This Document summarizes the lectures of the Mind part of the course Mind & Brain and the book 8" questions about the conscious mind". it describes the different perspectives scientists can have about the conscious mind and especially the mind-body problem.
Summery Mind & brain
General problem: How does the conscious mind fit in the physical world?
HD: we have a mind. But our intuitions may be false.
Lecture 1/chapter 1,2
What is the conscious mind?
An initial classification (three types of conscious states): (1) conscious experiences(qualia), (2) cognition
(cognitive states), (3) emotions
1. Conscious/phenomenal experiences/Qualia: qualitative aspects of experiences
- Experiences taste, colour etc.
- “what-it-is-likeness” ->phenomenal experiences (pleonasm) are characterized by
qualitative feels
- Can have experiences without intentionality (aboutness)
2. Cognitive states: have intentionality (aboutness)
- Two meanings of “intentionality”:
- 1.wanting to do something on purpose
- 2.thoughts about something
- There are discrete entities
- Propositional attitudes: stances towards a proposition (means meaning, knowing,
hoping)
3. Emotion: feel about something/someone
- Combination of the two
We might need to revise it to learn more about the mind
->they are defined by qualia and intentionality
Conscious and the unconscious mind
States of unconscious mind can become conscious given the right circumstances (example: memory)
-there are states which aren’t mental states because of the lack the ability to become conscious states
(heartbeat)
The mind-body problem:
Problem 1: How does qualia fit in the physical world?
Problem 2: How does intentionality fit in the physical world?
Possible positions in the debate:
1. Substance-dualism: the mind and the body are
independent of each other (MIND1);
2. Idealism: the physical world is dependent on the mental
world (MIND2);
3. Behaviourism: the mind is behaviour (MIND2);
4. Reductionism / identity theory: mental states are certain
brain states (MIND3);
5. Eliminativism: there’s no mind (MIND3&4);
6. Functionalism: mental states are realized by brain states
(MIND4);
,7. Connectionism: mental states are states in a neural
network (MIND5);
8. Embodied & Embedded (& even Extended) mind: there’s
more to mind than brain (MIND6);
9. Epiphenomenalism: the mind has no causal powers
(MIND7).
Chapter 2
Michel Eyquem de Montaige
separability thesis: min can exist and function separately from the physical world
Skeptics argue that we can never be certain about anything
Montagine did not claim anything at all
inseparability thesis: idea that the mind cannot function separately from the physical body
1.Substance dualism
Can the mind function separately from the brain?
Descartes is thinking thing and physical thing (two substances)
[1] Res cogitans (the thinking substance);
[2] Res extensa (the physical or extended substance);
Substance: that which can exist on its own;
Substance-dualism: there are two substances, which don’t need each other for their existing
Physical bodies are moved by another physical body bumping into them/pushing them
1.Descartes' first method: Radical doubt
-If you doubt, you think. And if you think, you have to exist. (I am, I exist)
-I think therefore I am (cogito ergo sum)
➔ Q: What if there is a malin genie? A: Cogito ergo sum.
2.Descartes’ second method: Clear & distinct insights
➔ God exists; God is good; Hence, God does not deceive me (at least not all the time); So: I also am
a body; I am also a res extensa / a physical substance; Essential property: it is extended.
The interaction problem
I.e. every physical event has a physical cause;
So nonphysical (mental) causes seem to be unintelligible;
But then we have a “Patrick Swayze Problem” (dub as interaction problem)
Two solutions:
Descartes corresponded with princess Elizabeth of Bohemia;
She asked him the following: “How can the soul of man, being only a thinking substance, determine [i.e.
causally interact with] his bodily spirits to perform voluntary actions?”
(HD: Spirits are not ghosts, but are physical particles in the nerves and blood vessels.)
Descartes does not know;
On the one hand (so Descartes says) we are [a] clearly two substances;
On the other hand, we are not like a sailor on a ship, [b] but mind and body are closely connected;
We cannot think [a] and [b] together.
Mind and brain are connected in the pineal gland (soul has the power to move the body) according to
Descartes.
, Suggestion by Descartes: God takes care of the interaction: He could have made us in a way that
stepping in a nail would not result in pain, but in the taste of chocolate.
HD: How? Still a mystery
Occasionalism
Only God is the true cause of things in the world;
➔ My thought is the occasion for God to raise my arm.
Parallelism
If we have two clocks that run in sync, that is because they have been made that way;
➔ The same applies to the mind and the body. It depend on the same supreme designer (God)
Both occasionalism and parallelism suffer from the same problem: How does God do this?
- One problem cannot replace by another!
➔ Believe in rather in soul as in god
➔ Our common sense concept of a soul is conceptually incoherent
Parapsychology= reason to prove that SD is correct
- Accept that parapsychological phenomenon exists
1. clairvoyance (support the separability thesis)
-> ability to gain info about a person without using the normal senses
-> claim to gain knowledge from spirit world
2. Electronic voice phenomena
-> contact with dead people via radio, television
Cons:
----no way that clear that the cause of white noise is supernatural
----no clear recordings
----pareidolia: recognizing meaningful patterns in random stimuli
----theory ladenness: what we perceive is influenced by a theory that tells us what to perceive
Conclusion
If SD would be right, we would not understand how mind & body interact; (mystery)
But separability thesis could be correct
It is clear that dualism is conceptually incoherent.
Scientific investigation
Scientific investigations have never provided us with data supporting dualism;
SD takes the mind seriously, but not science!!!!
➔ Dualists have a strategy: If phenomenon X gets debunked, they provide something else:
clairvoyance
Workgroup 1
Dualist many times try to reverse the burden of proof (“show me he is not a medium,” “show me god
does not exist”);
Dualists often see that one case study fails to provide the evidence needed, and try to find this in
another case study;
We cannot ‘debunk’ them all, but there is enough material if you are interested.
Voordelen van het kopen van samenvattingen bij Stuvia op een rij:
Verzekerd van kwaliteit door reviews
Stuvia-klanten hebben meer dan 700.000 samenvattingen beoordeeld. Zo weet je zeker dat je de beste documenten koopt!
Snel en makkelijk kopen
Je betaalt supersnel en eenmalig met iDeal, creditcard of Stuvia-tegoed voor de samenvatting. Zonder lidmaatschap.
Focus op de essentie
Samenvattingen worden geschreven voor en door anderen. Daarom zijn de samenvattingen altijd betrouwbaar en actueel. Zo kom je snel tot de kern!
Veelgestelde vragen
Wat krijg ik als ik dit document koop?
Je krijgt een PDF, die direct beschikbaar is na je aankoop. Het gekochte document is altijd, overal en oneindig toegankelijk via je profiel.
Tevredenheidsgarantie: hoe werkt dat?
Onze tevredenheidsgarantie zorgt ervoor dat je altijd een studiedocument vindt dat goed bij je past. Je vult een formulier in en onze klantenservice regelt de rest.
Van wie koop ik deze samenvatting?
Stuvia is een marktplaats, je koop dit document dus niet van ons, maar van verkoper nicksievering. Stuvia faciliteert de betaling aan de verkoper.
Zit ik meteen vast aan een abonnement?
Nee, je koopt alleen deze samenvatting voor €6,99. Je zit daarna nergens aan vast.
