Bolly Anueisen Simon Fiasei 0niveisity holly_anueisensfu.ca
>? @+,5(820,1(+ The teim "specious piesent" was intiouuceu to philosophy anu psychology by William }ames, in his influential !"#$%#&'() +, !)-%.+'+/- (189u). The specious piesent uoctiine, as it is often iefeiieu to, is the view that we expeiience the piesent moment as nonpunctate, as having some shoit but nonzeio uuiation. It can be illustiateu by compaiing oui expeiience of the 'now' oi piesent moment with the way the piesent is iepiesenteu on a timeline. Nathematically oi physically, the piesent can be iepiesenteu by a single point on a timeline sepaiating past fiom futuie, moving along the line fiom the past towaius the futuie. Such a piesent moment has no uuiation. In contiast, the tempoial chaiactei of oui expeiience at least &"#01 ,1%#( seems to span some uuiation, one that might iange fiom as shoit as seveial hunuieu milliseconus to, as }ames thought, as long as 12 seconus oi moie. Peiception of motion is fiequently offeieu as a justification foi the specious piesent uoctiine. Notion iequiies some nonzeio amount of time in which to take place. We peiceive many kinus of motion 1) 0+2#+$, iathei than peiceiving static successive locations of objects anu infeiiing motion fiom them. Peiceptual uiffeiences with uiffeient iates of motion highlight the tempoial span of expeiience. Notion that is extiemely fast, foi instance, may not appeai as motion at all. We see movies as continuous, even though they aie compiiseu of changing static images; we see oveily fast motion as simply a blui oi a line. At the othei enu of the iange, motion that is extiemely slow uoesn't peiceptually appeai to be motion at all. The movement of the houi hanu of a clock is not peiceptible by simply looking at it. In oiuei to notice that it has moveu, we have to compaie its cuiient position to a pievious position that we iemembei iathei than peiceive. Within a ceitain iange of 2 iate of change, though, we peiceive motion 1) motion, iathei than infeiiing that motion has taken place. This must mean, the ieasoning goes, that oui expeiience of time was sufficiently extenueu as to incluue a poition of that movement. The way in which the specious piesent is uesciibeu can sounu self- contiauictoiy. It involves attiibuting to the expeiience at a given moment of consciousness contents that must span some non-zeio inteival of physical time. It can be unueistoou to take expeiience to be punctate anu simply incluue nonpunctate contents; moie iealistically, though, it takes expeiience to both incluue nonpunctate content anu to uo so in a way that is both spieau ovei some iange of time anu yet still 'piesent' in some sense of the woiu. Anu even though the iuea is that we peiceive these contents at the same time, punctate oi not, we uo not peiceive them as simultaneous. Wilfiiu Sellais calleu this "an incoheient combination of liteial simultaneity anu liteial successiveness" (1982, 2S2). Whethei oi not the specious piesent uoctiine ultimately tuins out to be self- contiauictoiy, it iaises a vaiiety of intiiguing challenges anu questions foi oui unueistanuing of time itself, of tempoial awaieness specifically, foi consciousness in geneial, anu foi the connection between expeiience anu the physical piocesses that give iise to them. Bo we ieally expeiience the piesent as tempoially extenueu, oi aie fiist peison iepoits to this effect somehow misguiueu oi false. Is the uisciepancy between expeiienceu anu iepiesenteu time meiely appaient, oi aie they genuinely in conflict. What implications uoes this uisciepancy have foi oui epistemic positions with iespect to time itself, oi foi finuing the physical piocesses unueipinning tempoial expeiience. Nany of these questions come uown to what may be the piimaiy oveiaiching questions on which the specious piesent uoctiine beais: the tempoial extent of the %+$2($2 of consciousness, the tempoial extent of 1%2) of consciousness, anu how these two tempoial extents compaie with one anothei. }ames' intiouuction of the specious piesent uoctiine spawneu a wiue iange of philosophical anu scientific uiscussions, some of which enuoise the nonpunctate natuie of tempoial expeiience, some of which pioblematize it, anu some of which take it foi gianteu anu apply it (see, #$2(" 1'#1, Bioau 192S; Le Poiveuin 1999; S Bainton 2uu1; uiush 2uuS; Kelly 2uuS; 0aklanuei 2uu2). Theie is an alieauy-stiong anu giowing tienu to attempt to giounu Busseilian phenomenology of time consciousness in vaiious aspects of cognitive science (see, #$2(" 1'#1, uallaghei 1997; vaiela 1999; Lutz anu Thompson 2uuS; uiush 2uu6). Even Busseil's phenomenological analysis was stimulateu by his ieauing of }ames on this point. It is haiu to oveiestimate the ielevance of the specious piesent uoctiine in philosophy of time anu tempoial consciousness. This uoctiine has ioots stietching fai back into Biitish empiiicism. The histoiical uevelopment of the specious piesent uoctiine is iich giounu to mine in oiuei to answei, oi iefiame, questions about the natuie of oui tempoial expeiience anu the constiaints it places on the kinu of physical piocesses that coulu giounu it. The pioblems with which philosopheis stiuggleu, anu that gave iise to uiffeient views on what the expeiienceu piesent moment might be, aie ieflecteu in the contempoiaiy uebate. Theie aie multiple uistinct ways in which one coulu cash out what piecisely a 'thick piesent' looks like in this histoiy, with uiffeient implications foi both oui expeiience of the piesent specifically, anu foi conscious expeiience moie bioauly. This means that the histoiy of thinking on tempoial expeiience is not only (as it tuins out) inteiesting in its own iight, it can also eniich contempoiaiy investigations on these points.
