The Philosophy of Mind-Wandering

Abstract

This chapter provides an introduction to the philosophy of mind-wandering. It begins with a philosophical critique of the standard psychological definitions of mind-wandering as task-unrelated thought or stimulus-independent thought. Although these definitions have helped bring mind-wandering research onto center stage in psychology and cognitive neuroscience, they have substantial limitations. They do not account for the dynamics of mind-wandering, task-unrelated thought that does not qualify as mindwandering, or the ways in which mind-wandering can be task-related. The chapter reviews philosophical accounts that improve upon the current psychological definitions, in particular an account of mind-wandering as "unguided thinking." It critically assesses the view that mind-wandering can be defined as thought lacking meta-awareness and cognitive agency, as well as the view that mind-wandering is disunified thinking. The definition of mind-wandering as unguided thinking not only is conceptually and phenomenologically precise, but also can be operationalized in a principled way for empirical research. mind-wandering, psychology, neuroscience, cognition, task-unrelated thought, stimulusindependent thought, mental action Not anymore. Indeed, some researchers have dubbed our time "the era of the wandering mind" (Callard, Smallwood, Golchert, & Margulies, 2013). Nevertheless, because the cognitive science of mind-wandering is so young, foundational questions remain unanswered. In particular, there is no consensus about how to define mind-wandering (Christoff, 2012; Irving, 2015), although recent philosophical work on mind-wandering has addressed this foundational issue

Mind‐wandering: A philosophical guide

“…Philosophers have leveled three objections against the standard definition. First, task‐unrelated and/or stimulus‐independent thought is an overly heterogeneous category (Christoff et al, ; Irving, ; Irving & Thompson, ). Consider the student whose thoughts turn inwards during lecture.…”

“…Since your thoughts are not unified under a common goal, the disunity theory classifies them as mind‐wandering. This raises another problem: whether thinking counts as disunified depends on an arbitrary choice about how far we zoom out (Irving & Thompson, ). Consider your thoughts in the preceding example.…”

“… Mind‐wandering is distinct from goal‐directed task‐unrelated thought, such as solving a calculus problem during lecture. Goal‐directed thought is guided, mind‐wandering is not (Irving, ; Irving & Thompson, ). Mind‐wandering is distinct from rumination, which is subject to affective guidance (Christoff et al, ; Irving, ; Irving & Thompson, ; Watzl, ). Rumination is guided via affective versions of proactive and regulatory control.…”

“…His affective state thus exerts regulatory control to keep him focused on emotionally salient information. Affective guidance explains rumination's characteristic dynamics: we rigidly focus on an affectively salient topic because we are guided to remain in place. Unguided attention can be related to tasks such as planning a camping trip (Irving, ; Irving & Thompson, ). Our minds often wander to tasks, at least for a moment.…”

“…Despite this flurry of progress, scientists have stressed that mind‐wandering research requires firmer philosophical foundations (Christoff, ; Christoff, Irving, Fox, Spreng, & Andrews‐Hanna, ; Seli, Kane, Smallwood, et al, ; Smallwood, ). The time is therefore ripe for the philosophy of mind‐wandering (Carruthers, ; Dorsch, ; Irving, , , ; Irving & Thompson, ; Metzinger, , , ; Regis, ; Sripada, , ; Sutton, ). Section 2 of our review begins with a foundational question: What is mind‐wandering?…”