Goodreads helps you keep track of books you want to read.
Start by marking “Consciousness Explained” as Want to Read:
Consciousness Explained
Enlarge cover
Rate this book
Clear rating

Consciousness Explained

3.88 of 5 stars 3.88  ·  rating details  ·  4,482 ratings  ·  171 reviews
This book revises the traditional view of consciousness by claiming that Cartesianism and Descartes' dualism of mind and body should be replaced with theories from the realms of neuroscience, psychology and artificial intelligence. What people think of as the stream of consciousness is not a single, unified sequence, the author argues, but multiple drafts of reality compos ...more
Paperback, 511 pages
Published 1993 by Penguin Books (first published 1991)
more details... edit details

Friend Reviews

To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up.

Reader Q&A

To ask other readers questions about Consciousness Explained, please sign up.

Be the first to ask a question about Consciousness Explained

This book is not yet featured on Listopia. Add this book to your favorite list »

Community Reviews

(showing 1-30 of 3,000)
filter  |  sort: default (?)  |  rating details
A friend urged me to read this book. I got a couple of chapters into it, and found the author was telling me that "we are all novelists", and that a large part of consciousness was going to be explained in terms of the ongoing narrative we spin in our interior monologues. Shortly before, another friend had persuaded me to read some Derrida, and Dennett's arguments sounded a bit familiar. (Oddly enough, the two people in question had been dating at one point). I looked around in Dennett's book, a ...more
I love love love this book so much that I am hoping that when I die, the crime scene investigators will find it clutched tightly in my hand and will all have to read it very carefully perhaps to get clues about who killed me and then they will forget completely about investigating the crime and start totally getting into this astonishing book instead and will tell all their crime scene investigator buddies who will read it and tell their buddies and then everyone in the world will read it and th ...more
Jul 11, 2007 Joshua rated it 5 of 5 stars  ·  review of another edition
Recommends it for: philosophers
Consciousness explained? Well, no, not exactly. But a brilliant book nonetheless, despite the audaciousness of the title (though I must admit that Dennett concedes that his "explanation" is far from complete and that cognitive theory is really still in its infancy--or at least it was when this book was written). I only read it recently, and perhaps it is a bit outdated for a book about the ever-changing fields of cognitive theory, neuroscience, and psychology, but, if anything, this book does a ...more
A hard book to plough through and one that is so careful and meticulous that it never reaches an interesting or clear-cut conlusion. Dennett takes hundreds of pages to refute the idea of consciousness as a sentient observer sitting inside man's brain (a concept known as "the Cartesian Theatre"). I could have agreed about that being untrue in half a page. When Dennett has finally finished explaining what consciousness is not, he disappointingly admits that he does not have a good alternative eith ...more
Joshua Nomen-Mutatio
Yes, the title is audacious. Yes, it's not a perfect book. Yes, the subject is extremely complex and really smart people fight about it in prestigious journals, etc.

But Dennett has some fine ideas nonetheless. I go through periods of swinging in one direction and back again when it comes to what I'll just call the "consciousness wars." But lately Dennett's ideas are striking me as more and more correct (and I've always leaned in his and the Churchland's direction since I first began looking into
Amar Pai
Jun 07, 2014 Amar Pai rated it 1 of 5 stars
Recommends it for: dolts
Is it possible? Is this going to finally be the book that explains the mystery of consciousness?

No. No it is not.

What would it even mean to explain consciousness? Reminds of Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy where they build this ultra powerful supercomputer to finally answer the mystery of "life, the universe and everything," only to then realize that they don't actually know what the question means.
After having listened to this book, I will never fall for the make-believe just so stories about consciousness again. There is no reason to have to appeal to fantasy to explain consciousness. This book gives a complete story and forevermore I'll be able to not be sucked into false thought processes concerning the topics about the mind.

