Two Distinctions That Help to Chart the Interplay Between Conscious and Unconscious Volition.

Area of Science:

• Cognitive Neuroscience
• Philosophy of Mind
• Neuroscience

Background:

• Benjamin Libet's research questioned the role of short-term conscious intentions in initiating actions.
• Subsequent studies suggest longer-term intentions can be effective, implying a complex interaction in volition.
• The precise nature of this conscious-unconscious interplay remains largely unexplored.

Purpose of the Study:

• To clarify the complex interplay between conscious and unconscious processes in human volition.
• To introduce two neglected distinctions to better understand conscious intentional action.
• To support the idea that consciously self-initiated actions arise from deliberation and information integration.

Main Methods:

• Distinguishing between passively becoming conscious of intentions and actively forming intentions.
• Applying Fred Dretske's concept of structuring versus triggering causes to volition.
• Analyzing criticism of free selection paradigms in light of these distinctions.

Main Results:

• Consciously formed intentions act as structuring causes for self-initiated actions.
• Passive intentions differ from actively formed ones in their causal role.
• Unconscious processes significantly co-determine actions at multiple stages without negating self-initiation.

Conclusions:

• Consciously self-initiated actions typically stem from actively formed intentions, serving as structuring causes.
• Understanding the distinctions between passive and active intentions, and structuring and triggering causes, maps the territory of volition.
• This framework identifies at least four stages where unconscious processes influence action, preserving the concept of self-initiated action.