1 / 0

The Mind - Body Question by A. Besa (2010)

The Mind - Body Question by A. Besa (2010). How do we distinguish the mental from the physical?. Lack of spatial features Privileged access Subjectivity Intentionality Anomalousness. Lack of spatial features. Physical events happen somewhere.

ailsa
Download Presentation

The Mind - Body Question by A. Besa (2010)

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The Mind-Body Question by A. Besa (2010)
  2. How do we distinguish the mental from the physical? Lack of spatial features Privileged access Subjectivity Intentionality Anomalousness
  3. Lack of spatial features Physical events happen somewhere i.e. when you listen to music, sensory and neural processes occur in your eardrums and brain But where is your experience of music happening?
  4. Privileged access You know what you’re thinking and feeling You have first person authority Others can only infer what you’re experiencing. In contrast, someone else might know what you can only guess, i.e. your ankle is not just sprained but broken!
  5. Subjectivity Your exact sensations/feelings are yours alone at a given moment or on a particular occasion These token sensations are unique to you Phenomenological: the subjective or felt qualities that your sensations & feelings seem to you to have Qualia: “what it’s like-ness”
  6. Intentionality Mental states are directed at something. Thoughts, feelings, wishes, fears, etc are about something (the object)
  7. Anomalousness No scientific laws relating mental events to one another or to physical events. Donald Davidson: mental states are “lawless” and not predictable. The physical world is governed by laws.
  8. Are these features exclusive to or distinctive of mentality? Some items that are not mental events don’t really have a location (i.e. geometrical theorems or TV series) Some mental states are clearer to others than to ourselves (i.e. love or infatuation?) Maps, pictures have intentionality but are not about mental states It’s possible that mental events are not lawless. More research needed.
  9. The Theories Dualism Substance (Cartesian) dualism Property dualism Materialism/Physicalism Behaviorism Identity theory Functionalism Eliminative materialism
  10. The appearance of mind/body interaction Occasionalism The interaction of M & B is just coincidence God produces a mental sensation that corresponds to the stimulus Also vice versa!
  11. Epiphenomenalism The physical causes the mental i.e. lack of food  hunger i.e. Lack of sleep  inability to think straight The mental cannot cause the physical !
  12. Parallelism Mental states are systematically correlated with physical states The will of God (pre-programming)
  13. The problem of other minds--SOLIPSISM Nothing outside your own mind exists We know our own minds, but how can I know that anyone else has a mind?
  14. Descartes’ Criteria of Mindedness Capacity to act in a highly flexible and adaptable way Use of language
  15. The argument for other minds From Analogy Fact: you KNOW you have a mind. Other beings are similar to you. 3. Therefore you resemble each other in having a mind.
  16. Flaw An analogy does not necessarily lead to a logical conclusion An argument from analogy needs to have a broad base—not just one case The argument relies too much on superficial similarities. What if someone did not resemble you at all physically?
  17. A better argument:Mill’s Inference to the best explanation Inductive reference from many past cases of resemblance between causal chains whose links were observed, and other similar chains with a missing link Your own experience of cause-effect  another person’s similar experience. Note how he reacts to the same stimulus, i.e. he hugs himself after entering a very cold room. There is a gap in the chain which must indicate the same mental event/state.
  18. The EndSource: Philosophy for AS and A2, Ed. by Elizabeth Burns & Stephen Law (2004)
More Related