Features Of Mental States Flashcards
what is the difference between substance and property dualism
-Substance dualism states there are two distinct substances, physical and mental. the mind cannot be reduced to or explained solely in terms of physical processes.
-Property dualism posits that there is only one type of substance, physical. Yet the physical substance has two distinct properties, physical and mental. these are irreducible to each other, however they are the same substance and entities. mental properties are emergent properties of physical processes in the brain.
How does Substance dualism differ from Property dualism in terms of Qualia
qualia is seen as properties of the mental substance, which is separate from the physical substance of the body.
What is meant by cartesian dualism
-two distinct substances which are independent of each other
-mind and body CAUSALLY interact, the will of the mind causes the body to move
-this interaction takes place in the pineal gland in the center of the brain.
-although SUBSTANTIALLY different the mind and body hold an INTIMATE UNION with each other. the mind is extended throughout the body
What is the indivisibility argument,
layout in formation
Explain the point of the argument
Ps and Cs
How it logically succeeds (using leibniz law)
put forward by descartes, intended to demonstrate that the mind is distinct from the body, they cannot be reduced to each other. this provides a basis for substance dualism.
P1. the body is divisible
P2. the mind is indivisible
C. therefore the mind and body are distinct
By using leibniz law, this argument shows that two distinct things have different properties (being divisible and being indivisible), then these are separate substances.
Explain the counter argument to the indivisibility argument that the mental is Divisible
Asserts that descartes claim that the mind is indivisible (rejects P2), C cannot logically follow.
P1. if the mind were indivisible, then the mental states and processes would be present in every part of the mind.
P2. we can observe through introspection that different mental states and processes can be localized to different parts of the mind
C. therefore the mind must be divisible to smaller parts.
Explain the counter argument to the indivisibility argument that not all Physical things are Divisible
Asserts that descartes claim that all physical things are divisible (rejects P1), C cannot logically follow.
P1. If all physical things are divisible then everything can be divided into smaller and smaller parts
P2. some physical entities cannot be divided into smaller parts, such as quantised particles
C. therefore, not all physical things are divisible.
this undermines Descartes indivisibility argument, which relies on the notion that all physical things are divisible. This is not true, therefore descartes fails to create a distinction between physical and mental substances.
Outline the conceivability argument
the point of this argument is to challenge the idea that the mind and body are identical. Descartes posits that if it is conceivable (involves no logical contradiction) then this suggests that the mind and body are distinct properties. Argument follows:
P1. If I can clearly and distinctly the nature of two things to be different, then they must be different things
P2. i can clearly and distinctly recognise the nature of the mind to be conscious and nothing more
P3. i can clearly and distinctly recognise the nature of the body to be extension and nothing more
c. therefore the mind is a distinct substance from the body
Explain the counter response to the conceivability argument, ‘what is conceivable may not be metaphysically possible)
Rejects P1.
this view asserts that our cognitive limitations prevent us from accurately imagining or conceiving of what is metaphysically possible. we may be able to imagine scenarios which are in accordance with our beliefs about the world, but these may not be metaphysically possible. for example we can conceive of objects moving themselves without cause, however this is logically impossible according to the laws of physics. therefore our ability to conceive is an unreliable indicator of metaphysical possibility.
Outline the masked man fallacy against the conceivability argument
P1. i recognise that batman is a masked crusader
P2. i recognise that bruce wayne in a millionare
c. therefore batman is not bruce wayne
This is false, as we can assume P1 and P2 are true, however the conclusion doesn’t follow. It is possible for one to have an incomplete idea of something, so it appears to be two, when in reality it is one. Descartes idea of his mind is incomplete. introspection reveals the mind is a real, of consciousness , and i am unaware of my bodies role in this. so my unawareness in my bodies involvement in consciousness does not entail that mind and body are therefore distinct.
what is descartes response to the masked man fallacy against the conceivability argument
-he already makes a clear distinction between the mind and the body, there is nothing more involved in his ideas of mind and body.
if he is right then he can be certain that the essence of both mind and body are distinct, then they would have to be different substances. therefore his argument is valid.
what is metaphysically possible tells us nothing about the real world- response to conceivability argument
apriori investigations of the mind are fruitless, as we gain no further understanding of the actuality of the situation. we instead need empirical evidence to determine whether we are in a dualist or physicalist world.
explain the view that mind without body is not conceivable
verificationist approach. Considers the conditions under which a claim can be meaningful.
Substance dualism claims that the mind is a non-physical substance, therefore is un-observable from the physical world, meaning we cannot empirically verify this. neither is this claim factually significant, thus not meeting the verificationist criteria.
Outline substance dualism and explain the counter argument that the mind depends on the brain
the evidence of neuroscience strongly supports the claim that the mind depends on the brain. Modern imaging techniques show a correlation between brain activity and conscious experience. further to this, if the brain is damaged, this will affect certain conscious activity, such as memory. this is best explained that the mind is not just casually influenced by the brain, but instead dependent on the brain.
Outline substance dualism and explain the counter argument of evolutionary history
Humans evolved from other life forms over millions of years is a physical process, and all the capacities and properties of living creatures can be explained purely in physical terms. we can observe how our mental capacities correlate to those of other creatures. this seems like a simpler explanation, strengthened using occam’s razor
outline and explain the mary argument
challenges the view that all phenomena, including mental states, can be explained in physical terms.
argument begins with mary, who has a complete physical knowledge colour vision, but has never experienced colour herself.
according to the knowledge argument there are certain aspects of conscious experience, such as the subjective experience of colour, which cannot be explained in physical processes (qualia). the argument states that even if mary knows all the physical facts about colour vision, she still lacks knowledge of what it is like to experience colour. when she finally experiences colour, she learns something new.
it follows that there is a non physical aspects of consciousness (qualia) which cannot be reduced to physical terms.