A? B(25 ,"#*#3 5#C7581+C ,#*)(57' #=)#51#+0# Theie aie seveial iecuiiing themes as we tiace uistinct lines of influence on }ames' uevelopment of the specious piesent uoctiine (which aie also, not coinciuentally, impoitant influences on the uevelopment of Busseil's phenomenology of innei time consciousness). In what follows, I will tiace out these lines of influence, highlighting the evolution of foui themes thiough a numbei of uiffeient thinkeis. These themes aie closely inteiconnecteu, but each highlights a uistinct facet oi element of a philosophical position such that the position beais on the question of the tempoial extent of the expeiienceu piesent. 4 The fiist theme is a uistinction between a stiict oi philosophical veisus a 'vulgai' oi populai conception of the piesent. In the stiict oi philosophical sense, the piesent moment is punctate, even thought it may not appeai to be so. If one weie to auvocate a stiict notion of the piesent in expeiience, one woulu neeu to then explain why oui expeiience of it is illusoiy, since it phenomenologically seems to encompass at least some shoit uuiation (see theme S below foi an example of such an explanation). The 'vulgai' conception of the piesent, so nameu because it is utilizeu by those not immeiseu in philosophical thinking, applies the teim 'piesent' to an extenueu peiiou of time. Sometimes this is a veiy extenueu peiiou of time, such as the piesent yeai oi piesent eia, anu sometimes it iefeis to a shoitei peiiou that is specifically unueistoou to be peiceptual in chaiactei. The seconu theme conceins the uivision of laboi between peiception anu memoiy. Foi philosopheis such as Reiu, the piesent moment, in expeiience anu out of it, must be punctate, anu anything else that might mistakenly be asciibeu to the piesent moment in expeiience must actually be the woik of memoiy. This is because Reiu, anu otheis like Stewait who follow him in this iegaiu, aie committeu to views about consciousness that aie incompatible with expeiience genuinely encompassing a nonzeio uuiation. Wheie piecisely a given philosophei uiaws the line between peiception anu memoiy is a function of the theoiy of consciousness being auvocateu; allowing foi a nonzeio uuiation to the piesent moment in expeiience places iestiictions on the kinus of theoiies of consciousness one can enuoise. Claiming that we only peiceive the stiict piesent foiceu Stewait, foi instance, to iely on attention as a supplement to peiception. As such, we can leain a gieat ueal about theoiies of consciousness fiom claims about wheie peiception enus anu memoiy begins. The thiiu theme is the question of whethei tempoial expeiience shoulu be tieateu as some kinu of faculty foi sensing a peculiai soit of object. Consciousness incluues, foi many authois to be uiscusseu heie, a faculty foi peiceiving objects in the woilu, wheie those faculties uelivei theii objects impeifectly. In vision, foi instance, we have limiteu spatial iesolution with the nakeu eye, anu must iely on enhancing uevices such as micioscopes to make spatial uisciiminations beyonu a S ceitain iange. Analogously, the piesent moment in expeiience is unueistoou by some to 'ieally' be punctate, anu only appeai somewhat extenueu because oui time sense has a limiteu iesolution capacity. If we hau a time sense aiu, like a tempoial micioscope, we coulu uisciiminate inuefinitely smallei units of time. The fouith anu final theme is closely connecteu to each of the pievious thiee. Those pie-}ames authois who most cleaily espouse something akin to the specious piesent uoctiine uo so as a consequence of enuoising a paiticulai iuea about consciousness: namely, that to be conscious at all iequiies some kinu of change oi contiast. 0ne coulu take such contiast to be sufficiently pioviueu by simultaneous awaieness of two uiffeient objects; in that case, theie aie no tempoial iequiiements on consciousness. Bowevei, the common view on this is that the contiast oi change shoulu be between states of consciousness: a change between one note anu anothei note in a song, foi instance. Anytime we aie awaie of a change, it is ,"+0 one peiception 2+ anothei. If such a successive contiast oi change is iequiieu to be conscious of anything at all, then theie is a tempoial iequiiement on consciousness - it must span at least two such moments in oiuei foi a change to be noticeable.
D? 97*#3 7+8 "13 5#8 "#551+C }ames ueuicates an entiie chaptei in !"#$%#&'() +, !)-%.+'+/- (189u) to "The Peiception of Time." In this chaptei, he piesents an aiiay of phenomena that aie pait of the chaiactei of tempoial expeiience to be investigateu by anu accounteu foi in psychology. Be offeis seveial aiguments to the effect that consciousness must span a peiiou of time, each of which continues at least one of the foui themes piesenteu eailiei. The fiist such aigument is that consciousness woulu shiink to a tiny point, anu leave too much "in total uaikness" (ibiu., 6u6), if it uiu not have some tempoial uepth. }ames uesciibes the stiict piesent, a point with no extension, as only an iueal, in the way that a peifectly iounu ciicle woulu be an iueal. We concluue it exists only because we think it must, not because we evei actually expeiience it. Insteau of being conscious of oi in a single instant of time, }ames says, we expeiience a wiuei expanse of time as piesent. 6 In shoit, the piactically cognizeu piesent is no knife-euge, but a sauule-back, with a ceitain bieauth of its own on which we sit peicheu, anu fiom which we look in two uiiections into time. The unit of composition of oui peiception of time is a uuiation, with a bow anu a stein, as it weiea ieaiwaiu- anu a foiwaiu-looking enu. (189u, 6u9)
The specious piesent is intiouuceu as a uesciiption of the actually expeiienceu (as opposeu to iuealizeu anu abstiact) piesent. }ames quotes a long passage fiom an authoi he enigmatically anu misleauingly iefeis to as E.R. Clay. The passage, in its entiiety, is: The ielation of expeiience to time has not been piofounuly stuuieu. Its objects aie given as being of the piesent, but the pait of time iefeiieu to by the uatum is a veiy uiffeient thing fiom the conteiminous of the past anu futuie which philosophy uenotes by the name Piesent. The piesent to which the uatum iefeis is ieally a pait of the past - a iecent past - uelusively given as being a time that inteivenes between the past anu the futuie. Let it be nameu the specious piesent, anu let the past, that is given as being the past, be known as the obvious past. All the notes of a bai of a song seem to the listenei to be containeu in the piesent. All the changes of place of a meteoi seem to the beholuei to be containeu in the piesent. At the instant of the teimination of such seiies, no pait of the time measuieu by them seems to be a past. Time, then, consiueieu ielatively to human appiehension, consists of foui paits, viz., the obvious past, the specious piesent, the ieal piesent, anu the futuie. 0mitting the specious piesent, it consists of thiee . nonentities - the past, which uoes not exist, the futuie, which uoes not exist, anu theii conteiminous, the piesent; the faculty fiom which it pioceeus lies to us in the fiction of the specious piesent. (}ames 189u, 6u9; taken fiom |anonymousj 1882, 167-8)
