philosophy

Question 1

Problem of other mind’s through analogy:

Answer 1

our own intelligent behaviors are similar to our own, leading us to believe that that their case is similar to that of our own
Problem arises from overgeneralization. We may have been able to state from a few examples that this analogy holds true, but how do we know it holds true in all other cases?

Question 2

Ryle’s alternative of Logical Behaviorism:

Answer 2

To say that someone is in a given mental state is to say that they exhibit certain behaviors. (simply patterns of behavior)

Ryle tries to avoid problems of dualism by identifying mental states not with patterns of behavior, but with dispositions to behave. (inherent acts of behavior)

Question 3

The problem of knowledge of other minds:

Answer 3

EPISTEMOLOGICAL
Minds are immaterial and cannot be ordinarily observed. Can only observe your own mind, not others

Immaterial states of mind are associated with behaviors, therefore we cannot know what is actually going on in other people’s minds. How then could we know of other people’s mental states or if they even have any?

Question 4

Problem with mind-body interaction:

Answer 4

METAPHYSICAL
Mental states cause physical states and events and vice versa
Problem: if “mind” is completely different from “matter stuff”, having no shape, position in space, not subjected to any physical laws, how can mind possibly interact with body?

Question 5

Russel’s argument for analogy:

Answer 5

we can use analogy to understand how others are similar to us

We get cut and cry in pain, we see another person get cut and cry in person which could lead us to believe that they also felt the same pain we have.

Deductive reasoning, not certain