{"id":{"repo_id":"mississippi","oai_identifier":"oai:egrove.olemiss.edu:etd-2108"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/mississippi/oai:egrove.olemiss.edu:etd-2108","repository":{"repo_id":"mississippi","name":"University of Mississippi","base_url":"https://egrove.olemiss.edu/do/oai/"},"display":{"title":"A Teleosemantic Theory Of The Deep-Unconscious: A Response To John R. Searle's Account Of The Unconscious","abstract":"In mind, John R. Searle dismisses the deep-unconscious on the grounds that it neither satisfies the connection principle nor does it exhibit intentionality. I argue against Searle's account of the unconscious. My initial reason for rejecting Searle's account is that he sacrifices the theoretical virof explanatory power for the sake of ontological simplicity. The reason the unconscious mind gained theoretical sustenance in the first place was to understand and explain various aspects of human behavior that consciousness cannot account for, so any good theory of the unconscious ought to fill this explanatory gap. By oversimplifying the unconscious, Searle's account cannot explain such aspects of human behavior, e.g., the causes of our sexual preferences, the tendency to mirror body language of others, or how our environments can shape our judgements. As an alternative, I defend a teleosemantic theory of the unconscious as a causal explanation for consciously unintended human behaviors.","abstract_html":"In mind, John R. Searle dismisses the deep-unconscious on the grounds that it neither satisfies the connection principle nor does it exhibit intentionality. I argue against Searle's account of the unconscious. My initial reason for rejecting Searle's account is that he sacrifices the theoretical virof explanatory power for the sake of ontological simplicity. The reason the unconscious mind gained theoretical sustenance in the first place was to understand and explain various aspects of human behavior that consciousness cannot account for, so any good theory of the unconscious ought to fill this explanatory gap. By oversimplifying the unconscious, Searle's account cannot explain such aspects of human behavior, e.g., the causes of our sexual preferences, the tendency to mirror body language of others, or how our environments can shape our judgements. As an alternative, I defend a teleosemantic theory of the unconscious as a causal explanation for consciously unintended human behaviors.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Adkins, Kelly"],"institution":null,"degree_name":"M.A. in Philosophy","degree_level":"Thesis","degree_discipline":"Philosophy and Religion","degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":["Donovan Wishon","Robert Barnard","Deborah Mower"],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2018,"date_issued":"2018-01-01T08:00:00Z","date_published":"2018-01-01T08:00:00Z","updated_at":"2026-07-24T03:06:21Z","subjects":["Philosophy"],"languages":[],"rights":[],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://egrove.olemiss.edu/etd/1109","outbound_label":"Repository record","outbound_source":"dc:identifier"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor","label":"Contributor","values":["Donovan Wishon","Robert Barnard","Deborah Mower"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Adkins, Kelly"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2019-06-20T07:00:00Z"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["Philosophy and Religion"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["Thesis"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["M.A. in Philosophy"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Philosophy"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["https://egrove.olemiss.edu/etd/1109"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["In mind, John R. Searle dismisses the deep-unconscious on the grounds that it neither satisfies the connection principle nor does it exhibit intentionality. I argue against Searle's account of the unconscious. My initial reason for rejecting Searle's account is that he sacrifices the theoretical virof explanatory power for the sake of ontological simplicity. The reason the unconscious mind gained theoretical sustenance in the first place was to understand and explain various aspects of human behavior that consciousness cannot account for, so any good theory of the unconscious ought to fill this explanatory gap. By oversimplifying the unconscious, Searle's account cannot explain such aspects of human behavior, e.g., the causes of our sexual preferences, the tendency to mirror body language of others, or how our environments can shape our judgements. As an alternative, I defend a teleosemantic theory of the unconscious as a causal explanation for consciously unintended human behaviors."]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["A Teleosemantic Theory Of The Deep-Unconscious: A Response To John R. Searle's Account Of The Unconscious"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor":["Donovan Wishon","Robert Barnard","Deborah Mower"],"dc:creator":["Adkins, Kelly"],"dc:date.available":["2019-06-20T07:00:00Z"],"dc:description.abstract":["In mind, John R. Searle dismisses the deep-unconscious on the grounds that it neither satisfies the connection principle nor does it exhibit intentionality. I argue against Searle's account of the unconscious. My initial reason for rejecting Searle's account is that he sacrifices the theoretical virof explanatory power for the sake of ontological simplicity. The reason the unconscious mind gained theoretical sustenance in the first place was to understand and explain various aspects of human behavior that consciousness cannot account for, so any good theory of the unconscious ought to fill this explanatory gap. By oversimplifying the unconscious, Searle's account cannot explain such aspects of human behavior, e.g., the causes of our sexual preferences, the tendency to mirror body language of others, or how our environments can shape our judgements. As an alternative, I defend a teleosemantic theory of the unconscious as a causal explanation for consciously unintended human behaviors."],"dc:identifier":["https://egrove.olemiss.edu/etd/1109"],"dc:subject":["Philosophy"],"dc:title":["A Teleosemantic Theory Of The Deep-Unconscious: A Response To John R. Searle's Account Of The Unconscious"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["Philosophy and Religion"],"thesis:degree_level":["Thesis"],"thesis:degree_name":["M.A. in Philosophy"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-24T03:06:21Z"}