"The philosopher does not try to dictate how scientific inquiry and argument ought to be conducted. Instead he tries to enumerate the principles and practices that have contributed to good science."
Jerry A. Fodor.
The philosopher sat in from of his computer and reread that line over and over again. The philosopher's job is to question the contributions of science and it's methods, he thought and squinted at the flickering screen. Traditional philosophies of the mind can be divided into two distinct categories. Dualism and materialism. With the duelist approach the mind is observed as a nonphysical substance, such as the existence of the soul.
In the materialistic approach the mind is not distinct from the physical state like that of his son, Jack's obsession with video games. Will that be enough to argue that in the materialistic approach can be applied to anything other than abstract thought? Can this computer for instance answer me this basic question? Or does is take a mind and a body for cognitive thought flow?
Recently, the philosopher reflected as he spun the pencil on the desk next to the computer with its cyclopian eye glaring back at him unblinking, a new approach has been introduced. Oh boy, by new does that mean that he could finally publish or better yet go home and take the video games away from Jack and play them himself?
Probably not.
Functionalism. Yep, that what those stuffed shirts are going to call it the philosopher thought. Functionalism emerged out of the quagmire of philosophical reflection on the developments in artificial intelligence, computational theory, linguistics of cell phones, cybernetics and of course the fruition of psychology. The result? Skynet.
Well maybe no terminators running around grounding flighty philosophers like him but the same concept would rock his world and probably his job
"The chief drawback of dualism is in its failure to account adequately for mental causation... Dualism is also incompatible with the practice of psychology." Fodor again, the stuffed shirt.
Behaviorism has always worn an air of paradox...the idea of mental causation is deeply ingrained in our everyday language (whose? oh wait- the stuffed shirts)" And in our understanding of humanity.
Thus the strongest argument against behaviorism is that psychology has turned out to be different from behavioral predictions, since it has moved beyond it (and supper time).
Logical behaviorism is a semantic theory about the definition and meaning of mental terms. Logical behaviorism is strong in the fact by translating mental languages into the language of stimuli and response that it provides interpretations of psychological explanations in which the behavioral effects are attributed to mental causation (phew)
The central-state identity theory states that mental events are states and processes are identical with neuro-physical events in the brain and property of being in certain mental stats is identical with the property of being in a certain neuro-physiological state. HEY IS THIS ONE OF THOSE LOOP ARGUMENTS!
The philosopher decided that the scotch would be a good idea.
"Functionalism construes the concept of casual role in such a wqay that a mental state can be defined by its causal relations to other mental states."
Funstionalism is fully compatible with token physicalism, which logical behaviorism fails to accomplish. BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH!!!!!!
Yes, the Philospher's bubble had burst by this point. There would be no video games tonight.
Basically mental representation is the only functional part of the mind-body problem and though we should "acknowledge" the others we should pay special attention to this theory because it is better and won't rot your brain like marijuana and bad sex.
'nuff said. (the Thing said that.)
The Philosopher
August 4, 1992
Jerry A. Fodor.
The philosopher sat in from of his computer and reread that line over and over again. The philosopher's job is to question the contributions of science and it's methods, he thought and squinted at the flickering screen. Traditional philosophies of the mind can be divided into two distinct categories. Dualism and materialism. With the duelist approach the mind is observed as a nonphysical substance, such as the existence of the soul.
In the materialistic approach the mind is not distinct from the physical state like that of his son, Jack's obsession with video games. Will that be enough to argue that in the materialistic approach can be applied to anything other than abstract thought? Can this computer for instance answer me this basic question? Or does is take a mind and a body for cognitive thought flow?
Recently, the philosopher reflected as he spun the pencil on the desk next to the computer with its cyclopian eye glaring back at him unblinking, a new approach has been introduced. Oh boy, by new does that mean that he could finally publish or better yet go home and take the video games away from Jack and play them himself?
Probably not.
Well maybe no terminators running around grounding flighty philosophers like him but the same concept would rock his world and probably his job
"The chief drawback of dualism is in its failure to account adequately for mental causation... Dualism is also incompatible with the practice of psychology." Fodor again, the stuffed shirt.
Behaviorism has always worn an air of paradox...the idea of mental causation is deeply ingrained in our everyday language (whose? oh wait- the stuffed shirts)" And in our understanding of humanity.
Thus the strongest argument against behaviorism is that psychology has turned out to be different from behavioral predictions, since it has moved beyond it (and supper time).
Logical behaviorism is a semantic theory about the definition and meaning of mental terms. Logical behaviorism is strong in the fact by translating mental languages into the language of stimuli and response that it provides interpretations of psychological explanations in which the behavioral effects are attributed to mental causation (phew)
The central-state identity theory states that mental events are states and processes are identical with neuro-physical events in the brain and property of being in certain mental stats is identical with the property of being in a certain neuro-physiological state. HEY IS THIS ONE OF THOSE LOOP ARGUMENTS!
The philosopher decided that the scotch would be a good idea.
"Functionalism construes the concept of casual role in such a wqay that a mental state can be defined by its causal relations to other mental states."
Funstionalism is fully compatible with token physicalism, which logical behaviorism fails to accomplish. BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH!!!!!!
Yes, the Philospher's bubble had burst by this point. There would be no video games tonight.
Basically mental representation is the only functional part of the mind-body problem and though we should "acknowledge" the others we should pay special attention to this theory because it is better and won't rot your brain like marijuana and bad sex.
'nuff said. (the Thing said that.)
The Philosopher
August 4, 1992
No comments:
Post a Comment