Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Philo 7 - Intro to Mind > Class Review > Flashcards

Class Review Flashcards

1
Q

Cartesian Dualism

A

the doctrine that thinking beings possess immaterial souls entirely distinct from their physical bodies

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Argument From Doubt

A

(1) I can doubt the existence of my brain and my body.
(2) I cannot doubt the existence of my mind.
Therefore
(Conclusion) My mind is not the same thing as my body or brain.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Leibniz’s Law

A

If A and B are the same object, then they have exactly the same properties. In other words, if A and B do not share all the same properties, then A and B are not the same object.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Why is the argument from doubt fallacious?

A

because it involves an illegitimate use of Leibniz’s Law.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

The Conceivability Argument

A

(1) If I can conceive of some state of affairs without contradiction, then the state of affairs is possible. (God could bring it about)
(2) I can conceive of myself as existing without my body
Therefore
(3) It is possible for my body to exist without my body existing.
But,
(4) It is not possible for my body to exist without my body existing.
Hence (by Leibniz’s Law)
(conclusion) I am distinct from my body.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Arnauld’s Objection/Response and what does he give as an example?

A

The mere fact Descartes can conceive of some state of affairs does not sow that the state of affairs is possible. We can conceive of a triangle that does not follow the Pythagorean theorem and could not bring it into reality.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

What does it mean for something to be ‘metaphysically possible’?

A

A way the world could have been

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Amnesia Argument

A

Suppose I have amnesia.
(1) If I can conceive of a state of affairs, that that state of affairs is possible.
(2) I can conceive of a world in which I exist but HS does not exist.
Therefore,
(3) It is possible for me to exist w/o HS existing.
But,
(4) It is impossible for HS to exist w/o HS existing
Hence (by LL)
(conclusion) I am not HS

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

What was Princess Elisabeth’s Challenge?

A

How could an immaterial substance, existing outside physical universe, exert any kind of causal impact upon physical processes (soul)?

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

What was Descartes’ Response to Princess Elisabeth’s Challenge? How convincing is his response?

A

Only the pineal gland (seat of the soul) is affected. Not convincing bc it still does not explain how the nonphysical affects the physical.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Interactionism (and how its received)

A

the doctrine that the mind can enter into causal interactions with the physical world (almost everyone believes in this)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Materialism and what it thinks of mental

A

the doctrine that everything exists in physical (material). the mental is an extremely complex manifestation of underlying physical phenomena

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

What does objecting to materialism do?

A

Leaves out the subjective character of experience, omits what it is like to feel pain, see color, …

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Consciousness

A

qualitative aspect of experience (what it is like)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

The Mary Argument

A

(1) Mary knows all the physical facts concerning human color vision before leaving the black-and-white room.
(2) But there are some facts about human color vision that Mary does not know before leaving the black-and-white room.
Therefore,
(conclusion) There are non-physical facts concerning human color vision

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Supervenience

A

the doctrine that, if two entities share all the same physical properties, then they also share all the mental properties

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

What is the relationship between materialism and supervenience?

A

Anyone who endorses materialism also endorses supervenience.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

What is the inverted spectrum?

A

When two people are actually seeing two different colors, but still describe it as all the same properties. But this can only be seen as a 3rd party and we cannot prove ourselves so rejoinder: maybe this is not true at all.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

Descartes’ thoughts on Machine Thought

A

‘no machine could speak a language, so not machine could think’ ‘no thinking beings are composed of both bodily machine and immaterial soul’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

Turing Test

A

computer passes the TT if we cannot discern if it is a machine, rather than a human being, during the Imitation Game

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

What are the three resulting views of Machine Thoughts and Turing Test?

A

(1) If a machine passes the TT, then it can think
(2) If no machine can think. A machine that passes the TTcan only simulate thought
(3) If a machine passes the TT, then that provides us with good reason to believe that it can think

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

The Computational Theory of Mind

A

Mind is just a computer (made of neurons instead of silicon). Mental activity is just computational activity. (mind is software, not hardware)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

Syntactic Manipulation

A

computational models place a big emphasis on syntactic man. Basic idea is that a computer manipulates pieces of data according to mechanical rules

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

What are the three theories of mind?

A

Dualistic: mind=soul
Behaviorism: mind=behavioral dispositions
Computational Theory of Mind: mind=computer

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

What are the aspects of mentality?

A

Qualitative aspects (consciousness). Representational aspects (beliefs about the world/represent the world)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

The Chinese Room Argument

A

(1) Syntax is not sufficient for semantics
(2) Minds have a semantics, (ie, they have representational properties)
(3) Computer programs are entirely defined by their formal syntactical structure
Therefore,
(conclusion) Instantiating a program by itself is never sufficient for having a mind

27
Q

What is the ‘Systems Reply’ to The Chinese Room Argument?

A

person doesn’t understand Chinese, but system does. Searle replies, “what is he memorizes rule book?”-Well then he instantiates a system he understands Chinese even though he doesn’t.

28
Q

What is ‘The Robot Reply’ to The Chinese Room Argument?

A

Searle is right that syntax manipulation does not itself give rise to semantics causal interaction with the world is also needed for semantics. But this is consistent with the computational theory of mind.

29
Q

what is a valid argument? what makes an argument invalid? what makes an argument sound? provide ex for each.

A

valid:premises entail the conclusion
invalid:premises cannot guarantee conclusion
sound:premises are true AND valid ^

30
Q

Modus Ponens

A

if P, then q. P. Therefore, q. if P, then q. it is not that the case that q. Therefore, not P.

31
Q

Idealism

A

metaphysical theory created by Berkely to rebut external world skepticism. The thesis that all reality is a construct out of mental phenomena. There is no such thing as a ‘mind-independent’ reality. Ex: cup disappears when no one is perceiving.

