking: The 1893 Harward Lectures on Pragmatism, Albany: State University of New York Press.
Spencer-Brown, G. (1972): Laws of Form, 2nd edition. New York: Julien Press.
Spencer Brown, G. (1993/94), “Self-reference, Distinctions and Time”, Teoria Sociologica, Vol 2-3 No 1, pp. 47-53.
Mysticism and Philosophy:
Stace, W. T. (1960): Mysticism and Philosophy, Macmillan and Co, London (org. 1955).
Suzuki, D. T. (2002): Mysticism: Christian and Buddhist. Routledge Classics, London
Lorenz, K. (1966): On Aggression, London: Methuen
Lorenz, K. (1970-71). Studies in animal and human behaviour I and II, Cambridge: MA. Harvard University Press.
Lorenz, K. (1977): Behind the Mirror: a search for a natural history of human knowledge, London; Methuen & Co Ltd.
Thorpe, V.H. (1979): The Origin and Rise of Ethology: The Science of the Natural Behaviour of Animals, Heinemann, London
El-Hani, Charbel Niño, João Queiroz and Claus Emmeche (2006). A semiotic analysis of the genetic information system. Semiotica 160 (1/4): 1-68.
El-Hani, Charbel Niño, João Queiroz and Claus Emmeche (2009).Genes, Information, and Semiosi.. Tartu: Tartu University Press. (ISBN 978-9949-19-038-6, ISSN 1406-4278)
Emmeche, C. (1998). Defining Life as a Semiotic Phenomenon. Cybernetics & Human Knowing, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 33-42.
Favareau, D. (Ed.) (2010).Essential Readings in Biosemiotics: Antology and Commentatry. Berlin and New York: Springer.
Deacon, T.W. (1997): The Symbolic Species: The Co-Evolution of Language and the Brain. New York: Norton.
Deely, J.(2001): Physiosemiosis in the semiotic spiral: A play of musement‘’ Sign system Studies 29.1, pp.27-48.
Emmeche, C. (1991). Modeling life: a note on the semiotics of emergence and computation in artificial and natural living systems. pp. 77-99 in Biosemiotics. The Semiotic Web 1991
Emmeche, C. (1999).The Sarkar challenge to biosemiotics: Is there any information in a cell? Semiotica 127 (1/4): 273-293.
Emmeche, C. (2001).Does a robot have an Umwelt? Reflections on the qualitative biosemiotics of Jakob von Uexküll. Semiotica 134 (1/4): 653-693.
Emmeche, C. (2003). Biosemiotics. p. 63-64 in: J. Wentzel Vrede van Huyssteen (ed.): Encyclopedia of Science and Religion. New York: Macmillan Reference.
Emmeche, C. (2004). A-life, Organism and Body: the semiotics of emergent levels. Pp. 117-124 in: Mark Bedeau, Phil Husbands, Tim Hutton, Sanjev Kumar and Hideaki Suzuki (eds.). Workshop and Tutorial Proceedings. Ninth International Conference on the Simulation and Synthesis of Living Systems (Alife IX), Boston Massachusetts, September 12th, 2004.
Hoffmeyer, J. (1992 b): Semiotic aspects of biology: Biosemiotic, in Posner, R., Robins, K. & Sebeok, T.A. (Eds.).
Hoffmeyer, J (1995): The swarming cyberspace of the body, Cybernetics & Human Knowing Vol. 3, No. 1, pp. 16-15.
Hoffmeyer, J (1997): Signs of Meaning in the Universe, Indiana University Press, Indiana, USA.
Hoffmeyer, J (1998). Surfaces Inside Surfaces. In Cybernetics & Human Knowing, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 33-42.
Hoffmeyer, J (2002): The central dogma: A joke that became real, Semiotica, 138-1/4, pp1-13.
Hoffmeyer, J. (2010): A biosemiotic approach to health, pp. 21-41 in Cowley, Stephen J., Major, Joäo C., Steffensen, Sune V., Dinis, Alfredo (2010): Signifying Bodies, Biosemiosis, Interaction
Hoffmeyer, J. and Emmeche, C. (1991): “Code-Duality and the Semiotics of Nature” in M. Anderson and F. Merrell Eds. On Scientific Modeling, pp. 117-166, New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Krampen, Martin (1981). Phytosemiotics. Semiotica 36(3/4): 187–209.
Kull, K., Deacon, Deacon, T., Emmeche, C., Hoffemeyer, J., Stjernfelt, F. (2010). Theses on Biosemiotics: Prolegomena to a Theoretical Biology, Biological Theory 4(2) 2009, 167–173.
Sebeok, T. (1976). Contributions to the Doctrine of Signs. Bloomington: Indiana University. Sebeok, Thomas A. (ed.) (1986): Encyclopedic Dictionary of Semiotics. Vol. 1–3. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Sebeok, T. (1989). The Sign & Its Masters. Sources in Semiotics VIII. New York: University Press of America.
