The Representational Theory Of Mind

In David M. Armstrong’s “The Nature of Mind”, Armstrong praises the field of science and seeks to put the concept of mind into terms that agree with science’s definition of minds. His interest is in the physico-chemical, materialist view of man. Armstrong considers science to be the authority over other disciplines because of its reliability and result in consensus over disputed questions.

It involves having an interpretation, or meaning attached to those symbols” (Searle, p. 679). He is asserting in the same way the man cannot gain an understanding of Chinese by going through a computer program, computers fundamentally cannot gain total understanding of Chinese. Further more, Searle stresses that the computer does not have a mental state due to having a lack of meaning associated with

About a century after Descartes voiced his theories about the mind and the human body, La Mettrie responded with a controversial standpoint. In his Man a Machine, La Mettrie states how humans don’t exhibit any traits that differentiate them between animals or more importantly machine. For this essay’s purpose, the importance comes from looking at the relationship between body and mind. In La Mettrie’s first paragraphs he mentions his contrasting belief to the Cartesian idea of this

The important problems of the mind module are: how do we understand the nature of mental events, their relation to the physical world and physical events and fundamentally the problems with other minds. This essay essentially serves to evaluate whether the Zombie argument against Cartesian Dualism is sound by: criticising the Zombie argument through analysing the validity of each premise of the Zombie argument, defending the Zombie argument against one of its objections and responses from the Cartesian Argument by analogy. This essay will offer reasons to believe the Zombie argument by contrasting it with the strengths and weaknesses of the Cartesian

Nothing in the world is more mysterious than the human mind but without the brain how do you have a mind? The brain sends and receives information by electrical impulses around the human body allowing us to see, move, feel, hear and think. If the brain is removed from the human body these impulses will cease, thus there will be no mind. Philosophers like Place, Smart, and Armstrong support this claim through the notion of identify theory and type physicalism. Brain and mind identity is a very controversial topic with some philosophers arguing that because people can have knowledge of a specific mental state without being affected in the physical state, mind and the brain may well be different. However with significant breakthroughs in neuroscience in the last century, such as Dr. Penfield’s Montreal procedure it is safe to say that the brain has direct control over the mind thus the two being in/distinguishable.

The mind is perhaps the most fascinating part of the human body due to its complexity and ability to rationalize. In essence, the mind-body problem studies the relation of the mind to the body, and states that each human being seems to embody two unique and somewhat contradictory natures. Each human contains both a nature of matter and physicality, just like any other object that contains atoms in the universe. However, mankind also is constituted of something beyond materialism, which includes its ability to rationalize and be self-aware. This would imply that mankind is not simply another member of the world of matter because some of its most distinctive features cannot be accounted for in this manner. There are obvious differences between physical and mental properties. Physical properties are publically accessible, and have weight, texture, and are made of matter. Mental properties are not publically accessible, and have phenomenological texture and intentionality (Stewart, Blocker, Petrik, 2013). This is challenging to philosophers, because man cannot be categorized as a material or immaterial object, but rather a combination of both mind and body (Stewart, Blocker, Petrik, 2013). Man embodies mind-body dualism, meaning he is a blend of both mind and matter (Stewart, Blocker, Petrick, 2013). The mind-body problem creates conflict among philosophers, especially when analyzing physicalism in its defense. This paper outlines sound

The problem of other minds, in philosophy, addresses the issue of finding justification for the existence of minds other than one’s own. The issue is one that logically and chronologically follows the resolution of whether the individual mind truly exists, for if an individual admits to being, or at least having, a mind, then the question of whether consciousness exists in other beings shortly follows. Put simply, the problem states: if one can only observe the behavior of others, and if one cannot prove the actuality of any thoughts other than one’s own, then how can one know that others have minds? That is, the presence of complex behavior does not provide proof of mentality. While the answer seems simple if examined superficially, the proof and reasoning remains difficult to articulate. It is reasonable to assume that because I have a thinking mind—that which reasons, feels, remembers, and is self-aware—then the human beings surrounding me must surely have the same; however, philosophy calls in to question the reality of “ingenious automata,” or mechanical computers made to imitate a human beings (Russell 248). Could the beings surround one’s self be humans with similar human minds, or could they be humanoid robots created to act and react as humans would? This possible, although admittedly improbable, suggestion forces one to contemplate and legitimize the idea of personhood as it applies to beings other than one’s self.