Metaphysics, when it's at is best is to fill in the parts that physics (or science) is having a hard time explaining because they don't really understand the objec
While Dennett is probably better known to most readers as a grumbly professional atheist, I really don't need any help in that regard, so I went straight to his book on philosophy of mind. I can see why he's a public figure-- he's downright chatty and personable for a chilly analytic philosopher, and at the same time clear and rigorous in his presentation of ideas.

As for the ideas themselves... OK, the multiple-drafts notion of consciousness is something I can certainly get behind, and his attac
This book attempts a third-person, analytic approach to the investigation of the mind/body problem, as opposed to the traditional first-person, inductive approach found in Descartes and Searle. For the first few hundred pages, Dennett relates a serious of rational errors that plague the subject of consciousness; undeniably universal errors such as the phi phenomenon, wherein one posits flashes as movement, and the subject's tendency to say two related but distinct words at the same time. This l ...more
Joshua Stein
This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers. To view it, click here.
Rick Harrington
Yet another book which magically escaped my attention, though reading it would have promoted my understanding of so much. Better late than never, eh?

And as always, there was no program to my finding it. An old re-met friend rather, who must have been remembering me as I once was well over 30 years ago, lent it to me. He thought the book had my name written all over it.

Indeed! Nor do I wish to lay claim to that identity I would name for myself, acknowledging readily that most of what I call mys
Paul Johnston
It is hard to know what to say about this book. It contains a lot of interesting information and is very readable but it is also deeply confused. Dennett is clearly fascinated by the brain and keen to find a theory to explain how it works. As I am not an expert in this area, it is hard for me to assess whether what he puts forward is either new or interesting. What is most striking (and annoying) for me, however, is Dennett's philosophical naivety and lack of sensitivity to philosophical issues. ...more
Mar 21, 2009 DJ rated it 4 of 5 stars  ·  review of another edition
Recommends it for: anyone interested in brains and understanding our conscious experience
Shelves: brain
A bold book from my favorite philosopher-scientist that aims to build a framework for tackling perhaps the hardest question humanity has ever asked - "what is this conscious experience?" As in his other books, Dennett is adept at weaving the "soft" thought experiments of philosophy with the "harder" experiments of the scientific community. Some of his most triumphant points don't have the impact they may once have carried, as much of his material has been accepted (or disproved) in the last two ...more
Dennett uses some fascinating case studies from neuropsychology to debunk what he calls the Cartesian Theatre. He means the gut instinct we have that what goes on inside the brain is like a little multimedia presentation on a screen, in front of the audience of the soul. First off, he rightfully dismisses dualism. He then shows how there is no need for, or evidence for, a Cartesian Theatre. He introduces the temporal and spacial distribution of the mind in the brain. He shows how simple experime ...more
Troy Blackford
I feel like I just ran a marathon: one I was woefully unprepared for. This huge book required a huge amount of mental effort from me, and I'm afraid I was unable to meet much of it even halfway. Parts of it were explicable to me, and I found them to be incredibly interesting. I just don't have enough grasp of philosophical basics to take on a work like this. I read the entire thing, diligently, but much of it was inexplicable to me. Not because it made no sense-Dennett is a very sharp thinker an ...more
Leo Horovitz
Dennett has conducted a wonderful investigation into the nature of consciousness. Not being satisfied to treat consciousness as something ontologically and fundamentally "special", he dismisses some misguided notions of the workings of consciousness which makes it seem as though there has to be some sort of "center or awareness" in which it all comes together along with the related notion of conscious experience as something which has further unexplainable phenomena, qualia, as its building bloc ...more
A better title for this book would be "Consciousness Provisionally Explained, At Great Length", but that probably wouldn't have fit on the book jacket. In five-hundred or so pages, Dennett outlines most of his complete theory of the mind. The big idea is straightforward: there is no "Cartesian theater" where sense-data or memories or anything else is played for an internal observer or decision maker. Instead, consciousness is a stream produced by the activities of countless loosely joined agents ...more
This is exactly the kind of philosophy book I wish I had read in college. I had always felt philosophers spent so much time imagining what might be happening in the world and almost no time at all testing those theories. I always wanted to say "Just because you imagine it, doesn't mean it's true". And there are plenty of theories (De Carte's Devil, zombies, etc) that have no effect on the observable world. I can appreciate these theories for being a kind of mental exercise, but by focusing on th ...more
I have not fully accepted the author's claim (that he has explained consciousness), nor, obviously, his model for consciousness, but there is so much fascinating mind food in here that it's well worth five stars.

