Section 2.2 You Are What You Eat Mind as Body McGraw-Hill © 2013 McGraw-Hill Companies. All Rights Reserved.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
The value of certainty. Foundationalists suppose that true beliefs held with certainty (indubitable) together with logical and linguistic analysis offer.
Advertisements

Anselm On the Existence of God. “Nor do I seek to understand so that I can believe, but rather I believe so that I can understand. For I believe this.
What is it like to be me? Trying to understand consciousness.
Functionalism. SUMMARY FROM LAST TIME “Multiple Realizability”
LAST LECTURE. Functionalism Functionalism in philosophy of mind is the view that mental states should be identified with and differentiated in terms of.
Summer 2011 Wednesday, 07/06. Mental vs. Physical Items Write down 3 examples of mental items (anything that you consider to be a part of the mind) and.
Section 2.3 I, Robot Mind as Software.
Descartes’ rationalism
Summer 2011 Thursday, 07/07. Loose Ends: Wittgenstein’s Beetle Each of us carries a box with something that each of us calls a beetle. We can only look.
EPM: Chs XIII & XIV Pete Mandik Chairman, Department of Philosophy Coordinator, Cognitive Science Laboratory William Paterson University, New Jersey USA.
Section 2.2 You Are What You Eat Mind as Body 1 Empiricism Empiricism claims that the only source of knowledge about the external world is sense experience.
Artificial intelligence. I believe that in about fifty years' time it will be possible, to programme computers, with a storage capacity of about 10.
Summer 2011 Tuesday, 07/05. Dualism The view that the mind is separate from the physical/material world. Tells us what the mind is not, but is silent.
Hume on Taste Hume's account of judgments of taste parallels his discussion of judgments or moral right and wrong.  Both accounts use the internal/external.
Behaviorism. The Problem of Other Minds 1.If Substance Dualism is correct, it’s possible for all of the human bodies around you to lack minds and yet.
David Hume ( )  Fame as a philosopher (for Treatise and Enquiry) followed fame as an historian (for A History of Britain)
Chapter 2 Paradigms, Theory and Research. What is a paradigm? According to Burrell and Morgan (1979; 24), “To be located in a particular paradigm is to.
Substance dualism: do Descartes’ arguments work? Michael Lacewing
20 th Century Views on Mind and Body Logical Behaviorism (Gilbert Ryle): “mind” refers simply to a way of speaking about behaviors ( ) Mind-Brain.
Chapter 2 The Mind-Body Problem
The Egocentric Predicament (pg 194); term coined by Ralph Perry  Egocentric: the Individual self is at the center of all our experience.  Predicament:
The Knowledge Argument There’s Something About Mary.
The Mind-Body Debate. Mind-Brain Debate What is the relationship between mind and brain?
The Mind-Brain Type Identity Theory
Logical behaviourism: objections
Philosophy 4610 Philosophy of Mind Week 5: Functionalism.
Philosophy 4610 Philosophy of Mind Week 11: The Problem of Consciousness.
LECTURE 26 NEW VERSIONS OF DESCARTES’ ARGUMENT AND THE LEIBNIZIAN ARGUMENT G.E. MOORE’S OBSERVATION.
Michael Lacewing Logical behaviourism Michael Lacewing
Philosophy of Mind Week 3: Objections to Dualism Logical Behaviorism
 According to philosophical skepticism, we can’t have knowledge of the external world.
© Michael Lacewing Reason and experience Michael Lacewing
Philosophy 1050: Introduction to Philosophy Week 10: Descartes and the Subject: The way of Ideas.
Chapter 2 The Mind-Body Problem McGraw-Hill © 2013 McGraw-Hill Companies. All Rights Reserved.
Mind-Body Dualism. The Mind-Body Problem The problem of explaining how a mind is connected to and interacts with a body whose mind it is, or the problem.
The argument from neural dependency A natural consequence of dualism should be that the mind itself is not damaged whenever the brain is damaged. A natural.
Philosophy of Mind - Mind/Body Introduction to Philosophy Jason M. Chang.
Philosophy 4610 Philosophy of Mind Week 4: Objections to Behaviorism The Identity Theory.
Nagel’s Bat and the Explanatory Gap Nagel’s bat: preliminaries Phenomenal consciousness is what makes the mind-body problem hard Materialist analyses.
Introduction to Philosophy Lecture 14 Minds and Bodies #3 (Jackson) By David Kelsey.
Ross Arnold, Summer 2014 Lakeside institute of Theology Philosophy of Human Nature.
Section 2.3 I, Robot Mind as Software McGraw-Hill © 2013 McGraw-Hill Companies. All Rights Reserved.
Consciousness Knowledge and Reality: Mind and Body, Lecture 4.
PHL 203 Theories of Reality Lecture for January 11 & 13, 2011 Prof. Borrowdale.
BRAIN IN VATS ѕєяριℓ тυтι ѕєяριℓ тυтι Bilkent University, April 2008 вяαιη ιη ναтѕ вяαιη ιη ναтѕ q ɹɐ ıu.
Chapter 5: Mind and Body The Rejection of Dualism
Points of Discussion Discuss the link between theory and research. Explain the difference between inductive and deductive reasoning. What is a paradigm?
 The value of certainty.  Foundationalists suppose that true beliefs held with certainty (indubitable) together with logical and linguistic analysis.
What is it like to be a bat?
Philosophy of Mind materialism.
Lesson 4: Descartes; a dualist view
Introduction to Philosophy Lecture 13 Minds and Bodies #2 (Physicalism) By David Kelsey.
The Ontological Argument for the Existence of God August 15, 2015 George Cronk, J.D., Ph.D. Professor of Philosophy & Religion Bergen Community College.
Philosophy 4610 Philosophy of Mind Week 1: Introduction.
The Mind And Body Problem Mr. DeZilva.  Humans are characterised by the body (physical) and the mind (consciousness) These are the fundamental properties.
Bouwsma and the evil demon. Bouwsma’s Goal Bouwsma tries to show that in the evil demon scenario we are not actually deceived. Contrary to what Descartes.
The Ontological Argument
This week’s aims  To test your understanding of substance dualism through an initial assessment task  To explain and analyse the philosophical zombies.
Chapter 2 Section 1 Conducting Research Obj: List and explain the steps scientists follow in conducting scientific research.
Philosophy of Mind Lecture II: Mind&behavior. Behaviorism
Introduction to Philosophy of Mind
Philosophical behaviourism: two objections
Philosophical behaviourism and consciousness
Problems for Identity Theory
Introduction to Philosophy Lecture 14 Minds and Bodies #3 (Jackson)
The Problem of Consciousness
What is the relationship between body and soul.
Unscramble The Words What are these key terms from the current theory we’re looking at? Finicalmounts Callaroues Ipunt Optutu Relegatedgunkmown Nupmat.
True or False: Materialism and physicalism mean the same thing.
On your whiteboard: What is hard behaviourism? What are its strengths?
Presentation transcript:

