Lecture 7: The Mind-Body Problem

1. Lecture 7: The Mind-Body Problem

2. Lecture Outline • In today’s lecture we will: • Briefly recap Descartes theory of reality • Examine an important consequence of Descartes’ theory of reality; • The Mind-Body Problem • Analyze Descartes’ attempt at resolving the mind-body problem • Make an attempt at understanding the significance of the mind-body problem • Begin our investigation into historical and contemporary attempts to resolve the mind-body problem

3. Recap

4. Descartes’ theory of reality Descartes’ Theory of Reality According to Descartes, our world is composed of two distinct substances Physical and Mental Substances Each substance exhibits the following properties:

5. The Mind-Body Problem

6. Descartes’ Two Substances: Mental and Physical The Mind-Body Problem Body Mind Brain, Neurones, Eyes, Arms etc. Sensations, Pains, Feelings etc. Desires, Hopes, Dreams... Actions, Behaviour... Descartes: The Mind Can Continue to Exist Apart From the Body

7. The Distinction between Mental and Physical Events Mental Physical Experience of Seeing something Red Brain Activity in Response to Stimuli Thought About the Cow in the Road Physical and Behavioural Responses Taste of Ice Cream Neurones and Chemicals in the Brain The Mind-Body Problem

8. An objective view of the brain A subjective view of the mind Taste of Ice Cream Conceptual Gap Seeing chairs Remembering an old friend Feeling Pain The Mind-Body Problem

9. The Mind-Body Problem We know that there is a relationship between the mind and body Body Mind Stepping on a Nail Pain in Foot Desire to Have Candy Bar Grabbing Candy Bar No more pain Taking a Tylenol

10. The Mind-Body Problem: If Mind and Brain (Body) are composed of two distinct substances, how do we explain their causal interaction? How does something non-physical and non-spatial causally interact with something completely different to itself? The Mind-Body Problem ?

11. The Mind-Body Problem • Some key questions in the philosophy of mind: • What, If Any, Distinction Is There Between The Mind (Mental Events) And The Brain (Physical Events)? • Assuming Such A Distinction Exists, What Is The Relationship Between The Mind And The Brain? • What Is The Ontological Status Of Mental Events? • Can the problem be resolved by replacing dualist explanation with monistic ones?

12. Descartes’ Solution

13. Q: How do we explain the relationship between mind and body? • Descartes’ Solution: • A: The mind and body are mediated through the Pineal Gland • Why? It appears to serve no other purpose. • What is wrong with Descartes solution? • Flawed Reasoning • Just because something appears to play no other role doesn’t necessarily mean that it must play another role • Self-Contradictory • a) Mental substance is distinct from physical substances • b) Location is a property of physical substances • c) In attributing a location to the mind, Descartes is suggesting that the mind is not physical but has physical qualities? Descartes’ Solution

14. How do we resolve the mind-body problem?

15. What should we do with substance dualism? • We want to know what the relationship is between the mind and the brain • Is substance dualism worth saving? • Can it be fixed? • Or, should we just abandon it? • If we abandon it, what alternatives do we have? • What are the consequences of these alternatives? Resolving the problem

16. Resolving the Problem Why does the mind-body problem endure? In our experience it appears that the mind and body are distinct Mind-matter dualism appears to coincide with our common-sense intuition Thoughts, feelings, etc. are wholly private (unlike brain processes) Traditionally there is a great deal of resistance to the idea that our minds work in the same way as other merely physical things.

17. Resolving the Problem Why does mind-matter dualism appear to be inappropriate? We know that there is a causal relationship between mind and body Unscientific It appears to lack a clear solution Too obscure and mysterious Overall dilemma Giving up on substance dualism is difficult AND Accepting substance dualism is difficult

18. Alternatives to Dualism

19. Ryle’s Attack Category Mistakes I shall often speak of [the “official doctrine”] with deliberate abusiveness, as “the dogma of the Ghost in the Machine.” . . . It is not merely an assemblage of particular mistakes. It is one big mistake and a mistake of a special kind. It is, namely, a category mistake. It represents the facts of mental life as if they belonged to one logical type or category (or range of types of categories), when they actually belong to another. The dogma is therefore a philosopher’s myth. (Textbook, p. 101)

20. Ryle’s Attack Category Mistakes

21. Ryle’s Attack Category Mistakes Wicket Keeper Umpire Bowler Batters Fielders Where is Waldo Team-Spirit?

22. Ryle attacks the mind-body problem itself on the following grounds: • Category mistakes occur when we take a term or concept that belongs in one category, and mistakenly place it in another inappropriate category • Anyone attempting to talk about mental states as particular things is making a category-mistake • The mind-body problem is therefore invalid because it rests on a category mistake • Ryle does not deny that minds may exist, but denies that they can be described in the same way we describe physical things (trees, actions, chairs etc.) • Ryle’s objection is primarily logical, not ontological. Ryle’s Attack

23. Ryle’s Solution • We do not need to use mentalese(mental language) to explain human actions • Instead we can adequately describe, evaluate, explain and account for human actions by appealing to dispositions, behaviour, etc. • Consider how you would describe someone who is: • Thinking • In love • Happy • Sad • In pain • In a bad mood • Carrying out mathematical equations • Can all human activities be described in terms of behaviour? • Are there any human activities that we must use mentalese language to explain? Ryle’s Attack