Abstract

In this article I discuss Hutto & Myin’s so-called argument of “the hard problem of contentµ against the existence of mental representations and the computational/representational paradigm. I shall argue that, although the computational/representational paradigm may face other problems, the argument from the hard problem of content fails. The structure of the paper is the following. After introducing what is the hard problem of content, I proceed, first, by arguing that cognitive scientists are not involved in the problem of naturalizing intentionality (and content); then, second, providing a notion of representation according to which content is not an essential property of representations. Finally, I point out what are the differences between my position and Hutto & Myin’s “no-contentµ view.