Lecture 4: Identity Theory Flashcards
the main argument for identity theory
- Sensations are about inner causes of behaviour (agrees with CD, disagrees with LB)
- These inner causes are physical (disagrees with CD)
- These inner causes are identical to brain processes
Smart’s understanding of the Cartesian Dualist argument
P1: When I make such a report, I must be reporting on something
P2: But there is nothing physical which I could be reporting since the after-image doesn’t enjoy determinant spatiotemporal existence
C1: So, I must be reporting on something non-physical
C2: so, sensations/qualitative states are non-physical and must be states of a CM
Smart’s reason for rejecting Cartesian Dualism
- There is a flaw in P2 of the Dualist account
- Physical explanations follow Ockham’s razor (the simplest explanation is the most likely to be correct)
redescription strategy
redescribing the correlated events in terms of their constituent or component elements or terms of the microscopic nature of a macroscopic entity. Then we appeal to further lawlike correlations of a more general nature
why isn’t the redescription strategy available to the Dualist?
because it assumes we’re dealing with physical phenomena that can be described in more basic terms
identification strategy
involves treating phenomena as two different ways of describing the same event
why isn’t the Identification strategy available to the Dualist?
because they are committed to regarding mental states as non-physical
what strategy does Smart propose we should use?
we should use the identification strategy to account for the apparent lawlike correlations between mental states and physical brain states
what does the identification strategy involve for Smart?
viewing sensations as a sort of brain process
Leibniz’s Law (The Law of the Indiscernibility of Identicals)
if a and b are identical, then for all properties P, a has a property P if and only if b has a property P
Objection 7 to identity theory (commits the same error as Swimburne)
P1: I can conceive of sensations occurring without brain activity.
P2: I cannot conceive of brain processes occurring without brain activity.
C: Sensations cannot be identical to brain processes.
Objection 7 to identity theory as a violation of Leibniz’s Law
P1: Sensation(s) has the property of being conceivable by me as occurring in the absence of brain activity.
P2: Brain process (b) does not have the property of being conceivable by me as occurring in the absence of brain activity.
C: By LL, it is not the case that [sensation(s) = brain-process(b)].
why is objection 7 a violation of Leibniz’s law?
the problem is that the truth of P2 depends on whether a is identical to b. If a is, then P2 is false
objection 4 to identity theory
sensations and brain processes cannot be identical because they cannot possess all the same properties
Smart’s response to objection 4
the objection misrepresents what the identity theorist is claiming. The objection assumes that the proposed identity is between the after-image and the brain process. It is the experience of an after-image that is to be identified with the BP. Once we correctly represent the IT, there is no categorical incompatibility between sensations and brain processes