The Stream of Consciousness: XXIX. Does Consciousness Exist? (Second Part)

James argues that consciousness is not a substance but is constituted of 'pure experiences' that are neither mental nor physical but can be taken as either. A key feature is direct acquaintance with one's experiences, which forms the basis of all knowledge. For example, knowledge of the sun arises from taking certain experiences as that physical object, due to their context among other experiences that are also objects of inner awareness.

Study at a glance

Abstract

I continue to address W. James's intentions in his article of 1904 titled “Does ‘Consciousness’ Exist?” (DCE), and to raise critical questions concerning the direction his theory takes after The Principles of Psychology. Here, as in the preceding article of this series, I closely examine his article for what it tells us concerning his new conception of the stream of consciousness. James holds it to be constituted of “pure experiences,” which are neither mental nor physical but may be taken to be either mental or physical. An essential feature of this new conception is one's having a direct acquaintance with one's experiences. James considers consciousness, in this basic sense, to be a crucial part of how one knows anything one does know. Knowledge of the sun, for example, has a basis in direct acquaintance with certain experiences; that is, one takes some of one's experiences to be a certain physical object, the sun itself, because of their occurrence in a context consisting of certain other experiences that, too, are objects of inner awareness.