In this paper, I will argue that the Mind-Brain Identity Theory provides sufficient grounds to accept Epicurus’ argument for death being annihilation. I will argue my thesis by referring to Peter Carruthers’ The Mind Is the Brain to establish that one’s mental states are in fact brain states and will also refer to Epicurus’ Death is Nothing to Us. Next, I will explain that if one accepts the Identity Theory then one should also accept, as Epicurus argues, that death should not be feared, for it is annihilation. I will conclude by refuting objections to the Identity Theory and the Epicurean argument on death.

The mind and body problem is a conundrum that argues the explanation of how mental

Scientists have discovered that bonobos, chimpanzees, orangutans, and gorillas, do in fact posses many aspects of the theory of mind. The theory of mind was something scientists thought was unique to humans. These great apes can identify the goals and intentions that were behind actions of someone else, and they can also identify features of the environment that others can know about or see. There is one thing apes can’t seem to wrap their fingers around, which is understanding others false belief. One experiment they did was showing the apes a video of humans dressed like apes. In one scene of the video the human actor was trying to search for a stone that he saw King Kong hide within one of two boxes. However, the actor went away, and King

Many arguments in the philosophy of the mind have been made for and against, whether or not the mind and the brain are the same entity. The mind-brain identity theory is the view that the mind is the brain and that mental states are brain states (Mandik 77). Therefore, we can identify sensations and other mental processes with physical brain processes (Blutner 4). I argue, that the mind is not identical to the brain, and the conceivable idea of zombies, as well as the multiple realizability argument, can disprove this theory.

It has been said that what distinguishes humans from other animals is metacognition-- the ability to think about thinking. Thinking and consciousness are two topics that Descartes emphasizes heavily in his Meditations on First Philosophy. On the topic of thinking, Descartes asks, “But what then am I? A thing that thinks. What is that? A thing that doubts, understands, affirms, denies, wills, refuses, and that also imagines and senses…Indeed it is no small matter if all of these things belong to me. But why should they not belong to me?” (Descartes, 20). This example of metacognition provides insight into the content of thinking, which can be applied in a variety of ways. By analyzing the way that people think about thinking, it becomes possible to explore an important feature of the human experience. In particular, this aspect of the Cartesian approach to thinking is useful when considering the impact of mental illness on mental processing and thinking.

The mind-body is made up of physical and mental properties. The physical properties “have a certain weight, shape, etc., and are publicly accessible” (Osmundsen, 2016), whereas, with the mental properties “there is a raw qualitative feel to have a mental state” (Osmundsen, 2016). These two properties cause many problems within human life, however there are five major problems arising about the mind and body. The majority of people do not put enough thought into these problems, but they are very important to understand. This paper will include those five different complications with the mind and body, give an argument for dualism, give a response for the argument, and include an opinion for the argument that is stronger and why it is stronger.

The human body itself is a complex organism. The most important organ that makes us function to survive on earth is the brain. On the other hand, our mind is a psychological center which functions based on our cognitive abilities. Our brain consist of cerebrum which is located in the upper portion of the skull. It is here where the bucket of human intelligence lies. Our skills of writing, reading, speaking, perception or any other sensory function processes in this part of the brain; including the voluntary actions. This is why the cerebrum is one of the most essential part for our living. Now, this seems that our brain controls us, therefore are we robots then? Here is when our mind comes to play. Our mind makes an image based on our thoughts which is then displayed in our human nature with the help of the brain.

The simplest example of this point, which is critical for an understanding of how languages function as representational systems, is the famous traffic lights example.