I guess this book has become a de rigeur foundational piece for anybody interested in what consciousness is, because he sets up a groundwork for discussing it, and he covers lots of things (like Descartes' consideration of the question), and the thought experiments provide wonderful fodd
Mar 06, 2007 AJ rated it 4 of 5 stars  ·  review of another edition
Recommends it for: People interested in brain science
More of a philosophical approach to handling the question of consciousness. Dennett uses this book to suggest an alternative way to see the mind, a way to join the subjective experience of consciousness with the meat and neurons in the brain. His argument is really to show that old ways of thinking are not necessarily the only ways to think about the mind. He proposes his own model of consciousness, but admits it is not necessarily correct, only that the approach is more justified, and that old ...more
Jon Boorstin
Dennett tackles the consciousness question from a common-sense/philosopical point of view, if such a thing is possible. It's an intriguing, if not entirely convincing theory. It feels like a good attempt to figure something out that won't be figured out for another twenty years.
This is probably my favorite non-fiction book that I have ever read. I read it for the first time when I was 15 or so, and have probably read it a dozen times since. When I was a dumb highschooler with a passing interest in science who loved pop science books? Loved it. When I was getting my degree in computational neuroscience and looking for pioneers in the field? Loved it. Now, with a glass of red wine and a desire to wax philosophical with my friends? Love it.

In fact, I like it so much that
Prithvi Shams
Consciousness is a tough concept to grasp, but this book is a fairly amiable guide. I'm not sure I understood his Multiple Drafts model of consciousness well, but Dennett did make a well-argued point that consciousness does not necessarily need to be forever beyond our grasp, nor is it a given that the conscious self must itself be formed of "conscious" constituents or some immaterial, metaphysical entities. After all, liquids and gases are themselves not made of "liquid" or "gaseous" particles, ...more
Shane Wagoner
Daniel C. Dennett is a first-class troublemaker. In Consciousness Explained, not only does he attempt to break down our most fundamental experiences (the "I", Qualia, and his Cartesian Theater among others), but he does it convincingly every step of the way! Beginning with the basic idea that all conscious experience is fundamentally a physical process spread across space and time within the brain, Dennett proceeds lay waste to the "hidden dualism" that remains prevalent in Neuroscience and Phil ...more
I'm actually quite sad to come to the end of this book and that's always a good sign, as far as I'm concerned, but in this case it's especially true because it's left me wanting more.

By his own admission, Dennett hasn't quite completed his work by the end of it and feels that it's due to revision, addition, speculation and all the rest, but what he does provide is a neat theory of his own, together with some very detailed breakdowns of other, more traditional versions of events. Certainly knock
Douglas Summers-Stay
Dennett is infuriating in his total inability to see that everything he is saying is missing the whole point. Yes, a lot of our experiences are illusions. So what? If there exist feelings at all, there is something that is not explained by the 3rd person account.
This page:
says it better than I can here. The repetition of the "yes, but how" question in every line of that page was just how I felt on every page of the book.
This book is as revolutionary as it is short-sighted. Dennett tries to find an empirical basis of consciousness. For this purpose he digs deep into the neuroscientific literature, questioning everything he finds from a theoretical point of view. This is interesting, and exceptional. Most scientist spend little time doubting the concepts they use, or what their findings mean in a broader theoretical sense. Dennett does takes this time and comes to unsettling conclusions.

