The mind body problem is the controversial idea of the connection between the mind and the body. Physicalism is a solution to the mind body problem, providing the idea that there is nothing above the world and accepts the mind to be a physical essence, nothing above the body. Physicalism provides different approaches in search of the mind and its constituents. By approaching the mind as a physical entity, behaviorist, a type of physicalism, view the mind as a category containing emotions, sensations and feelings. Another approach within physicalism is functionalism, the idea that the mind is a series of input and output of mental states.
His response to this is the claim that because “they are intrinsically mental, they are therefore a fortiori they are physical”(P115).He even goes further to say that terms are constrained in design, and as such are assumed to be a complete opposition. Due to this, we can conclude that consciousness is just a simple reductive biological feature of the brain. This assumption constrains his argument and assumes that reduction to a metaphysical level is not necessary in understanding Consciousness. Searle assumes this reduction is fully casual, and that if ontologically reduced, we lose the whole concept. However, what if we consider mental events as individual and subjective.
To come up with an idea of how mind and body work together, Descartes had two ideas that he played with. The first had to do with the material being and how it is subject to obey physical laws. The second idea is how the mind was able to move the matter. This is confusing because it blows up the idea that matter, specifically the human body, always obey’s the law of matter. How can a thought cause an action?
This term simplifies all of the questions human beings experience through their lives. However, answers tend to be more complicated than what is essential to our senses and that is why perception tends to deceive and influence the way we act. Perceptual illusions are vital for such understanding. Through sensation, which is the first perceptual illusion, human beings are provided answers by the world. These answers are simple, superficial, and generalized.
The best form of argument, in my opinion, is showing how other beliefs on the topic can be refuted. Physicalism, a main view on the mind-body issue states that a human is completely physical. The knowledge argument says that one might have complete physical knowledge on the properties of another mindset, but does not retain the knowledge regarding the experiences of that mental entity (Nida-Rumelin, 2015). For example, if one claims to know all the physical facts of a certain topic, but comes to find out this person determines there are some facts they have yet to gain knowledge on, therefore non-physical facts regarding thus topic are present. I like this example because it’s specific, and clearly defines how non-physical facts can come about in a physicalism point of view.
Quite to the contrary. A respectable contemporary philosopher would normally adopt physicalism as a hypothesis about the mind, thus embracing a materialist ontology. A materialist treats organisms possessing mind as parts of the physical world. The way how the problem is posited then generates a question about the persisting explanatory gap, or about the reductionist hard problem: All in being treated as a part of the world, organisms possessing mind still differ from the World in that they have consciousness consisting of qualitative experiences which are not reducible to the physical World. So one may wish to be a nonreductionist concerning the ontology of mind.
The mind is assuredly capable of thought, as Descartes states, and has intangible elements in the form of memories and personality characteristics; however, I believe that the mind is an extended entity because physical matter is required for these elements to exist. In my opinion, this means that the only logical conclusion is that the brain is the physical extensi... ... middle of paper ... ... ceases to function. Descartes makes very interesting points on the differentiation of the mind and body in Meditation on First Philosophy. His position on the body being a strictly physical entity while the mind is not is a superb point of reasoning that can be applied on many different levels with many different results. Overall, I believe that there are some areas of Descartes’ position that could be modified or expanded upon given what has been learned about the brain through modern science.
Type identity theory is a subcategory of physicalism. In physicalism it is understood that physical things form the basis for all things that exist. When this approach is taken it is incorrect to distinguish the mind from the body. The mind in a sense is not regarded as a thing. When discussing the mind it would be a better representation to reference mental states and particular processes that the brain performs.
It states that everything can be defined in purely physical terms. This view has many implications, especially within the philosophy of mind, where it stands in stark contrast to dualism which puts the mind above the physical world. This focus on the philosophy of mind is, in part, due to it producing most of the objections that appear against physicalism. Within the philosophy of mind, physicalism states that all mental states can be equated to some physical state. Note that this does not necessarily imply the identity hypothesis, or the idea that a specific mental state is associated with a spe... ... middle of paper ... ...s like to experience something.
Moreover, a brain sits useless unless it has a mind. Substances with shape, mass, and other physical properties characterize the physical. In contrast, substances without any size, shape, mass often characterize the mental. One of the first things about our bodies is that they have limitations that we may think are not there. Our bodies seem to be what they are no matter what we think about them.