When it comes to the types of consciousness, D. M. Armstrong maintains that there are three distinct forms of consciousness: minimal, perceptual, and introspective. In order to defend the idea that perceptual consciousness can work without introspective or higher-level consciousness, he suggests the so-called the puzzle of a long-distance truck driver. As it were, in the case of the driver who drove his truck for a long time and safely reached his destination, but at the same time could not remember anything about what he saw during the driving, exactly what type of consciousness is involved in his cognition and behavior performed during the driving process? Armstrong answers that the truck driver had perceptual consciousness but not introspective one. Whereas Kim Sterelny, according to Armstrong, presents the view that the driver had both perceptual and introspective consciousness but failed his memory trace. Between these two views, which one is more appropriate? In contemporary philosophy of mind, this is a difficult issue remaining unanswered. For the purpose of exploring an answer to the question, we attempt to make an interdisciplinary, convergent approach based on Consciousness-Only Buddhism and Information Processing Theory in psychology. Interestingly the approach is interpreted as supporting Stereln' s view. On the basis of this consideration, we conclude that Armstrong's distinction about the types of consciousness, although it is still efficacious, should be refined in a more subtle, sophisticated way.