To the vast majority of people, the problem of other minds may seem inconsequential or non-existent; to some; however, the problem of other minds is a tantalizing dilemma. The problem of other minds asks how one can support the commonsense belief in the existence of other minded individuals against the general denial of other minds. A general denial of other minds requires an individual to wholeheartedly believe they are the only minded individual that exists and all others are simple automatons. The problem of other minds arises because any belief we have about another’s minds is drawn solely from observation and inference; and the information supplied by the senses cannot be proven accurate. Furthermore no amount of observation can reveal the conscious thought processes and experiences of another individual (and more importantly their mind) with the same clarity and understanding which we have toward our own minds. Consequently we must question what warrants our inferences and beliefs about the mindedness of other individuals? How can we truly know the individual sitting next to us in class, or on a plane, is a conscious, thinking person with their own beliefs and experiences? According to George Graham there are three main proposed explanations for the problem of other minds which fail to withstand critique (Logical Behaviorism, Humbling Disclosure, Arguments from Analogy), and one acceptable solution to the problem (The Inference to the Best Explanation).
Logical Behaviorism claims observation of intelligent peripheral behavior is the only way to draw inferences about other minds; in this way the observation of intelligent external behavior constitutes the entirety of the mind (minds are just peoples’ expressions and...
... middle of paper ...
...o hypotheses should be used. Network Criteria efficiently lumps Graham’s example of Mrs. T and the Flatworm together because, in the case of Mrs. T she possess a singular belief not established in a network of other beliefs. In the case of the Flatworm Network Criteria eliminates it from containing beliefs because of its complete lack of intelligence or even ability to tell the direction of stimuli. Network Criteria applies beliefs to more intelligent animals such as dogs and cats who’s actions can be explained by a network of beliefs. For instance a cat runs up a tree because it knew it was being chased by a dog and assumed the tree would provide safety. While the cat may not recognize the tree as a living organism or the dog as indeed a dog that does not mean it does not harbor beliefs but rather its beliefs are less complex than ones you and I may have.
Behaviorist identify mental states with dispositions. A mental state is identical when, given the same inputs the disposition toward a particular output in the same. Unlike functionalism, behaviorism recognizes dispositions according to merely outward behavior. Alternatively, a functional system includes a typical behavioral outputs given a range of inputs, as well as a tendency to experience a property of a mental state. Functionalists want to individuate mental states causally, but since mental states have mental effects, functionalist advance on behaviorism by acknowledging some similar input and output systems have similar descriptions without entailing similar mental effects. Functionalism, as an advancement of behaviorism, also describes the function of the mental state.
I will show that Kelly's response to the question of epistemic significance of peer disagreement is not compelling. In my explanation of Kelly's argument, I will show that it is contradictory of him to assert the first persons perspective and the right reasons view. I will then examine the third person perspective, and show that this is more compatible with the right reasons view. Nevertheless I will propose an objection in the form of a question. Specifically, why should the difference between first person and third person change my thinking skeptically? Would this view only be attractive from the third person view? The third person perspective, the right reasons view as Kelly explains it, plus what I will call external Validation of a belief makes a more compelling argument.
This book presents the relationship between human and animal behaviors and the behavior that is now created by our modern day society. The mind has two main parts. There is the conscious mind and the unconscious mind. The unconscious mind is the better half, yet it is potentially threatening; therefore, the conscious mind is aware at all times. The unconscious mind influences your behavior in many ways. Pi experiences both of these minds. Pi is consciously planning his survival and how he was going to spend his food, so he didn’t run out. His conscious mind contributed to Pi surviving at sea. Consequently, when Pi`s father fed a goat to a tiger to prove a point, he was unaware that this event changed his personality brutally. He became more
Lowe, E.J. 2007, An introduction to the philosophy of mind, United States of America, New York, Cambridge University Press. pg 146.
Psychology from the Standpoint of a Behaviorist rejected the idea of introspection and the role of the human conscious, or unconscious, in the behaviors of human beings. Instead, it focused on the experimental exploration of human behavior based on stimuli and human response to the stimuli. Watson’...
Logical behaviorists believe that there are no inner mental states but we know mental states because of behavior we see through others. The problem with this is that we cannot analyze beliefs and desires through inner states because that would be too easy. Mental states to behaviorists are not inner states, this is because if they were then we would not be able to identify within others. The argument is that because we can see the mental states through others they are real but because we cannot see inner mental states they are not real. Dualists would disagree with this method of thought. They would think that just because others cannot physically see your inner mental states does not mean they aren’t there. Inner mental states are what makes us who we are. Seeing behaviors through others, to dualists, is just another way of their inner states
An Unquiet Mind is a memoir of the manic-depressive illness written from a dual perspective of the healer and the healed by Kay Redfield Jamison, the Professor of Psychiatry at the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine. This memoir uses vivid imagery and technically deft writing to bring life to the internal experience of those afflicted with bipolar disorder. This alone makes the memoir capable of educating even those people who might have been formerly unsympathetic to the suffering of people with mental disorders.
Bertrand Russell expressed his belief on knowing other minds, in an article based primarily around the notion of ‘analogy’, meaning similar to or likeness of. His belief is that, "We are convinced that other people have thoughts and feelings that are qualitatively fairly similar to our own. We are not content to think that we know only the space-time structure of our friends’ minds, or their capacity for initiating causal chains that end in sensations of our own" (Russell 89). Russell speaks of the inner awareness, such as being able to observe the occurrences of such things as remembering, feeling pleasure and feeling pain from within our own minds’. This would then allow us to presume that other beings that have these abilities would then be that of having minds.
Are minds physical things, or are they nonmaterial? If your beliefs and desires are caused by physical events outside of yourself, how can it be true that you act the way you do of your own free will? Are people genuinely moved by the welfare of others, or is all behavior, in reality, selfish? (Sober 203). These are questions relevant to philosophy of the mind and discussed through a variety of arguments. Two of the most important arguments with this discussion are Cartesian dualism and logical behaviorism, both of which argue the philosophy of the mind in two completely different ways. Robert Lane, a professor at the University of West Georgia, define the two as follows: Cartesian dualism is the theory that the mind and body are two totally different things, capable of existing separately, and logical behaviorism is the theory that our talk about beliefs, desires, and pains is not talk about ghostly or physical inner episodes, but instead about actual and potential patterns of behavior. Understanding of the two arguments is essential to interpret the decision making process; although dualism and behaviorism are prominent arguments for the philosophy of the mind, both have their strengths and weaknesses.
One can say or try and dissect the brain and try to figure what’s going on inside of it and that’s what Philophers today try to do that. Why is that why must the brain be dissected? This question is raised for the simple fact that Philophers really want to know why whats going on the human brain. This can also go back to “knowing” and believing in something. We will also take a look into emotion with a emphisis on facil expressions. Reading the human face could be a difficult task. Last but not least I will talk about the Philosphy of life and why it is important to have an outreach like that in life, futhermore this has an emphese on belief. Learning a lot this busy semester the topics above will be though out and discussed so that we can get a better understand of each of them.
I very much enjoyed watching the series Misunderstood Minds. There were a variety of different students with disabilities that caught my attention and inspired me to teach special education. Each child in the series taught me something new about special education.
Behaviorism must be seen as a methodological proposal of explaining the behavior of organisms from the lowest to the highest. Explaining human and nonhuman behavior by reference to scientific laws and the theories expressed of physical states, events, and entities. Because modern psychology emerged roughly in the mid-19th century, information of behaviorism was gathered in its early stages by introspection (looking at your own inner states of being; your own desires, feelings, and intentions) then linking them to the outside observable state.
There are three types of behaviorism. The first, methodological is a normative theory about the scientific conduct of psychology. It claims that psychology should concern itself with the behavior of organisms and not with mental states or events or with constructing internal information processing accounts of behavior. ("Behaviorism," 2000) The second is psychological behaviorism. It explains human and animal behavior in terms of external physical stimuli, responses, learning histories and reinforcements. The last type is analytical or logical behaviorism. This theory has a philosophy about the meaning of mental terms and concepts. The idea of the mental state is the idea of behavioral tendencies that shows how a person behaves in one situation compared to another.
As the name implies, behaviorism focuses on people’s behaviors, which are directly observable, rather than on the mental systems underlying these behaviors (Narasimhan, 1998). Language is viewed as a kind of verbal behavior and it is proposed that children learn language through imitation, reinforcement, analogy, and structured input (Fromkin, Rodman & Hyams, 2003).
...ocesses which are distinct from observable behavioral responses. Acts such as thinking, remembering, perceiving, and willing are defined by behavioral actions and by dispositions to perform behavioral actions. However, Ryle criticises Behaviorist theory for being overly simplistic and mechanistic, just as he criticizes Cartesian theory for being overly simplistic and mechanistic. While Cartesian theory asserts that hidden mental processes cause the behavioral responses of the conscious individual, Behaviorism asserts that stimulus-response mechanisms cause the behavioral responses of the conscious individual. Ryle argues that both the Cartesian theory and the Behaviorist theory are too simplistic and mechanistic to enable us to fully understand the Concept of Mind.