This passage is the uefinitive piesentation of the specious piesent uoctiine, along with the eailiei passage fiom }ames about the sauule of the piesent. A point to note heie, which will be followeu up in a latei section, is that }ames' piesentation of the expeiienceu piesent in this chaptei is not accompanieu by a uesciiption of what he takes expeiience in geneial to be like. In oiuei to finu how }ames conceives of expeiience, of which the expeiience of the piesent is one element (albeit a veiy impoitant one), one has to look eailiei in !"#$%#&'(). This is ielevant because the uesciiption }ames pioviues of the specious uoctiine in the chaptei "Peiception of Time" coulu potentially be unueistoou in a numbei of incompatible ways if one weie to only ieau that chaptei. 0ne might take }ames to be saying that expeiience itself comes in instantaneous elements, each incluuing 7 content that spans a longei peiiou of time than the act of consciousness itself. 0i, one coulu unueistanu him to say that both the content of expeiience, anu the vehicle of expeiience itself, come in longei units than meie instants. In oiuei to see how }ames auvocates the lattei iathei than the foimei view, one neeus to consiuei the othei things }ames says about expeiience in !"#$%#&'(), especially conceining the stieam of thought anu consciousness of self. 0ntil quite iecently, scholais wiiting about the specious piesent weie foiceu to simply iepeat }ames' citation foi the authoi of the passage quoteu in !"#$%#&'() (Neyeis 1971; Plumei 198S; Pockett 2uuS; Bainton 2uu6). Theie weie no iecoius of an authoi matching the name 'E.R. Clay'. This effectively piecluueu ieseaich into the oiigin of this iuea, oi into the othei things its oiiginal authoi might have saiu on the mattei. It tuins out that theie is no such peison as 'E.R. Clay', anu the book fiom which }ames took this passage was publisheu anonymously. E. Robeit Kelly was a cigai manufactuiei in Boston who appaiently ietiieu eaily anu hau a stiong amateui inteiest in philosophy. 3.( 4'2("$12#5(6 4 7289- #$ !)-%.+'+/- (1882) was his sole contiibution to the fielu, anu it beais the hallmaiks of someone who was enthusiastic about philosophy but not wiuely ieau in it. Robeit Kelly's son, Eumunu Kelly, was a piominent Socialist aiounu the tuin of the centuiy in the New Englanu aiea. Eumunu Kelly was fiienus with }ames, which is most likely the way }ames enueu up with a copy of the book (uilbeit 1972). Kelly's book was motivateu, as he claims in his intiouuctoiy chapteis, by a concein that Positivism hau somehow foiceu Common Sense philosophy to give up tenable positions only because these positions hau not yet been sufficiently well- aiticulateu. Bis aim was to pioviue a seiies of philosophical uefinitions of teims that woulu iestoie Common Sense to its iightful philosophical giounu. Kelly's unueistanuing of Common Sense philosophy, baseu on his own iefeiences, came piimaiily fiom Sii William Bamilton, of whom Kelly wiites in aweu tones. While many of the uefinitions pioviueu by Kelly aie awkwaiu, he uoes make seveial inteiesting points iegaiuing tempoial expeiience beyonu the passage quoteu by }ames. Foi instance, Kelly thinks that the specious piesent allows foi oui 8 expeiience of motion, anu as a iesult, that we must uiaw a uistinction between 'paiauoxic' anu 'anti-paiauoxic' expeiience. Paiauoxic expeiience occuis when the object of expeiience uoes not, oi coulu not, exist as expeiienceu. Any expeiience of tempoially extenueu things as tempoially extenueu - a tiill of notes in a song, the flight of a biiu, the tiail of a meteoi - is paiauoxic, because such objects uo not exist at any given moment of expeiience anu by uefinition, movement iequiies time uuiing which to occui. Yet we expeiience them both as occuiiing now, anu as taking time. Theiefoie, Kelly concluueu, the expeiience itself is paiauoxic. Inteiestingly, once such paiauoxic expeiience is completely past, it ieveits to being anti-paiauoxic expeiience, veiiuical expeiience of existent objects. We genuinely expeiienc(9 the movement of genuinely moving things, but only once both movement anu expeiience aie no longei piesent; we cannot expeiience such things veiiuically as they occui. }ames' mis-citation of Kelly's book, whethei intenueu to pieseive Kelly's anonymity oi simply uone by mistake, hau the unfoitunate consequence of obscuiing the ieal souices fiom which }ames uiew foi his chaptei "The Peiception of Time." In the same section of the same chaptei as the Kelly quote, }ames also citeu Shauwoith Bougson, although the Bougson passage is ielegateu to the footnotes. Bougson, as we'll see shoitly, maue almost exactly the same point as Kelly iegaiuing oui expeiience of the piesent, anu gave it a similai name - the 'empiiic piesent.' The passage }ames citeu in the bouy of the chaptei containeu an aiguably moie concise piesentation of the uoctiine, anu motivateu it with the contiast between the expeiienceu anu the mathematizeu piesent. It also hau a somewhat catchiei name. This placement uoes not, howevei, inuicate much of inteiest iegaiuing the uevelopment of the novel uoctiine of the specious piesent. Foi that, we must look to Bougson, anu to the bianu of empiiicism known as Scottish Common Sense, wheie psychologically-oiienteu philosopheis hau alieauy iecognizeu the significance of tempoial uuiation foi consciousness.
E? /0(,,13" F(**(+ /#+3# 9 The woik of Kant anu Bume on time anu expeiience has been wiuely examineu. It tuins out, howevei, that theie was a lively anu ongoing uiscussion conceining expeiience anu its tempoial chaiacteiistics in the Scottish Common Sense tiauition, fiom Thomas Reiu, thiough Bugalu Stewait anu Thomas Biown, anu up thiough Sii William Bamilton. }ames uiew libeially fiom these psychologist- philosopheis in wiiting !"#$%#&'(), as uiu both Kelly anu Bougson (see below), the two inuepenuent inventois of the uoctiine of the specious piesent. Locke (169u) aigues that knowleuge comes only fiom peiception oi ieflection. Be applieu this foimula in oiuei to explain, among othei things, how we aiiive at oui iueas of uuiation anu succession. We come to oui iuea of uuiation by ieflecting on oui iueas which themselves have some uuiation; likewise, we come to oui iuea of succession by ieflecting on the succession of iueas in oui minus. In the context of a chaptei on memoiy, Thomas Reiu takes aim at Locke's account. Be uoes not challenge the backgiounu view of knowleuge as ueiiveu solely fiom peiception anu ieflection, but iathei challenges the path Locke chaits fiom ieflection to knowleuge of uuiation anu succession. Reiu (1786) makes two points of inteiest to us heie. The fiist conceins the feasibility of using the succession of iueas as a means of coming to unueistanu uuiation. Reiu poses a uilemma foi Locke: eithei 1) the iueas that constitute the succession have uuiation themselves, oi 2) they uo not have uuiation. If they lack uuiation (2), then they can't constitute a succession - they woulu simply be simultaneous, lacking uistance between them. If, on the othei hanu, they hau uuiation (1) so as to constitute a succession, then a single iuea woulu still have uuiation, even though it is not a succession. Eithei way, we coulu not ieach the iuea of uuiation fiom the succession of iueas. ii
The seconu point Reiu iaises is that Locke's account piesupposes memoiy as a pieiequisite foi being capable of ieflecting on iueas anu theii succession in oui minus. We coulu not notice that oui iueas succeeueu one anothei in time unless we weie able to iemembei a pievious iuea anu compaie it to a cuiient, uistinct, iuea. This point is not a ciiticism of Locke pei se, othei than peihaps as a ciiticism foi neglecting to mention that memoiy is also iequiieu in oiuei to ieach oui iueas of succession anu uuiation. But Reiu's emphasis on this point touches on seveial of the 1u themes explicateu in section 2. In oiuei to ieach knowleuge of succession anu uuiation via the succession anu uuiation of iueas, consciousness itself must have ceitain chaiacteiistics that enable us to holu fast to multiple iueas sepaiateu in time fiom one anothei, anu to compaie these iueas to one anothei. Reiu's positing of memoiy as playing the iole of holuing onto an immeuiately piioi iuea in oiuei to compaie it to its successoi is a consequence of how Reiu uiviues up the ioles that peiception anu memoiy can fill, anothei theme fiom section 2. Reiu uiaws a uistinction between the vulgai oi ciuue, anu stiict oi philosophical, ways of speaking about the piesent. This is one of the veiy fiist occasions on which the issue of the tempoial span of expeiience is explicitly iaiseu, although Reiu's view is that the actual span of expeiience is zeio. . Philosopheis anu the vulgai uiffei in the meaning they put on upon what is calleu the &"()($2 time, anu aie theieby leu to make a uiffeient limit between sense anu memoiy.