Section 2.2 You Are What You Eat Mind as Body McGraw-Hill © 2013 McGraw-Hill Companies. All Rights Reserved.

2.2-2 Empiricism  Empiricism claims that the only source of knowledge about the external world is sense experience.  Corollaries: (1) an idea corresponds to a real object only if it is derived from or reducible to sense impressions, and (2) a term is meaningful only if it stands for a real idea.

2.2-3 Hume on Meaning  “When we entertain, therefore, any suspicion that a philosophical term is employed without any meaning…we need but enquire, from what impression is that supposed idea derived? And if it be impossible to assign any, that will confirm our suspicion.”

2.2-4 Logical Positivism  20 th century version of empiricism.  A statement is meaningful only if it can be verified by sense experience.  Verifiability theory of meaning: the meaning of a statement is its method of verification.

2.2-5 The Argument from Logical Positivism to Logical Behaviorism 1.The meaning of a statement is its method of verification. 2.The way we verify claims about mental states is by observing behavior. 3.Therefore, what we mean when we say that someone is in a mental state is that they have a behavioral disposition.

2.2-6 Logical Behaviorism  According to logical behaviorism, mental states are behavioral dispositions.  A behavioral disposition is a tendency to behave in certain ways in certain circumstances.

2.2-7 The Argument from Ordinary Language to Logical Behaviorism  Not all nouns refer to things, e.g., “waltz.”  To dance a waltz is to dance in a certain way.  Similarly, to have a mind is to behave in a certain way.

2.2-8 Thought Experiment: Ryle’s University Seeker  “A foreigner visiting Oxford or Cambridge for the first time is shown a number of colleges, libraries, etc….He then asks, “But where is the University?”  The visitor makes a category mistake in assuming that the University exists in the same way that the buildings exist.  Cartesian dualists make the same mistake in assuming that minds exist in the same way that bodies do.

2.2-9 Qualitative Content  To be in certain mental states, like pain, is to have a certain sort of feeling.  The felt quality of mental states is known as their qualitative content.

