My basic theory of mind-brain relationship is presented here as five short ideas that have been jotted down within a period of about 4 years, the first being the latest one. The experience of consciousness and mind is so different from the functions of the brain that so far no scientific theory is capable of accounting for the missing subjectivity within the brain. In my theory, Mind is the dominant factor, and not the brain. Mind uses the functions of the brain to express itself.
Historical Antecedents The identity theory as I understand it here goes back to U. Place and Herbert Feigl in the s. Place Place and H. Nevertheless mention should be made of suggestions by Rudolf Carnapp.
Reichenbach and M. Reichenbach said that mental events can be identified by the corresponding stimuli and responses much as the possibly unknown internal state of a photo-electric cell can be identified by the Mind-brain correlation thesis light falling on it and response electric current flowing from it.
In both cases the internal states can be physical states. However Carnap did regard the identity as a linguistic recommendation rather than as asserting a question of fact. Avowals were thought of as mere pieces of behaviour, as if saying that one had a pain was just doing a sophisticated sort of wince.
Smart Mind-brain correlation thesis that the hypotheticals would ultimately be explained by neuroscience and cybernetics. They would dangle from the nomological net of physical science and should strike one as implausible excrescences on the fair face of science.
The Nature of the Identity Theory Place spoke of constitution rather than of identity. We find out whether this is a table in a different way from the way in which we find out that it is an old packing case.
|MIND-BRAIN IDENTITY THEORY (THEORIES OF MIND)||How are the mind and brain related? Several different but overlapping kinds of relationship obtaining between mind and brain are evident in recent literature:|
|Hyponoetics - Essay: Mind and Brain Relationship||Robb and John F.|
|Historical Antecedents The identity theory as I understand it here goes back to U.|
|The Relationship Between the Mind and the Brain||The President lives in the Whitehouse.|
We find out whether a thing is lightning by looking and that it is a motion of electric charges by theory and experiment. This does not prevent the table being identical to the old packing case and the perceived lightning being nothing other than an electric discharge.
Feigl and Smart put the matter more in terms of the distinction between meaning and reference. Of course these expressions could be construed as referring to different things, different sequences of temporal stages of Venus, but not necessarily or most naturally so.
There did seem to be a tendency among philosophers to have thought that identity statements needed to be necessary and a priori truths. We had to find out that the identity holds.
Aristotle, after all, thought that the brain was for cooling the blood. Descartes thought that consciousness is immaterial.
It was sometimes objected that sensation statements are incorrigible whereas statements about brains are corrigible. The inference was made that there must be something different about sensations. Place, influenced by Martin, was able to explain the relative incorrigibility of sensation statements by their low claims: One should deny anything other than a relative incorrigibility Place As remarked above, Place preferred to express the theory by the notion of constitution, whereas Smart preferred to make prominent the notion of identity as it occurs in the axioms of identity in logic.
So Smart had to say that if sensation X is identical to brain process Y then if Y is between my ears and is straight or circular absurdly to oversimplify then the sensation X is between my ears and is straight or circular. Of course it is not presented to us as such in experience.
Perhaps only the neuroscientist could know that it is straight or circular. The professor of anatomy might be identical with the dean of the medical school. A visitor might know that the professor hiccups in lectures but not know that the dean hiccups in lectures.
Phenomenal Properties and Topic-Neutral Analyses Someone might object that the dean of the medical school does not qua dean hiccup in lectures. Qua dean he goes to meetings with the vice-chancellor.
This is not to the point but there is a point behind it. This is that the property of being the professor of anatomy is not identical with the property of being the dean of the medical school. The question might be asked, that even if sensations are identical with brain processes, are there not introspected non-physical properties of sensations that are not identical with properties of brain processes?
How would a physicalist identity theorist deal with this? If you overheard only these words in a conversation you would not be able to tell whether the conversation was one of mathematics, physics, geology, history, theology, or any other subject.
Thus to say that a sensation is caused by lightning or the presence of a cabbage before my eyes leaves it open as to whether the sensation is non-physical as the dualist believes or is physical as the materialist believes.
This sentence also is neutral as to whether the properties of the sensation are physical or whether some of them are irreducibly psychical. To see how this idea can be applied to the present purpose let us consider the following example.
Suppose that I have a yellow, green and purple striped mental image. That is I would see or seem to see, for example, a flag or an array of lamps which is green, yellow and purple striped.
Suppose also, as seems plausible, that there is nothing yellow, green and purple striped in the brain. Thus it is important for identity theorists to say as indeed they have done that sense data and images are not part of the furniture of the world.The latter descriptions use intentional predicates, but because of indeterminacy of translation and of interpretation, these predicates do not occur in law statements.
It follows that mind-brain identities can occur only on the level of individual (token) events. For centuries, philosophers and scientist have been trying to solve the problem of the mind-body (brain).
The most prolific of the minds has wandered sleeplessly, trying to solve the mind-brain problem, yet, the mysteries behind our skulls remain hidden.
This paper is an attempt to address the causality problem of the mind and the brain. For centuries, philosophers and scientist have been trying to solve the problem of the mind-body (brain). The most prolific of the minds has wandered sleeplessly, trying to solve the mind-brain problem, yet, the mysteries behind our skulls remain hidden.
This paper is an attempt to address the causality problem of the mind and the brain. The Relationship Between the Mind and the Brain Thomas Ash. Many theories have been put forward to explain the relationship between what we call your mind (defined as the conscious thinking 'you' which experiences your thoughts) and your brain.
Thesis Statement. argumentative. compare and contrast. log in × scroll to top. Mind Body Problem Essay Examples.
17 total results. A Literary Analysis of the Sixth Meditation by Descartes. 1, words. 3 pages. Eliminative Materialism and the Mind-Body Problem.
1, words. 3 pages. A Critique on Thomas Nagel's What it Is Like to Be a Bat.
The Relationship Between the Mind and the Brain Thomas Ash. Many theories have been put forward to explain the relationship between what we call your mind (defined as the conscious thinking 'you' which experiences your thoughts) and your brain. Mind-Brain Correlation Thesis: For each type M of mental event that occurs to an organism o, there exists a brain state of kind B (M's "neural correlate" or "substrate") such that M occurs to o at time t if and only if B occurs to o at t. Lawful regularities, not mere accidental co-occurences, we suppose. The mind–body problem is a philosophical problem concerning the relationship between thought and consciousness in the human mind and the brain as part of the physical body. is the thesis of body–mind interaction.
I. Mind-Brain Correlations [The Mind-brain correlation thesis]: For each type M of mental event that occurs to an organism o, there exists a brain state of kind B (M's "neural correlate" or "substate") such that M occurs to o at time t if and only if B occurs to o at t.