<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Phenomenal Experience · Pablo Stafforini</title><link>https://stafforini.com/tags/phenomenal-experience/</link><description/><generator>Hugo -- gohugo.io</generator><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Sat, 01 Jun 2013 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://stafforini.com/tags/phenomenal-experience/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>objectivity</title><link>https://stafforini.com/quotes/sinhababu-objectivity/</link><pubDate>Sat, 01 Jun 2013 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://stafforini.com/quotes/sinhababu-objectivity/</guid><description>&lt;![CDATA[<blockquote><p>While one&rsquo;s phenomenology is often called one&rsquo;s “subjective experience”, this does not mean that facts about it lack objectivity. “Subjective” in “subjective experience” means “internal to the mind”, not “dependent on attitudes towards it.”</p></blockquote>
]]></description></item><item><title>cognitive mind</title><link>https://stafforini.com/quotes/chalmers-cognitive-mind/</link><pubDate>Sun, 08 Feb 2004 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://stafforini.com/quotes/chalmers-cognitive-mind/</guid><description>&lt;![CDATA[<blockquote><p>On the phenomenal concept, mind is characterized by the way it<em>feels</em>; on the psychological concept, mind is characterized by what it<em>does</em>. There should be no question of competition between these two notions of mind. Neither of them is<em>the</em> correct analysis of mind. They cover different phenomena, both of which are quite real.</p></blockquote>
]]></description></item></channel></rss>