The best, and most necessa
I don't spend a lot of time reading philosophy but I actually found this book really captivating.
The book has a very materialistic, rational view of the brain. Which is good; I don't think I could get through a book that presented it differently.
There are some parts that I feel could get to the point faster and some parts I had to skip because I was already convinced of what he was trying to argue for (like the second section which is entirely devoted to explaining why his readers should want t
Oy vey. Tough read. Went delving into the details of consciousness and the nuances of how some very specific, and minor distinctions can lead to a massive alteration in the idea of consicousness. The first parts and the last parts are quite intriguing. The middle section gets tedious to muddle through. However, a good framework for ways to distinguish consciousness are discussed in the beginning. The ending explores the self. This intrigued me the most possibly because I have recently read other ...more
This book doesn't explain what consciousness is or where it comes from, but rather explains how it operates and the illusions it generates. At times enlightening and disturbing, this book can change the way people view their minds. In fact, the very early attacks on the notion of a "Cartesian Theater" are staggering are hard to wrap one's mind around.
« previous 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 99 100 next »
There are no discussion topics on this book yet. Be the first to start one »
  • The Conscious Mind: In Search of a Fundamental Theory
  • Conversations on Consciousness: What the Best Minds Think about the Brain, Free Will, and What It Means to Be Human
  • Matter and Consciousness: A Contemporary Introduction to the Philosophy of Mind
  • Looking for Spinoza: Joy, Sorrow, and the Feeling Brain
  • Neurophilosophy: Toward a Unified Science of the Mind/Brain
  • The Society of Mind
  • Philosophy in the Flesh: The Embodied Mind and its Challenge to Western Thought
  • The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind
  • The Illusion of Conscious Will
  • The Ego Tunnel: The Science of the Mind and the Myth of the Self
  • The Mystery Of Consciousness
  • I Am a Strange Loop
  • Synaptic Self: How Our Brains Become Who We Are
  • Religion Explained: The Evolutionary Origins of Religious Thought
  • Reflections on the Dawn of Consciousness: Julian Jaynes's Bicameral Mind Theory Revisited
  • The Quest for Consciousness: A Neurobiological Approach
"Daniel Clement Dennett (born March 28, 1942 in Boston, Massachusetts) is a prominent American philosopher whose research centers on philosophy of mind, philosophy of science and philosophy of biology, particularly as those fields relate to evolutionary biology and cognitive science. He is currently the co-director of the Center for Cognitive Studies and the Austin B. Fletcher Professor of Philoso ...more
More about Daniel C. Dennett...
Darwin's Dangerous Idea: Evolution and the Meanings of Life Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon The Mind's I: Fantasies and Reflections on Self and Soul Freedom Evolves Kinds of Minds: Towards an Understanding of Consciousness

Share This Book

“But recently I have learned from discussions with a variety of scientists and other non-philosophers (e.g., the scientists participating with me in the Sean Carroll workshop on the future of naturalism) that they lean the other way: free will, in their view, is obviously incompatible with naturalism, with determinism, and very likely incoherent against any background, so they cheerfully insist that of course they don't have free will, couldn’t have free will, but so what? It has nothing to do with morality or the meaning of life. Their advice to me at the symposium was simple: recast my pressing question as whether naturalism (materialism, determinism, science...) has any implications for what we may call moral competence. For instance, does neuroscience show that we cannot be responsible for our choices, cannot justifiably be praised or blamed, rewarded or punished? Abandon the term 'free will' to the libertarians and other incompatibilists, who can pursue their fantasies untroubled. Note that this is not a dismissal of the important issues; it’s a proposal about which camp gets to use, and define, the term. I am beginning to appreciate the benefits of discarding the term 'free will' altogether, but that course too involves a lot of heavy lifting, if one is to avoid being misunderstood.” 82 likes
“Philosophers' Syndrome: mistaking a failure of the imagination for an insight into necessity.” 10 likes
More quotes…