Thought Experiment: The Perfect Pretender  Imagine someone who cannot feel pain but nevertheless has learned to behave as if he or she can feel pain.  This possibility shows that having the right behavioral dispositions is not a sufficient condition for being in pain.

Thought Experiment: Putnam’s Super-Spartans  “Imagine a community of ‘super-Spartans’…They may, on occasion, admit that they feel pain, but always in pleasant, well- modulated voices…”  This possibility shows that having the right behavioral dispositions is not a necessary condition for being in pain.

Putnam’s Argument Against Behaviorism 1. If having certain behavioral dispositions were a necessary condition for being in a certain mental state, then it would be impossible to be in that state and not have those dispositions. 2. But, as the example of the super- Spartans shows, that is possible. 3. Therefore, having certain behavioral dispositions is not a necessary condition for being in a certain mental state.

Thought Experiment: Chisholm’s Expectant Nephew  Logical behaviorism claims that all talk about mental states can be translated into talk about behavioral dispositions.  Suppose Jones expects to meet his aunt at the railway station in 20 minutes.  Can this be translated into a statement that just refers to behavioral dispositions?

The Identity Theory  According to the identity theory, mental states are brain states.  It follows that anything that does not have a brain cannot have a mind.

Phineas Gage and Mind/Brain Dependency  An explosion drove a steel bar through the head of Phineas Gage.  He survived but his personality was radically different.  Thus proving that the mind is dependent on the brain.

Neurophysiological Evidence for Mind/Brain Dependency  Phylogenetic – More evolved brains have greater cognitive abilities  Developmental – More mature brains have greater cognitive abilities  Clinical – Brain damage results in loss of mental function  Experimental – Electronic stimulation of the brain produces mental events  Experiential – Chemically altering the brain results in altered states of consciousness

Identity and Indiscernability  If two things are identical, then whatever is true of one must be true of the other and vice versa.  So if mental states are identical to brain states, whatever is true of mental states must be true of brain states and vice versa.

Thought Experiment: Nagel’s Bat  “I have said that the essence of the belief that bats have experience is that there is something that it is like to be a bat.”  We can know everything there is to know about a bat’s brain without knowing what it’s like to be a bat.  So mental states cannot be identical to brain states.

Nagel’s Argument 1. If mental states were identical to brain states, then it would be possible to know everything about the mind by knowing everything there is to know about the brain. 2. But, as the example of the bat shows, that’s not possible. 3. Therefore, mental states are not brain states.

Thought Experiment: Lewis’s Pained Martian  “…there might be a Martian who sometimes feels pain, just as we do, but whose pain differs greatly from ours in its physical realization.”  This possibility shows that having a brain is not a necessary condition for being in a mental state.

Thought Experiment: Putnam’s Conscious Computer  “It must be physically possible…to produce something with the same program [as the brain] but quite a different physical or chemical constitution.”  This possibility shows that having a brain is not a necessary condition for having a mind.

Multiple Realizability  What Lewis’s and Putnam’s thought experiments show is that minds can be realized in things other than brains.  In other words, minds are “multiply realizable.”

Lewis’s and Putnam’s Arguments 1. If the identity theory were true, then it would be impossible for anything without a brain to have a mind. 2. But, as Lewis’s pained Martian and Putnam’s conscious computer show, things without brains can have minds. 3. So the identity theory is not true; having a brain is not a necessary condition for having a mind.

Thought Probe: Speciesism  Suppose you fell in love with someone who seemed to be the most intelligent, witty, and caring person you’ve ever met.  Now suppose that “person” turns out to be an android.  Would you conclude that he or she doesn’t have a mind? Would you still love him or her?

Thought Experiment: Searle’s Brain Replacement  Imagine that your brain starts deteriorating and is gradually replaced by computer chips.  There are 3 possible outcomes: (1) your mind is unaffected; (2) your mind is destroyed but your behavior is unaffected; or (3) you are paralyzed but your mind is unaffected.  (1) refutes the identity theory; (2) refutes behaviorism; (3) refutes both the identity theory and behaviorism

Thought Probe: Neural Prostheses  Suppose you had a failing brain and your only hope for survival was to have your neurons replaced by silicon chips.  Would you do it?  Suppose that those who’ve had it done report that they feel no different. Would you still do it?

Thought Experiment: Your Mother the Zombie  “Imagine…that your mother’s a zombie.” Imagine that your Mother has no conscious experience—no feelings whatsoever—but nevertheless behaves as if she does.  Would you claim that she does not have a mind?