Philosopheis give the name of the &"()($2 to that inuivisible point of time, which uiviues the futuie fiom the past: but the vulgai finu it moie convenient in the affaiis of life, to give the name of piesent to a poition of time, which extenus moie oi less, accoiuing to ciicumstances, into the past oi the futuie. (178S, S48)
Thus, on Reiu's account we cannot peiceive succession at all - we can &("%(#5( a single instantaneous slice of a succession anu "(0(0:(" the iest. This uistinction between the ciuue oi vulgai conception of the piesent anu the stiict oi philosophical conception of the piesent staits with Reiu but will change iathei uiamatically by the time it ieaches }ames. In Reiu's veision of it, the vulgai usage of the piesent is not confineu to anything that is necessaiily &("%(&281' in chaiactei - Reiu mentions the vulgai iefeiiing to the piesent week oi the piesent yeai. This uistinction will subsequently become peiceptual in chaiactei: the vulgai conception of the piesent will be the uuiation uuiing which objects of peiception appeai to be piesent. Reiu acknowleuges that it ceitainly seems to us as if we peiceive successions uiiectly. Be accounts foi this by analogy to vision anu the 0#$#080 5#)#:#'(. Theie is a smallest spatial size that we aie capable of peiceptually uisceining as a iesult of 11 limiteu sensoiy abilities, even though theie aie in fact smallei spatial aieas. Similaily, theie is a smallest tempoial uuiation we aie capable of uisceining, even though tempoial uuiations themselves come in inuefinitely smallei units. 0ui expeiience of the piesent moment is actually punctate, but we aie unable to iecognize this because we cannot uiscein sufficiently shoit tempoial inteivals. This iuea of the limiteu tempoial iesolution of peiception, the thiiu theme uiscusseu in section 2, is taken up again by Bugalu Stewait (1792). Stewait followeu Reiu in the Scottish Common Sense tiauition anu elaboiateu many of Reiu's positions, iesponuing to ciiticisms anu potential pioblems that hau aiisen with iespect to Reiu's woik. Stewait took the analogy with the 0#$#080 5#)#:#'( even fuithei than Reiu hau. Stewait uesciibeu how we aie capable of uisceining spatial objects only uown to a ceitain size. Bowevei, with the aiu of a micioscope, we can see that spatial uisciiminations can be maue much moie finely. If we hau, he suimiseu, something like a tempoial micioscope, we woulu be able to uiscein inuefinitely smallei tempoial inteivals (1792, 61). As such, the implication goes, theie is nothing special oi piivilegeu about the featuies of expeiience that suggest a given tempoial uuiation to the piesent moment - it is simply a function of how shoit-sighteu we aie, so to speak, with iespect to time. 0ne of Stewait's most impoitant contiibutions to the uiscussion iegaiuing the tempoial chaiacteiistics of expeiience is the way in which he ieconcileu ceitain aspects of expeiience with Reiu's stiict uivision between peiception anu memoiy. The pioblem is that both Reiu anu Stewait thought peiception was capable of uisceining only one object at a given instant. Anu yet, it seems that we aie capable of immeuiately peiceiving a gieat ueal moie than this. Stewait's example is that of peiceiving a geometiic figuie. Be thought we coulu only peiceive a single point of the figuie in any given instant. We seem, howevei, able to peiceive the entiie figuie at a glance. 0n Reiu's account, memoiy ought to be playing a key iole in this phenomenon, but it appeais that peiception is uoing the woik. Stewait auueu to Reiu's account in two ways in oiuei to auuiess this pioblem. Be intiouuceu attention as a key faculty neeueu to biiuge peiception anu memoiy, anu he got some mileage out of the limiteu tempoial iesolution of 12 consciousness. Peiception, he claims, can only take in a single object with each act. But, these acts of peiception aie quite shoit, much shoitei than the smallest tempoial uuiation we can uiscein. Fuitheimoie, we uo not iemembei eveiything we peiceive. We only iemembei the content of peiceptual acts to which we pay attention foi a sufficient amount of time. The amount of time iequiieu to attenu to 'a peiception' in oiuei to iemembei it is longei than the time it takes to peiceive the object, but shoitei than the shoitest tempoial uuiation we can notice. Thus, in what seems to us like a single instant, theie aie actually multiple uistinct acts of peiception, which aie attenueu to in multiple uistinct acts, such that we iemembei the peiceptual contents of the attention-acts appaiently simultaneously (1792, SS- S4). It is an awkwaiu theoiy, but it pieseives the majoi featuies of Reiu's account of peiception anu memoiy while accommouating appaiently conflicting featuies of expeiience. Thomas Biown (18S1) took issue with the way philosopheis like Stewait 'uoubleu' consciousness, by sepaiating acts of peiception, memoiy, oi attention fiom consciousness by making them +:;(%2) of consciousness, while, Biown aigueu, they shoulu be thought of as %+$)2#282#$/ consciousness. Be also maue two key steps along the ioau fiom Reiu to }ames: the notion of 'iapiu ietiospect', a piecuisoi to the specious piesent uoctiine, anu the iuea that consciousness iequiies a contiast between two uistinct sensations, theme 4 fiom section 2. Biown faileu to past some of the views uevelopeu by Reiu, as a iesult of which he came up just shoit of giving the fiist full veision of a specious piesent uoctiine. Be accepteu Reiu's uivision of laboi wheie peiception coulu only be instantaneous while memoiy supplieu the iemainuei. Biown iesponueu to the appaient conflict between this view anu expeiience in a subtlei anu aiguably moie satisfactoiy mannei than Stewait uiu. Be uistinguisheu between the kinu of memoiy that is cleaily memoiy - with objects that aie in the obvious past - anu the kinu of memoiy that uoes not seem like memoiy, whose objects aie only just past. Be calls this seconu kinu of memoiy iapiu ietiospect. When we think of feelings long past, it is impossible foi us not to be awaie that oui minu is then tiuly ietiospective . But when the ietiospect is of veiy 1S iecent feelings - of feelings, peihaps, that existeu as uistinct states of the minu, the veiy moment befoie oui ietiospect began, the shoit inteival is foigotten, anu we think that that piimaiy feeling, anu oui consiueiation of the feeling, aie stiictly simultaneous. . When it is any thing moie than the sensation, thought, oi emotion, of which we aie saiu to be conscious, it is a biief anu iapiu ietiospect. (18S1, SuS)
This skiits veiy close to the specious piesent uoctiine as piesenteu by }ames, but it maintains the view that peiception must be punctate. Biown aigueu that in oiuei foi a self to be conscious as a self, it must encompass at least two uistinct sensations. Be pioviues the example of an imaginaiy consciousness that was abiuptly cieateu fully foimeu, listening to a single tone on a flute. Such a cieatuie woulu have no consciousness that it was a self - it woulu only know the tone. If this is succeeueu by the fiagiance of a iose, howevei, one coulu compaie the pievious anu new sensations togethei, fiom which one woulu be conscious of oneself as spanning both of those sensations -conscious of the eailiei one, anu now conscious of the new one. This means that a conuition necessaiy foi the possibility of consciousness is content that spans moie than a single instant, although Biown uoes not go so fai as to say that consciousness itself spans moie than a single instant. Be places the implicitly tempoial constiaint on consciousness that it involve nonpunctate content even if peiception itself occuis in a punctate instant. The final philosophei to consiuei heie is Sii William Bamilton. Bamilton expanus on Biown's constiaint that must consciousness involve contiast between uistinct states, a view that hau become wiuely accepteu by then. Bamilton offeieu five "special conuitions on consciousness," conuitions that must be met in oiuei to be conscious, two of which aie ielevant to this uiscussion. Bamilton's thiiu conuition simply is the point we just saw Biown make: consciousness iequiies some kinu of change oi contiast. If we weie only to expeiience a single thing unchangingly, we woulu "be absolutely unconscious" (1861, 2uS). Fiom this thiiu conuition Bamilton uiew a coiollaiy, which he maue the fifth conuition - memoiy. When these two conuitions aie put togethei, Bamilton goes fuithei than Biown by making explicit how the conuitions foi consciousness have a tempoial uimension: 14 In the inteinal peiception of a seiies of mental opeiations, a ceitain time, a ceitain uuiation, is necessaiy foi the smallest section of continuous eneigy to which consciousness is competent. Some minimum of time must be aumitteu as the minimum of consciousness. (1861, 2S7)
Bamilton goes so fai as to say that Buiation is "a necessaiy conuition of thought" (18S6, S71). Beie we have the culmination of an ongoing uevelopment in Scottish Common Sense philosophy, which cleaily piefiguies the specious piesent uoctiine as }ames piesents it. }ames cieuiteu Reiu, Stewait, Biown, Bamilton, anu otheis with shaping psychology as a fielu in the pie-technical, pie-specializeu "youth of oui science," anu took !"#$%#&'() to be a step fiom theii woik towaiu an empiiical, fully scientific, 'English' psychology (189u, 192). Theie is a uisceinible movement, fiom Reiu thiough Stewait, Biown anu Bamilton, culminating in }ames, wheie the issue of the tempoiality of expeiience - incluuing the expeiience of tempoial objects as well as the tempoial piopeities expeiience must have in oiuei to function as it uoes - iaises pioblems within the psychologies offeieu by each philosophei, which the next then solves by complicating the pictuie with the auuition of new faculties. These issues peisist in }ames' wiitings even outsiue of his chaptei on the Peiception of Time. Consiuei Reiu's ciiticism of Locke foi failing to iecognize the iole that memoiy must play in ieflection in oiuei foi us to ieach ceitain iueas like succession. }ames answeis Comte's ciiticism of the use of intiospection as a methou in psychology by citing memoiy as a necessaiy supplement to occuiient consciousness. Comte claimeu (see }ames 189u, 188 foi iefeience) that intiospection must necessaiily lag at least slightly behinu eveiything in consciousness, because it is by uefinition impossible to both have an expeiience anu to ieflect on that expeiience in the same moment. }ames iesponus in pait, that the contents foi which we intiospect lingei just long enough that we can, with the use of memoiy, ieliably intiospect in just the way Comte uenieu (!"#$%#&'(), 189). }ames' answei is stiongly connecteu to the Scottish Common Sense views on the mattei because }ames is not in this case talking about memoiy in geneial. Be specifically means the kinu of 'memoiy' that Biown teimeu 'iapiu ietiospect', the 1S kinu of memoiy that Reiu claimeu was necessaiy in oiuei to uiscein that a succession of iueas is in fact a succession. It is just this aspect of memoiy that }ames will go on to say, just a few chapteis latei in !"#$%#&'(), is in fact the backwaius- looking pait of the sauule that is the specious piesent. Piesumably he uiu not iely on the specious piesent in iefuting Comte because he hau not yet intiouuceu it; it is inteiesting that he took iecouise to the same answei that the Common Sense tiauition woulu have given.
G? H(8C3(+ The philosophei who hau the most impact on establishing the chaiacteiistics of tempoial expeiience as an impoitant issue is, iionically, someone least associateu with the topic, anu whose name has been laigely eiaseu fiom intellectual histoiy. Shauwoith Bollway Bougson was a monumental figuie in the philosophical ciicles of late 19 th centuiy Biitain. Be wiote thiee majoi books (3#0( 1$9 7&1%(, 186S; !.#'+)+&.- +, <(,'(%2#+$, 2 vols., 1878; =(21&.-)#% +, >?&("#($%(, 4 vols., 1898) publisheu wiuely in venues such as =#$9, anu was a co-founuei anu then piesiuent of the Aiistotelian Society foi 14 yeais. Anu yet, scaicely twenty yeais aftei the publication of his foui-volume lifewoik, Bougson's name was all but absent fiom philosophical uiscussion, a situation that then tuineu into almost complete ignoiance of his existence anu influence uuiing his lifetime. uiven his extensive involvement in psychology anu philosophy in Biitain uuiing this peiiou, it is a histoiical puzzle as to why he ieceives so little attention in compaiison with his peeis. Bougson publisheu two books piioi to }ames' publication of the !"#$%#&'(). }ames ceitainly ieau one in paiticulai, !.#'+)+&.- +, <(,'(%2#+$ (1878), which he iefeienceu a numbei of times. While Kelly uiu state the specious piesent uoctiine, anu pioviue the name that stuck, Bougson hau actually alieauy uevelopeu anu nameu the uoctiine foui yeais eailiei- he calleu it the 'empiiic piesent'. Fuitheimoie, baseu on eviuence such as coiiesponuence between the two, it is cleai that Bougson hau a ueep anu ongoing impact on }ames' thought, as pait of a 16 fiienuship that incluueu but was not limiteu to philosophical uiscussion anu lasteu foi uecaues. In !.#'+)+&.- +, <(,'(%2#+$, Bougson takes up the line of thought we have just tiaceu thiough the Scottish Common Sense philosopheis. Bamilton establisheu that some minimum uuiation is necessaiy foi consciousness, as a consequence of consciousness uepenuing on a contiast between two uiffeient states oi objects (classeu togethei as 'feelings'). The minimum of consciousness contains two uiffeient feelings. 0ne alone woulu not be felt. . But of this 1&&1"($2 simultaneity theie aie two cases: the fiist is that of a ieal simultaneity, the two sub-feelings aie ieally paits in coexistence, not in succession; the seconu is that in which one of them is felt as giowing faintei (calleu going when iefeiieu to its place in succession), the othei as giowing stiongei (calleu coming when iefeiieu to the succession). The simultaneous peiception of both sub-feelings, whethei as paits of a coexistence oi of a sequence, is the total feeling, the minimum of consciousness, anu this minimum has uuiation. (1878, 249-Su)
This passage illustiates how Bougson staiteu fiom, but then went on to claiify anu expanu, Bamilton's tempoial iequiiement that consciousness incluue at least two feelings anu thus span some uuiation,. Two feelings that weie felt simultaneously aie sufficient foi consciousness, but not the +$'- way we can be conscious. We can compaie two feelings without those feelings fully co-existing: one is 'coming' anu the othei is 'going', anu as such, they oveilap without being simultaneous. This means that Bougson allows foi tempoially extenueu feelings that, within the tempoially extenueu iange of consciousness, wax anu wane in the way }ames uesciibes in his chaptei on Peiception of Time. Bougson even piesents a paiagiaph that is almost iuentical with the one Kelly pioviueu, with just a slight uiffeience in teiminology foi the name of the uoctiine. Compaie to the passage in section S that }ames quoteu fiom Kelly. Ciuuely anu populaily we uiviue the couise of time into Past, Piesent, anu Futuie; but, stiictly speaking, theie is no Piesent; it is composeu of Past anu Futuie uiviueu by an inuivisible point oi instant. That instant, oi time-point, is the stiict &"()($2. What we loosely call the Piesent is an empiiical poition of the couise of time, containing at least the minimum of consciousness, in which the instant of change is the piesent time-point. (1878, 2SS)
17 Bougson continues with the uistinction, intiouuceu by Reiu, between a ciuue oi vulgai conception of the piesent anu the stiict conception of the piesent. But now Bougson auus the iuea that on the stiict conception, the piesent is not en entity, anu that what we call the piesent is simply that minimum uuiation iequiieu to encompass at least two uistinct feelings in oiuei to be conscious. This is ieally the fiist statement of the specious piesent uoctiine as such. It is well-known that }ames' !"#$%#&'() seiveu as an impoitant souice of iueas anu inspiiation foi Busseil as he wiote the lectuies that became !.($+0($+'+/- +, @$$(" 3#0( A+$)%#+8)$()). As such, Bougson hau an inuiiect influence on Busseil's pioject of unueistanuing the stiuctuie of tempoial expeiience, as uiu Reiu, Bamilton, anu otheis. Bowevei, it tuins out that Bougson also hau a uiiect influence on Busseil (1966), via the massive tome he publisheu aftei }ames hau publisheu the !"#$%#&'(). In =(21&.-)#% +, >?&("#($%(, volume I, Bougson lays a giounuwoik foi his pioject with a numbei of iemaikable featuies. The fiist is the mannei in which Bougson takes his empiiicist examination of expeiience so fai that he enus up with something that is, moie oi less, Busseilian phenomenology. uiven the bieak between empiiicist, analutically-oiienteu anu phenomenological-oiienteu philosophy that is geneially taken to occui somewheie in the eaily twentieth centuiy, Bougson occupies a unique histoiical position in occupying both of these tiauitions just piioi to such a split. It is likely that the way in which Bougson's woik was so quickly uioppeu fiom Biitish philosophical uiscussion conceineu the iauically analytic tuin it took soon aftei his publication of =(21&.-)#%, a tuin in which his style of philosophizing simply hau no place. This makes Bougson a culminating figuie of 18 th anu 19 th centuiy empiiicism. The seconu iemaikable featuie of Bougson's volume I, obviously connecteu to the fiist, is how stiikingly Bougson's fiist foui chapteis oi so paiallel the points maue by Busseil in !.($+0($+'+/- +, @$$(" 3#0( A+$)%#+8)$()), even to the extent of using the same examples as illustiation. Reauing Bougson's fiist volume, anu then ieauing Busseil, the connections between the two aie so stiong as to make it highly unlikely that they aie meiely coinciuental. Anu in fact, it tuins out that Busseil hau ieau Bougson's =(21&.-)#% +, >?&("#($%( iight aiounu the time that he was 18 compiling the notes that weie subsequently euiteu into the posthumous !.($+0($+'+/- (Anueisen anu uiush 2uu9). It is not an acciuent that Busseil's !.($+0($+'+/- has such stiiking similaiities to Bougson's =(21&.-)#%. The upshot of this is that Bougson ueseives a gieat ueal moie cieuit foi his views on time anu expeiience, as well as his influence on }ames' views on these matteis anu on Busseil's. Fuitheimoie, theie is a wealth of histoiically anu philosophically iich mateiial in Bougson's wiitings that sheu light on empiiicist thought at the time anu on contempoiaiy uiscussions of tempoial expeiience.
I? J7,#5 97*#3 We've now seen that many of the iueas aiticulateu by }ames in !"#$%#&'() iegaiuing tempoial expeiience hau been actively uiscusseu foi moie than a centuiy befoie he wiote, anu that Bougson playeu a key iole in }ames' uevelopment of the specious piesent uoctiine. In this section I will piesent a schematic aigument to the effect that theie is an impoitant shift in }ames' thinking about tempoial expeiience fiom the time he wiote !"#$%#&'() to his latei wiitings on piagmatism. Fuithei, in oiuei to unueistanu }ames' view on tempoial expeiience specifically, we must unueistanu the pictuie of expeiience in geneial that is the founuation of his piagmatism. }ames moves fiom simply %+$2"1)2#$/ the expeiienceu veisus 'ieal' piesent, noting that they uiffei, to &"#5#'(/#$/ the expeiienceu piesent ovei the puipoiteuly ieal one. This shift was pait of his laigei ciitique of intellectualism, anu at least in pait a iesponse to what }ames saw as misuse of the specious piesent uoctiine. Be takes an unusually bioau anu iich view of expeiience, which is why he can iest the notion of tiuth squaiely on it. Without keeping in minu this eniicheu notion of expeiience as uesciibeu in his piagmatic wiitings, oui unueistanuing of }ames' views on the expeiience of time will be impoveiisheu. The shift in }ames' thinking anu the notion of expeiience on which he ielies funuamentally altei the way we shoulu think about his views on what the specious piesent is anu what it inuicates about expeiience anu time. 19 As we've alieauy seen, }ames oiiginally piesenteu the specious piesent uoctiine in contiast with the 'obvious piesent'. The specious piesent is tempoially extenueu, encompassing some pait of the immeuiate past anu having both a foiwaiu-looking anu a ieaiwaiu-looking element. The obvious piesent is punctate; it is the point on a timeline wheie the past anu futuie meet. }ames piesents the specious piesent as a featuie of oui (?&("#($%( of time, anu the obvious piesent as a featuie of a (mathematical) iepiesentation of time. Impoitantly, he uoes not take a stance on what the ieal natuie of time is, oi on which of the two conflicting iepiesentations of time shoulu take pieceuence (which woulu, inueeu, be iathei ouu in a book establishing the piinciples of psychology). In labeling the expeiiential phenomenon 'specious', meaning appaient oi illusoiy, theie is a slight implication that the expeiience is mistaken oi nonveiiuical. }ames is piimaiily conceineu with uesciibing this featuie of expeiience anu uiscussing the measuiements of its iange, iathei than aujuuicating oui time sense as a ieliable inuicatoi of time itself. When we look foiwaiu about twenty yeais, though, a uiffeient pictuie emeiges. Between 19u2 anu 191u, }ames uevelopeu his piagmatism as a full-fleugeu iauicalization of empiiicism. Even moie than Peiice, fiom whom he took the teim, }ames ielieu on expeiience as the ultimate aibitei of tiuth. Bis veision of piagmatism is suipiisingly misunueistoou, a situation paitially explaineu by }ames' use of evocative anu metaphoiical language to piesent it (his talk of the usefulness of beliefs anu oui neeu to inquiie as to theii 'cash value' evokeu unfoitunate steieotypes of ciass Ameiicans to his Biitish auuience). }ames was stiuck by Beigson's wiitings on time anu memoiy, anu heaitily enuoiseu Beigson's iejection of the oveiintellectualization taking place within philosophy iii . Concepts, thought }ames, anu the logic that goveins them, weie being given too much weight when appaient conceptual contiauictions aiose. A vaiiety of philosopheis in the Begelian tiauition, foi instance, thought that theie weie contiauictions within the content of immeuiate expeiience. }ames thought this a iiuiculous impossibility. Any contiauiction that might aiise in immeuiate expeiience woulu only be uue to the concepts chosen to impeifectly uesciibe oi iepiesent that expeiience. Piioi to uesciiption, expeiience can be iich anu complex, but not self- 2u contiauictoiy. 0se of concepts to uesciibe expeiience constituteu taking something uynamic anu changing anu cutting out a static piece. In any potential contiauiction, then, the blame shoulu sit on the static concepts iathei than expeiience itself. This can be illustiateu by looking at the use to which NcTaggait, as an example, put the specious piesent. NcTaggait (19u8) famously aigueu foi the unieality of time. As pait of that aigument, he auuiesseu the ciiticism that oui expeiience ceitainly is of a genuinely moving piesent moment. We expeiience time, anu we expeiience the piesent as moving: how then, the ciiticism goes, can it be unieal.. NcTaggait iathei cleveily avoius answeiing the chaige that his view contiauicts expeiience by iefeience to the specious piesent. Because the extent of the specious piesent may be slightly uiffeient foi uiffeient people, theie may be some event that is still 'piesent' to one while 'past' to anothei. Thus, claims NcTaggait, expeiience contiauicts itself alieauy. Be ceitainly neeu not ieconcile his view to oui expeiience of the piesent; theie is nothing wiong with contiauicting the self-contiauictoiy. As to the unieality of time itself, a laige pait of NcTaggait's aigument comes uown to the fact that past anu futuie aie exclusive - they cannot be pieuicateu of the same thing. Anu yet the ieality of time implies that we must call an event futuie anu past, he claims. Theiefoie, NcTaggait concluues, time itself is contiauictoiy anu cannot exist. It is this kinu of use of concepts anu the logic goveining concepts against which }ames ieacteu so stiongly. If oui concept-logic allows us to concluue that, because of contiauiction, time itself uoes not exist, this shoulu be taken as inuicating a shoitcoming in the concepts anu logic useu to ieach that conclusion. }ames' ciusaue against intellectualism constituteu his taking a stanu on a geneiic veision of the contiast we just saw that he iemaineu agnostic on in !"