Although dualism has the advantage of being intuitively plausible, it is not compatible with a 21st-century (scientific) world view. Jaak Panksepp and Antonio Damasio are contemporary writers who reject dualism, and whose views take the form of “biological naturalism”. I first discuss how their views compare in five specific respects; and then I look more closely at how the different emphases of the views affect their ability to account for the evolutionary advantages of consciousness, specifically. Both authors agree that “consciousness” provides creatures with a survival advantage in terms of their ability to produce novel and/or flexible responses, their ability to plan ahead, and their motivation to promote their own survival – but the exact means by which they think these advantages are conferred, in each of these respects, differ. One might say that, whereas Damasio thinks the main evolutionary advantages of “consciousness” (the “higher reaches” of which are unique to humans) have to do with enabling creatures to work out what to do to promote their well-being, Panksepp thinks the main advantage of “consciousness” is that being “conscious” of affective feelings urgently motivates creatures to take action when their well-being is threatened. Considering that “working out what do” is only possible for a small selection of cognitively sophisticated organisms, I argue that Panksepp’s account is more plausible than Damasio’s account.

中文翻译：

---

达马西奥基于人体图的观点，潘克谢普以情感为中心的观点以及意识的进化优势

尽管二元论的优点是直观上合理，但它与21世纪（科学）世界观不兼容。Jaak Panksepp和Antonio Damasio是当代作家，他们反对二元论，并且其观点采取“生物自然主义”的形式。首先，我将讨论他们的观点在五个方面的比较。然后，我会更仔细地研究观点的不同重点如何影响它们解释意识进化优势的能力。两位作者都同意，“意识”在生物产生新颖和/或灵活反应的能力，超前计划的能力以及促进自身生存的动力方面为生存提供了优势，但他们认为的确切方法是这些优点在每个方面都有所不同。也许有人会说，尽管达马西奥认为“意识”（人类的“上流”是人类所独有的）的主要进化优势与使生物能够制定出促进其福祉的方法有关，潘克谢普认为“意识”的主要优势在于，对情感的“意识”会在动物的健康受到威胁时立即促使他们采取行动。考虑到“解决问题”仅适用于少量认知复杂的生物，我认为潘克谢普的说法比达马西奥的说法更可信。潘克谢普认为，“意识”的主要优势在于，对情感的“意识”会紧急激发生物在受到威胁时采取行动。考虑到“解决问题”仅适用于少量认知复杂的生物，我认为潘克谢普的说法比达马西奥的说法更可信。潘克谢普认为，“意识”的主要优势在于，对情感的“意识”会紧急激发生物在受到威胁时采取行动。考虑到“解决问题”仅适用于少量认知复杂的生物，我认为潘克谢普的说法比达马西奥的说法更可信。