The connectionist vehicle theory of phenomenal experience
in the target article identifies consciousness with the brain's
explicit representation of information in the form of stable patterns
of neural activity. Commentators raise concerns about both the
conceptual and empirical adequacy of this proposal. In the former
regard, they worry about our reliance on vehicles, representation,
stable patterns of activity, and identity. In the latter regard, their
concerns range from the general plausibility of a vehicle theory to
our specific attempts to deal with the dissociation studies. We
address these concerns, and then finish by considering whether the
vehicle theory we have defended has a coherent story to tell about
the active, unified subject to whom conscious experiences belong.