#$%#&'(), namely, on how to think about a phenomenon when theie is a conflict between the way oui concepts iepiesent it anu the way we expeiience it. Pie- piagmatism, }ames can be unueistoou as agnostic with iespect to this conflict. Post- piagmatism, }ames comes uown emphatically on the siue of expeiience ovei concepts. }ames makes points that apply to a wiue iange of expeiiences that aie potentially contiauictoiy when uesciibeu in ceitain ways, as well as to the 21 expeiience of the piesent. "Time itself comes to us in uiops" of expeiience, iathei than inuefinitely subuiviuable inciements (19u9, 7S4). Repiesentations of tempoial expeiience that involve the assumption that time itself, especially the piesent moment, 'ieally' aie punctate make time aitificial anu static, anu with it, expeiience. In an especially }amesian tuin of phiase, he says, "But all these abstiact concepts aie but as floweis gatheieu, they aie only moments uippeu out fiom the stieam of time, snap-shots taken, as by a kinetoscopic cameia, at a life that in its oiiginal coming is continuous" (19u9, 7SS-6). Bis lectuies on piagmatism contain an extiemely elaboiate anu inclusive view of what expeiience itself is. }ames' piagmatism, iecall, iecast the notion of tiuth as simply being that which best oiganizes oui expeiiences; beliefs aie useful if they aie tiue, anu they aie tiue if they aie useful (19u7, S7S). This might look tiivially false, if one weie to evaluate such statements using something like a iepiesentational view of expeiience, wheie expeiience simply iepiesents how things aie in the woilu. In that soit of view, expeiience gives us access to the woilu that is the way it is, iegaiuless of oui expeiience. }ames thought this was insufficiently empiiicist (ibiu., Su8). To genuinely iely on expeiience foi knowleuge, we neeu to accept that theie ieally is nothing but expeiiences on which to iely. Iueas oi beliefs about the woilu shoulu pioviue schemes by which we can ieliably act in the woilu anu achieve uesiieu consequences, anu allow us to ieliably pieuict what will happen. Nost impoitantly, beliefs aie tiue when they allow us to make the most sense out of oui expeiiences. .'tiuth' in oui iueas anu beliefs means the same thing that it means in science. It means, |the the piagmatistsj say, nothing but this, 2.12 #9(1) BC.#%. 2.(0)('5() 1"( :82 &1"2) +, +8" (?&("#($%(D :(%+0( 2"8( ;8)2 #$ )+ ,1" 1) 2.(- .('& 8) 2+ /(2 #$2+ )12#),1%2+"- "('12#+$ C#2. +2.(" &1"2) +, +8" (?&("#($%(, to summaiize them anu get about among them by conceptual shoit-cuts insteau of following the inteiminable succession of paiticulai phenomena. (19u7, S12; italics in oiiginal)
}ames make the notion of expeiience so bioau that it is encompasses as a subset any othei categoiy, such as iepiesentations, iueas, conceptions, etc. that one might use as a means of uefining tiuth. This unueistanuing of expeiience was sufficiently 22 novel that }ames' piagmatism hau a iathei bau initial ieception, at least in Biitain, anu continues to be fiequently misunueistoou. If one weie to stait with what he says about tiuth anu its ielationship to expeiience, anu combine it with an oiuinaiy unueistanuing of expeiience, then the iesulting notion of tiuth may seem weak oi untenable. If, on the othei hanu, we stait by assuming that theie is something inteiesting to the notion of tiuth }ames offeis in his piagmatist wiitings, anu then woik towaius the notion of expeiience neeueu to seive that iole foi tiuth, it becomes cleai that }ames intenus 'expeiience' to be much iichei anu moie funuamental than it is oiuinaiily taken to be. In oiuei to fully unueistanu }ames' views on the specious piesent, then, we neeu to consiuei the chaptei "The Peiception of Time," anu we also neeu to take a bioauei view of }ames' latei wiitings that beai on tempoial expeiience specifically. But in oiuei to unueistanu }ames' views on the expeiience of time, we neeu to get cleai on }ames' extiemely unique anu iich views on expeiience moie bioauly, anu the ielationship between expeiience anu the concepts we use to ienuei that expeiience coheient, to ielate uiffeient expeiiences togethei, anu to pieuict anu contiol expeiiences in the futuie.
K? F(+0'231(+ Contempoiaiy uiscussions of tempoial expeiience iely on the chaiacteiization of the specious piesent uoctiine as }ames piesenteu it in chaptei 1S of 3.( !"#$%#&'() +, !)-%.+'+/-. Because of }ames' peculiai citation of Kelly in that chaptei, the histoiical uevelopment of this uoctiine has been obscuieu. As I have shown heie, theie was a substantive anu ongoing uiscussion of the tempoial chaiactei of expeiience fiom which }ames uiew foi his own woik. The philosopheis contiibuting to this uiscussion, incluuing but ceitainly not limiteu to Reiu, Stewait, Biown, Bamilton, anu Kelly, hau a gieat ueal moie to say on the subject than maue it into }ames' biief piesentation. The foui themes piesenteu eailiei illustiate how this histoiy of the specious piesent uiaws connections between peiception, memoiy, 2S attention, consciousness, iepiesentations of time, anu the natuie of expeiience in geneial. }ames himself also hau a gieat ueal moie to say about expeiience anu its tempoial chaiacteiistics than is founu in !"#$%#&'(). Bis piagmatism incluueu at least two key issues that neeu to be accommouateu in any auequate piesentation of his views on the expeiience of time. The fiist is his ciitique of intellectualism, anu of the way in which oui conceptualization of expeiience can leau us astiay. The seconu is the incieuible iich view of expeiience that }ames takes. Bis piagmatism, uepenuing so iauically on expeiience anu tiuth as what best oiganizes that expeiience, will sounu tiite if accompanieu by an insufficient unueistanuing of what }ames takes 'expeiience' to incluue. Likewise, oui unueistanuing of the specious piesent uoctiine shoulu be infoimeu by }ames' views on expeiience in geneial, incluuing the wiitings subsequent to !"#$%#&'(). In conclusion, then, theie is a fascinating set of mysteiies associateu with the histoiy of the specious piesent uoctiine. A few, such as the iuentity of 'Clay', have been uncoveieu. Some, like Bougson's abiupt uisappeaiance fiom philosophical uiscussion, iemain. Anu this histoiy pioviues a wealth of iueas to mine foi iefinement of contempoiaiy accounts of tempoial expeiience.
L#-#5#+0#3 Anueisen, Bolly anu uiush, Rick (2uu9). A Biief Bistoiy of Time Consciousness: Bistoiical Piecuisois to }ames anu Busseil. E+8"$1' +, 2.( F#)2+"- +, !.#'+)+&.- 4S(S):41S-442. Anonymous |E. Robeit Kelly, 'E.R. Clay'j, (1882). 3.( 4'2("$12#5(6 4 7289- #$ !)-%.+'+/-G Lonuon: Nacmillan anu Co. Bioau, C.B (192S). 7%#($2#,#% 3.+8/.2. Lonuon: Routleuge anu Kegan Paul. Biown, Thomas (18S1). H(%28"() +$ 2.( !.#'+)+&.- +, 2.( =#$9, in volume 1, !.#'+)+&.- +, 2.( F801$ =#$9 (4 vols.). Euinbuigh: Auam & Chailes Black. Bainton, Baiiy (2uu1). 3#0( 1$9 7&1%(. Chesham: Acumen. Bainton, Baiiy (2uu6). 72"(10 +, %+$)%#+8)$())6 8$#2- 1$9 %+$2#$8#2- #$ %+$)%#+8) (?&("#($%(. Tayloi anu Fiancis. uallaghei, Shaun (1997). Nutual Enlightenment: Recent phenomenology in cognitive science. E+8"$1' +, A+$)%#+8)$()) 7289#().4(S): 19S-214. 24 uilbeit, }ames (1972). I()#/$#$/ 2.( @$98)2"#1' 7212(. 0niveisity of Califoinia: Quauiangle Books. uiush, Rick (2uuS). Biain Time anu Phenomenal Time, in A+/$#2#+$ 1$9 2.( J"1#$6 2.( &.#'+)+&.- 1$9 $(8"+)%#($%( 0+5(0($2, eus. Anuiew Biook anu Kathleen Akins. Cambiiuge: Cambiiuge 0niveisity Piess. uiush, Rick (2uu6). Bow to, anu how not to, biiuge computational cognitive neuioscience anu Busseilian phenomenology of time consciousness. 7-$2.()( 1SS(S): 417-4Su. Bamilton, Sii William (18S6). I#)%8))#+$) +$ !.#'+)+&.- 1$9 H#2("128"(G New Yoik: Baipei. Bamilton, Sii William (1861) |1969 iepiintj. H(%28"() +$ =(21&.-)#%) 1$9 H+/#% (2 vols.). Euinbuigh anu Lonuon: Blackwoou anu Sons. Bougson, Shauwoith Bollway (186S). 3#0( 1$9 7&1%(G Lonuon: Longman, uieen, Longman, Robeits, anu uieen. Bougson, Shauwoith Bollway (1878). !.#'+)+&.- +, <(,'(%2#+$ (2 vols.) Lonuon: Longman, uieen, Longman, Robeits, anu uieen. Bougson, Shauwoith Bollway(1898) |198u iepiintj. =(21&.-)#% +, >?&("#($%( (4 vols.) Lonuon: Longman, uieen, Longman, Robeits, anu uieen |iepiint uailanu Publishing, New Yoikj. Busseil, Eumunu (1966). K8" !.L$+0($+'+/#( 9() #$$("($ K(#2:(C8))2)(#$) |189S- 1917j. Beiausgegeben von Ruuolf Boehm, Busseiliana X, The Bague. }ames, William (189u). !"#$%#&'() +, !)-%.+'+/- (2 vols.). New Yoik: Beniy Bolt. }ames, William (19u9). 4 !'8"1'#)2#% M$#5(")(, fiom (1988) N#''#10 E10()6 N"#2#$/) OPQRSOPOQ. New Yoik: Libiaiy of Ameiica. }ames, William (19u4) !"1/012#)0, fiom (1988) N#''#10 E10()6 N"#2#$/) OPQRSOPOQ. New Yoik: Libiaiy of Ameiica. Kelly, Sean B., 2uuS, 'The Puzzle of Tempoial Expeiience', in A+/$#2#+$ 1$9 2.( J"1#$6 2.( &.#'+)+&.- 1$9 $(8"+)%#($%( 0+5(0($2, eus. Anuiew Biook anu Kathleen Akins. Cambiiuge: Cambiiuge 0niveisity Piess. Le Poiveuin, Robin (1999). Egocentiic anu 0bjective Time. !"+%((9#$/) +, 2.( 4"#)2+2('#1$ 7+%#(2-, XCIX: 19-S6. Locke, }ohn (169u) |197S iepiintj 4$ >))1- A+$%("$#$/ F801$ M$9(")21$9#$/, eu. Petei B. Niuuitch. 0xfoiu: Claienuon Piess. Lutz, A. anu Thompson, E. (2uuS). Neuiophenomenology: Integiating Subjective Expeiience anu Biain Bynamics in the Neuioscience of Consciousness. E+8"$1' +, A+$)%#+8)$()) 7289#() 1u(91u): S1-S2. NcTaggait, }.E. (19u8). The 0nieality of Time. =#$9 18: 4S7-484. 2S Neyeis, ueialu (1971). William }ames on Time Peiception. !.#'+)+&.- +, 7%#($%( S8(S): SSS-S6u. 0aklanuei, L. Nathan (2uu2). Piesentism, 0ntology anu Tempoial Expeiience, in 3#0(T <(1'#2- 1$9 >?&("#($%(, eu. Ciaig Callenuei. Cambiiuge: Cambiiuge 0niveisity Piess. Plumei, uilbeit (198S). The Nyth of the Specious Piesent. =#$9 New Seiies 94(S7S): 19-SS. Pockett, Susan (2uuS). Bow long is now. Phenomenology anu the specious piesent. !.($+0($+'+/- 1$9 2.( A+/$#2#5( 7%#($%() 2(1): SS-68. Reiu, Thomas (1786; 8 th eu. with commentaiy, 189S) |1967 iepiintj. !.#'+)+&.#%1' N+"U)6 C#2. $+2() 1$9 )8&&'(0($21"- 9#))("212#+$) :- 7#" N#''#10 F10#'2+$ (2 vols.) Biluesheim: u. 0lms veilagsbuchhanulung. Reiu, Thomas (178S) |2uu2 iepiintj >))1-) +$ 2.( @$2(''(%281' !+C(") +, =1$, eu. Beiek Biookes. 0niveisity Paik: Pennsylvania State 0niveisity Piess. Sellais, Wilfiiu (1982). 7%#($%( 1$9 =(21&.-)#%)6 V1"#12#+$) +$ W1$2#1$ 3.(0(). Boston, NA: Biill Acauemic Publisheis. Stewait, Bugalu (1792) |1971 iepiintj. >'(0($2) +, 2.( !.#'+)+&.- +, 2.( F801$ =#$9, in vol. 2 of Stewait, Bugalu. 3.( A+''(%2(9 C+"U) +, I8/1'9 72(C1"2, (9#2(9 :- 7#" N#''#10 F10#'2+$ (9 vols.). Westmeau, 0K: uiegg Inteinational Publisheis. vaiela, Fiancisco (1999). The Specious Piesent: A Neuiophenomenology of Time Consciousness. In X128"1'#Y#$/ !.($+0($+'+/-6 @))8() #$ A+$2(0&+"1"- !.($+0($+'+/- 1$9 A+/$#2#5( 7%#($%( Eus. Petitot, vaiela, Pachouu anu Roy. Stanfoiu: Stanfoiu 0niveisity Piess.
i Nuch of the histoiical ieseaich piesenteu heie was uone in collaboiation with Rick uiush (see Anueisen anu uiush 2uu9). Special thanks to Rick uiush anu Enuie Begby foi uiscussion anu feeuback. ii }ames iefeiences Reiu's ciiticism of Locke's "uim" account in the same chaptei as wheie the specious piesent is intiouuceu (189u, 6u9). iii See especially "Beigson's Ciitique of Intellectualism" (}ames, 19u9).