Mental states and physical phenomena por Gregory Bradshaw

With relation to verb choice

To See vs. To Look•“Come see it!” expresses the act of seeing

“it”, mentally, for the mental experience of having seen it.

•“Come see this painting I did.” again stresses the idea of seeing the painting for the mental experience of seeing it. In this case, specifying “this painting I did” merely indicates that the speaker doesn’t believe the listener has enough contextual information to interpret “it” in the intended manner, “this painting I did.”

• “I see what you mean.”• The first historical instance of this expression

appears in the Republic, written by the Greek philosopher Plato.

• Even though the listener doesn’t literally have a visual experience, the verb see is convenient because it involves a physical phenomena (listening) that evokes a mental state; in this case, the mental state of understanding.

• Vision is the most important of the 5 senses for humans, so using this expression implies deeper understanding than the expression, “I hear what you’re saying.”

“We looked for organic products at the store.”

This phrases emphasizes the action of looking for the organic products rather than the visual experience evoked by doing so.

It is also implicit that the speaker means [s]he looked at organic products rather than anything else.

•“Look at me!” is a solicitation for the listener to focus his or her conscious attention on a certain aspect of his or her potential visual field (that is, the speaker).

•Again, it is implied by saying this that the listener will not be looking at anything else while simultaneously looking at the speaker. This is because conscious attention is a unitary process directed by the listener’s mental state.

Primary Differences

•You can see many things simultaneously, but you can only look at one thing at any given moment, because looking is an active process of focusing your conscious attention.

•Looking implies a greater measure of intentionality, because people must decide to focus their conscious attention; however, they can see things which merely happen to pass through their visual field. Ex: relationships.

Conclusion

•Seeing involves physical phenomena evoking mental states, while looking involves mental states evoking physical phenomena. Since people are much more responsible for their mental states than for the physical phenomena they encounter, looking implies an element of culpability.

Seeing

“I am going to focusOn the puppy.”

Looking

Remember: two words are never synonymous. Consider the following distinctions:

Hear vs. ListenFeel vs. Touch

The distinction between these sets of verbs mirrors that between see and look. Taking this into consideration, we might postulate that originally there was only one word for a visual experiences either evoking or being evoked, but that the need for a distinction based upon the differences we have examined created a need for two verbs to distinguish them.

•What’s more, we can see the same distinction present in the Spanish language.

Ver vs. MirarOír vs. EscucharSentir vs. TocarGreek: Βλέπω vs. Κοιτάξτε

Hebrew: לראות vs. להסתכלChinese: 見 vs. 看Icelandic: sjá vs. lítaRussian: посмотреть vs. СмотретьArabic: انظر vs.نظرة

Telugu and Finnish are exceptions: చూ�డం�డి and katso are used for both verbs, respectively.

Further Philosophical Considerations

•This examination highlights the ever present dichotomy between mind and body. The question remains: which came first, matter or mind?

Are mental states the result of complex physical phenomena interacting with one another

•Or do physical manifestations result from [a] conscious mind[s]?

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” Gospel of John 1:1

•Or is it possible that collisions between light particles create the illusion of a dichotomy between body and mind?