What is the aim of contemporary philosophy of consciousness? - to show the fly the way back into the bottle

从1945年到20世纪70年代中期，英国精神哲学被后来的维特根斯坦和J·L·奥斯汀的遗产所主导。根据这些哲学家的说法，关于意识本质的看似实质性的哲学问题，可以通过研究我们语言的运作来解决，而不是通过形而上学或科学的方法来解决。但到了20世纪70年代末，这种主导地位被打破了。思辨形而上学再次出现，人们普遍认为，对意识的哲学研究--佩斯·维特根斯坦和奥斯汀--一直在不断地进行科学研究。50年后，哲学家们在所谓的“意识的难题”上几乎没有取得什么进展。这篇论文提出的问题是，拒绝接受所谓的“日常语言哲学”的方法是否导致了宝贵的教训和见解的丧失。我将调查并论证，拒绝这些方法背后的主要力量是制度和文化，而不是哲学。我打算表明，来自OLP的见解在许多当代意识哲学中没有得到承认，构成了一个重要且仍然相关的批评。我的研究将：1.考察OLP对心灵哲学的贡献。运用这一分析来批判当代关于意识的哲学讨论。探索导致OLP消亡的社会和文化因素。评估针对OLP.5的哲学论据。根据3和4，评估当代意识哲学家的假设，并重新评估OLP提出的挑战。

Between 1945 and the mid-1970s British philosophy of mind was dominated by the legacies of the later-Wittgenstein and J. L. Austin. According to these philosophers, seemingly substantive philosophical questions about the nature of consciousness would be solved by 'looking into the workings of our language' and not by metaphysical or scientific method.However, by the end of the 1970s that dominance was broken. Speculative metaphysics re-emerged and it became orthodoxy that the philosophical study of consciousness, pace Wittgenstein and Austin, was continuous with scientific study thereof.Fifty years later, philosophers have made little progress on the so-called 'hard problem of consciousness'. This thesis asks whether the rejection of the methods of so-called 'Ordinary Language Philosophy' has led to valuable lessons and insights being lost.I will investigate, and argue, that the main forces behind the rejection of these methods are institutional and cultural rather than philosophical. I intend to show that insights from OLP that are unacknowledged in much of contemporary philosophy of consciousness constitute an important, and still relevant, critique.My research will:1. Examine OLP's contribution to the philosophy of mind.2. Employ this analysis to critique contemporary philosophical discussions of consciousness.3. Explore the social and cultural factors which led to the demise of OLP.4. Assess the philosophical arguments levied against OLP.5. In light of 3 and 4, assess the assumptions of contemporary philosophers of consciousness and re-assess the challenges posed by OLP.