32
Q

Idealism - esse est percipi

A

its being consists in being perceived

33
Q

What is the problem with idealism?

A

how can things exist when they’re not being perceived?

34
Q

Berkely’s Rejoiner

A

God perceives everything at all times, so objects continue to exist

35
Q

Metaphysics - provide ex

A

studies the nature, constitution, and structure of reality
Ex: Does God exist?

36
Q

Epistemology - provide ex

A

studies our ability to acquire knowledge and/or justified beliefs about reality
Ex: Can I know anything on the basis of perception?

37
Q

Behaviorism

A

Metaphysical theory to rebut skepticism about other minds. The doctrine that mental state are simply behavioral dispositions. Nothing more to the mind beyond behavioral dispositions.

38
Q

Behavioral Disposition

A

Tendency to exhibit certain types of behavior under certain circumstances. A person is in pain if and only if the person instantiates appropriate behavioral dispositions (both sides must be true for this).

39
Q

Hempel’s Toothache Scenario

A

Paul has a toothache if and only if
(a) Paul weeps and makes gestures of “such and such” kinds (behavior)
(b) At the question “what is the matter?” Paul utters the words “I have a toothache” (behavior)
(c) Closer examination reveals a decayed tooth with exposed pulp (physiological)
(d) Paul’s blood pressure, digestive processes, speed of his reactions, show “such and such” changes (physiological)
(e) “such and such” processes occur in Paul’s central nervous system (physiological)
[“such and such” is vague, describe such and such kinds]

40
Q

3 counterexamples to behaviorism

A

1) talented actor
2)super-spartans
3)nonhuman animals

41
Q

Argument from Analogy

A

A usually causes B, and usually only A causes B.
B occurred.
Therefore,
A also occurred.

42
Q

Problems with Behaviorism (Belief)

A

Beliefs alone do not generate action, only in conjunctions with desires

43
Q

Belief

A

Anything that you hold to be true in your mind

44
Q

3 levels of skeptical doubt about other minds

A

1) Lies, self-deception, misunderstandings
2)systematic deception
3)zombies

45
Q

3 levels of skeptical doubt about the external world

A

1) Perceptual Error
2) Dreaming Argument
3) Demon Argument

46
Q

What is perceptual error?

A

Questions immediate surroundings on basis of illusions, hallucinations, etc

47
Q

What is dreaming argument? What is its rebuttal?

A

Cannot know anything on the basis of perception (as per veil of perception)
“if you can’t know that you’re not dreaming, then you can’t know anything about the real world on the basis of perception.
You can’t know you’re not dreaming.
Therefore,
You can’t know anything about the external world on the basis of perception.”
Rebuttal: “I think, therefore I am”/ “Cogito, ergo sum”

48
Q

What is the demon argument? What is its rebuttal?

A

An evil demon has created a false reality around us to trick us.
Rebuttal: “God no deceiver”

49
Q

What is meant by “I think, therefore I am”/”Cogito, ergo sum”?

A

We know we are thinking so we know we exist because I am thinking. Does not mean there is a thinker, just thinking happening.

50
Q

What is meant by “God no deceiver?” How is the idea of God defended?

A

God would not trick us (like with evil demon) as he is all just, all knowing, all powerful. He is defended by the ontological argument.

51
Q

The ontological argument

A

1) I can conceive of a perfect deity
2) A deity that exists is more perfect than a deity that does not exist
Therefore,
3) The deity that I am conceiving exists
‘To exist’ is a necessary condition for the deity to be perfect.

52
Q

Problem with behaviorism (Pain)

A

A person can be in pain without showing behavioral dispositions (i.e super-spartans) or a person can show behavioral dispositions without being in pain (i.e talented actor)

53
Q

What are the different outcomes of Pascal’s Wager?

A

(1) I believe and God exists: eternal salvation
(2) I do not believe and God exists: eternal damnation
(3) I believe and God does’t exist: no afterlife
(4) I don’t believe and God doesn’t exist: no afterlife

54
Q

Epistemic vs Practical Reasons

A

epistemic = what evidence shows
practical = it is in best interest

55
Q

The continuity of nature objection

A

-no sharp boundary between thinking vs nonthinking beings
-no boundary where matter becomes associated with a soul
-diff between creatures that speak language vs who don’t (human vs nonhuman)

56
Q

Causal overdetermination

A

every physical event has a physical cause. so every movement of my body has a physical cause. but, if a given bodily movement also has a mental cause, then the movement would be causally overdetermined.

57
Q

Occasionalism

A

when we choose to voluntarily move, God comes and moves us physically

58
Q

Pre-established Harmony

A

there are 2 universes: physical and mental/soul that develop in their own ways and do not causally impact one another. they are just both set up in a way that the mental thoughts and physical actions align with one another.

59
Q

‘What is it like’

A

qualitative aspect of consciousness

60
Q

Blockhead

A

theres a finite number of responses preprogrammed in to respond to every possible question and makes sense

61
Q

The Specter of Epiphenomanlism

A

the doctrine that one’s mind exerts no causal impact upon one’s body. (if we accept dualism, difficult to avoid this)

62
Q

Solipsism

A

the doctrine that nothing exists except myself and my own immediate mental states

63
Q

What are the three objections to Dualism?

A
  1. Dualism is too mysterious
  2. Smullyan’s Parable
  3. The Continuity of Nature
64
Q

Smullyan’s Parable

A

-seems to think dualism is absurd bc someone can exhibit all symptoms of having a mentality w/o having a mind
-cannot verify if a person has a soul or not
-assumes someone can lose a soul and retain capacity to think
-confuse metaphysical and epistemological questions

Philo 7 - Intro to Mind (1 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions