efficient cause of the soul, existence of unobservable things, etc.). Typically, the burden of truth dualists must bear is enough to make me side with materialists. Though Baggini causes a problem by asserting that consciousness miraculously arises from matter. Thus what could have been a more empirically reasonable account of self (e.g. something like Dennett’s view), is muddled with the same mysterious nature found in the Dualist
The ability for the self to think, reason, and perceive believed by many philosophers is to relate ourselves to our bodies and bring ourselves to achieve a destiny. The philosophers who believe in the idea of self believe that the self is essentially independent of the physical body. It is a nonphysical element of... ... middle of paper ... ...ery topic discussed in this paper, it can be concluded that the idea of individuality explains the existence of life. Time, morals, and opinions all can be debated based on individual perception and thoughts through the self, enduring self. Reality is a difficult element to explain but through the ability of ourselves to shape the world around us based on our skepticism and knowledge; we are able to exist independently.
Although we can suppose there is an overlap between philosophy, psychology and psychotherapy, in this paper I will focus on the overlap between teaching philosophy and psychotherapy. More precisely: how can Gestalt principles and techniques help in the teaching of the topic of selfhood. I will outline some theoretical background of the importance of Gestalt in relation to didactics of philosophy and describe some possible applications. When I ask whether Socrates was a philosopher or a psychologist, this is also a question about what kind of knowledge is involved. Do I really want to know myself or do I just search for general knowledge about human nature?
Personal identity is a very controversial aspect of life. Who are we? What defines us? According to John Locke, psychological continuity is what defines our personal identity. Locke discusses the case of the prince and the cobbler to help shape his theory.
Psychological egoism claims that ‘each person is so constituted that he or she will look out only for his or her own interests’ (Rachels 1993:62). The idea of complete altruism in us or in other people is said to be a myth. As Rachels puts it in his book, The Elements of Moral Philosophy, psychological egoism is based on human motivation; actions that are done intentionally. Others have claimed that it is a theory of human psychology. Thus it claims that when people respond to the needs of others, they are doing so because they are expecting something in return for themselves (ibid.).
Rather, philosophy's catalytic and integrative role in human cognition should be stressed. Anthropological interests on the part of philosophers can be explained on different levels. Since thinking in general is reflective, philosophical thinkers must naturally be interested in understanding the nature of humans, which they themselves are, including the nature of their own thinking. But non-philosophical theorists can also be reflective enough to seek an understanding of human nature and the nature of their characteristic thinking. On a deeper level, with their realization that cognitive functions including philosophical thinking are characteristically human, philosophers may come to reflect upon how such functions are conditioned by human conditions.
Both find consciousness to be the source of “the self,” the “me” that defines an individual’s identity. Functionalist philosopher David Armstrong makes the argument that introspective consciousness is aligned with consciousness of self and feels that "unless mental activity is monitored by introspective consciousness, it is unlikely it will be remembered" (Armstrong, 1980). Anti-functionalists like Thomas Nagel argue that the "subjective character of experience” associated with consciousness can't be fully measured by physical description and that brain state... ... middle of paper ... ..._consciousness.html Gertler, B., & Shapiro, L. A. (2007). David Chalmers: The puzzle of conscious experience.
Psychologists seeking to clarify this discussion have researched phenomena concerning the nature of self-identity, and it’s relation with consciousness. Philosophers can attempt to investigate the fundamental assumptions underlying these studies, an d examine their ramifications upon our dogmas of self-identity. To formulate a concept of our idea of self we must consider the uniqueness of our experience, and account for memories of prior experiences. Self-identity is my ownership of a personal, distinct unity of consciousness that is consistent through time. Unity of consciousness is the personal, private, owned, and discrete continuing experience of the self.
Many theories exist arguing for and against the inner sense. Evolutionary considerations often favor the inner sense as understanding the self is necessary for monitoring and control. Behaviorism on the other hand suggests that the inner sense does not exist, along with privileged access, as the only mental states are those that are dispositions to behave. Although the question regarding the existence of the inner sense remains, it is clear that the transparent epistemic rule allows for an individual to further understand their mental state, therefore supporting the idea of privileged access. Assuming that one is conscious of their state of mind, the logical rules allow inductive and deductive inferences to be made and can therefore help an individual determine what is true and not.
Locke on the other hand believes that our main source of knowledge is sensory experience. Locke provides strong evidence of his theory but his theory is known as one of the most confusing in his work. He views that without experience or reason, we have to question our reality and the external world we live in. Through experience comes sensation and reflection and that is how we know what is real because all ideas to form complex ideas come from those two