A comparison of Searle's and Dennett's theories of consciousness

The scientific developments regarding the brain and neuro science, we embrace new findings, about the brain. However, consciousness still seems mysterious. The mystery of conscioussnes is sought to be revealed by neuroscientists, biologists, zoologists, psychologists, computer scientists, anthropologists, and philosophers. The data gathered by the sciences on brain and consciousness should be transformed into a holistic theory of consciousness by philosophers. In this context, the increasing interest in philosophy of mind in recent years is promising. In this study, the theories of two important thinkers in the field of philosophy of mind, John Rogers Searle and Daniel C. Dennett, and their methods of understanding consciousness are compared and contrasted. While emphasizing the biological and natural aspects of the mind, Searle argues that consciousness can be known from a subjective first-person perspective. Dennett, on the other hand, has a materialistic view of the mind and tries to prove that consciousness can be explained from a third-person perspective. In this study, firstly, Searle's attitude towards biological naturalism, monism, the famous Chinese Room thought experiment, artificial intelligence and other minds were examined. After outlining Searle's philosophy of mind, the argument why we can understand consciousness from a first-person perspective is discussed. Then, Dennett's materialist theory of consciousness, the evolution of consciousness and the multiple drafts model are explained within the limits of this study. Subsequently, Dennett's own reasons presented how heterophenomenology, which is the basic method of Dennett's materialist philosophy of mind, can explain consciousness in an objective way, that is, from a third-person perspective. It is known that these two thinkers were in polemic with each other in their works. Discussions about the methods they use in understanding consciousness and accusing each other of being dualists are the subject of the last part of this thesis. In this discussion, Searle's arguments appear to be weaker. Although Searle tries to explain consciousness as a biological and natural entity, his claim that consciousness cannot be known objectively weakens his theory. Dennett, on the other hand, acts with more concrete data about consciousness and exhibits an attitude that tries to illuminate consciousness within the framework of science. While Dennett's heterophenomenological method explains consciousness objectively, it also explains why it seems subjective to us. Keywords: Philosophy of Mind, Consciousness, John Searle, Daniel Dennett, First Person Perspective, Third Person Perspective, Biological Naturalism, Materialism, Heterophenomenology.