Sebeok, Thomas A. (1990): Essays in Zoosemiotics. Toronto: Toronto Semiotic Circle.
Sebeok, Thomas A.(1992): ‘Tell me, where is fancy bred?’: The biosemiotic self. In: Sebeok, Umiker-Sebeok (eds.) 1992: 333–343.
Sebeok, T. (2000): Life Signs – Essays in Semiotics , Toronto: Legas.
Sebeok, T. A.; Umiker-Sebeok, Jean (eds.) (1992). Biosemiotics: The Semiotic Web 1991. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Sebeok, Thomas A.; Danesi, M. (2000). The Forms of Meaning: Modeling Systems Theory and Semiotic Analysis. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Autopoiesis and second-order cybernetics plus Luhmann’s system theory:
Leydesdorff, Loet (2012): Luhmann’s Communication-Theoretical Specification of the ‘Genomena’ of Husserl’s Phenomenology, Forthcoming in: Edmundo Balsemão Pires (Ed.), Public Space, Power and Communication, University of Coimbra, Portugal (received as PGF from the author by email 20. february 2012).
Leydesdorff, Loet (2009). Non-linear dynamics of meaning processing in social systems. Social Science Information 2009, 48; 5.
Luhmann, N. (1989): Ecological Communication, Polity Press, Cambridge.
Luhmann, N. (1990): Essays on Self-Reference, New York: Colombia University Press.
Luhmann, N. (1992). What is communication? Communication Theory; Vol. 2. No. 3, August 1972. pp. 251-258.¬
Luhmann, N. (1995): Social Systems. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press
Luhmann, N. (1999): “Sign as Form” Cybernetics & Human Knowing V. 6 No. 3. Special Issue: Luhmann: Cybernetics, Systems and Semiotics. Pp 21-37.
Maturana, H.R. (1988): "Ontology of observing: The Biological Foundation of Self Consciousness and the Physical Domain of Existence" The Irish Journal of Psychology, Vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 25-82.
Maturana, H. (1981): "Autopoiesis", in Milan Zeleney ed., Autopoiesis: A Theory of Living Organization (New York: North Holland).
Maturana, H. (1983): “What is it to see?” Archivos de Biologia y Medicina Experimentales, No.16, pp. 255-269.
Maturana, H & Varela, F. (1980). Autopoiesis and Cognition: The realization of the Living, Reidel, London.
Maturana, H. & Varela, F. (1986): Tree of knowledge: Biological Roots of Human Understanding, Shambhala Publishers. London.
Deacon, T. W. (2007), “Shannon – Boltzmann – Darwin: Redefining information (Part I)”, Cognitive Semiotics, 1.
Deacon, T W. (2008), “ Shannon – Boltzmann – Darwin: Redefining information (Part II)”, Cognitive Semiotics. 2: 169-196.
Hofstadter, Douglas (2007). I am a strange loop, New York: Basic books.
Küppers, B.-O. (1990). Information and the origin of Life, Cambridge, London: The MIT Press.
Levine, Joseph (1983). Materialism and the Qualia: The Explanatory Gap, Pacific Philosophy Quarterly 64, 1983.
Philosophy of science and transdisciplinarity:
Latour, Bruno, 1993. We Have Never Been Modern. (translated by Catherine Porter), Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
Latour, Bruno.2004. Politics of nature: How to Bring the Sciences Into Democracy, New York: Harvard University Press
Latour, Bruno .2007. Reassembling the social: An Introduction to Actor Network Theory. New York: Oxford University Press.
Nagel, Thomas (1974). What is it like to be a bat? Philosophical review 83:435-450.
Nagel, Thomas (1986). The view from nowhere. New York: Oxford University Press
Nicolescu, B. (2002). Manifesto of Transdisciplinarity. Albany: State of New York University Press.
Heelan, P.A. (1987). Husserl’s later philosophy of natural science. Phil. Sci. 1987, 53, 368-390.
Heelan, P.A. (1983). Space-perception and the Philosophy of Science. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Husserl, E. (1970) The Crisis of European Science and Transcendental Phenomenology. Translated by David Carr; Northwestern University Press: Evanston, IL, USA, 1970.
Merleau-Ponty, M. (1962). Phenomenology of Perception; Translated by C. Smith. Routledge & Kegan Paul: London, UK, 2002. Originally published as Phenomenologie de la Perception; Callimard: Paris, France, 1945, English 1962.
Merleau-Ponty, M. (1963/2008). The structure of Behavior, Pittsburg: Duquesne University Press.
Merleau-Ponty, M. (2003). Nature: Course Notes from the Collège de France.Illinois: North Weston University Press.
Spiegelberg, H. (1965), The Phenomenological Movement: A Historical Introduction, The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, two volumes, Pp. 765.
Thompson, Evan (2003) (Ed.).The problem of Consciousness: New essays in the phenomenological philosophy of mind. Alberta: University of Calgary Press.