Upload
ajayinsead03
View
136
Download
7
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
MetaphysicsU. 1
.
Metaphysics
The Nature of Reality
Consider firstly, an ‘ontological’ exercise:
RealUnreal (place the following along this continuum)
Perfection Colours Time Shadows Imagination
God Maths Morality Air Pain
Trees Music Choice Minds Thoughts
Atoms Unicorns Aliens Dreams Souls
Bodies Germs Electricity Dogs Evil
Metaphysics
The Nature of Reality
Can something be real but not exist, and vice versa?Can something be real if the senses
cannot perceive it? Which items exist in perpetuity, and which do not? Are there different ‘modes’ of existence?
RealUnreal
What qualities, if any, do the similarly grouped items share?
Metaphysics
Mind
Body
Metaphysics
Body
Mind
What constitutes ‘you’?
Physical (assoc. w.
body)
Mental (assoc. w.
mind)
Both(body & mind)
Neither
Metaphysics
Body
Mind
Hair Brain Dreams Eyes Teeth
Memories
Pain Teeth Ideas Senses
Bones Ideas Taste Fingernails
Fear
Metaphysics
Body
Mind
What constitutes ‘you’?
Physical components
Incorporeal components
Blue eyes
Values
Brown hair
Thoughts
Bone & Sinew
Feelings
Metaphysics
Body
Mind
Ostensibly, we are composed of two parts: The
Corporeal Me The
Intangible Me
Are the two actually separate in a meaningful sense?
Metaphysics
Body
Mind
Dualism Monism
2 Approaches/Views
Metaphysics
Body
Mind
Dualists argue there are two modes/levels of
existence:
A physical level, in which the corporeal body operates
And an incorporeal level, where the mind resides.
Dualism
Metaphysics
Body
Mind
Monists hold that there is only a single reality:
An entirely physical reality where mind and body are corporeal. (Physicalism)
OR An entirely mental/non- physical reality where matter does not exist. (Idealism)
Monism
The Case for Dualism – Texts for Analysis
1.
2.
Greek Mythology
Greek Humanis
m
500 BCE
An Intellectual Revolution
Rise of Dualism Against a Monist Mythology
“Men find it very hard to believe. They think that after (the soul) has left the body it no longer exists anywhere, but that it is destroyed and
dissolved on the day the man dies.”
“No, by god, I haven't. Are you really in a position to assert that?”
Cebe
Glaucon
“Haven't you realized that our soul is immortal and never destroyed?”
A Monist attitude prevailed in ancient Greece:
The Phaedo - Platonic Dualism
1. Argument Concerning
Indestructibility2. Argument Concerning
Recollection
3. Argument Concerning Opposites
The Phaedo - Platonic Dualism
1. Argument Concerning IndestructibilityP1: There are two kinds of
existence; seen and unseen;
P2: The Seen is changeable and the Unseen is unchanging;
P3: The soul is most alike and akin to the unseen;
C: Therefore, the soul is most likely unchanging, and thus indissoluble
The Phaedo - Platonic Dualism
2. Argument Concerning RecollectionP1: We cannot derive knowledge
(of absolutes) from the material world;
P2: We have knowledge (of absolutes);
P3: This knowledge must be obtained prior to our physical life;
C: Therefore, our soul must exist prior to our physical existence, and thus is separate from it.
So true Socrates, gosh you’re so wise!
The Phaedo - Platonic Dualism3. Argument Concerning
OppositesP1: All things that have opposites are generated out of their opposites
P2: Life is the opposite of Death, and vice versa
P3: The dead are generated from the living, the living are generated from the dead
C: Therefore, the souls of the dead must exist in some place out of which they come again
The Phaedo - Platonic Dualism
1. Argument Concerning
Indestructibility2. Argument Concerning
Recollection
3. Argument Concerning Opposites
The Case for Dualism – Texts for Analysis
1.
2.
Metaphysics
Body
Mind
C.17th revival of Dualism
‘Cartesian Dualism’
Metaphysics
Body
Mind
C.17th Dualist Revival
1. Argument from Doubt 2. Argument from
Indivisibility ‘Cartesian
Dualism’
1. Argument from Doubt
Cartesian Dualism
P1: I can doubt my body (physical self) exists
P2: I cannot doubt that I exist
C: Therefore, I must be distinct (a different substance) from my body
Some Responses to ‘The Cogito’How, Monsieur Descartes, does the existence of ‘thinking’ extend to the existence of an ‘I’? Better had the
conclusion been “it thinks”, as in “it is raining”.
Descartes, you scoundrel, your cogito already pre-supposes the existence of "I“ (which is doubting), and
therefore concluding with existence is logically trivial!
Descartes, old boy, I agree with Nietzsche; your process allows you to claim simply that “thinking is occurring” – you cannot attribute that thinking
to an entity.
2. Argument from Indivisibility
P1: The body is divisible into parts.
P2: The mind is not divisible into parts
C: Therefore, the mind is of a different nature to the body.
Cartesian Dualism
Metaphysics
Body
Mind
Even if we ‘suppose’ Dualism – problems arise: How does the incorporeal mind ‘control’ the
physical body?
Dualist Theories
Epiphenomenalism Interactionism
Occasionalism Parallelism
Consider the following theories regarding dualist mind-body
interaction:
How sufficiently do these theories account for the co-existence of a mental and
physical realm/reality?
Set this one to the side for
now
Property Dualism
The ONLY ‘substance’
The objective experience of ‘me’
The subjective experience of ‘me’
Property Dualism ‘Supervenience’
(pp.76-77 of Phelan)
Challenging Substance Dualism
The numerous cases of physical damage to the brain resulting in an alteration to personality and the function of the mind is a common
refutation of dualism
To view the mind as a thing which exists in addition to the body is a mistake in classification.
- My football team won the game - The team is made up of 15 members
- The team exists in addition to its members
Is it justified to speak of the mind as an ‘entity’, a ‘thing’ which exists? Consider:
Person Y did this for person X’s sake The ‘sake’ is not an entity in itself – just a term of reference
Challenging Substance Dualism
Genuine
Article
Category Error
Scientific
Evidence
MeaningfulMeaningle
ss
Thirsty
Physicalism P s
Behaviourism
Functionalism
Unverifiable statements about interior mental life are senseless.
For the behaviourist, ‘mental states’ are just descriptions of behaviour or dispositions to behave in certain ways
Pain Wincing, shrieking, hopping around, clutching the wound
Would be inclined to drink water if it were available
Problems?
- Pretence? - Paralysis? - Qualia?
Physicalism P s
Behaviourism
Functionalism
The role of the brain is purely functional:The brain responds to some stimuli (input) and processes a responses
(output)Problems?
- The Chinese Room
- Zombies & Mutants
- The Two Marys - Qualia
(Phelan pp. 87-88)
Mary Maryhttp://people.brandeis.edu/~
teuber/philsyllabus2.html
Physicalism P sUsing the Phelan textbook (pp.77 – 83) and internet
resources… (internet encyclopaedia of philosophy & Stanford university philosophy website are
good starting places)Write a brief explanation of the following Materialist
theories: 1. Reductive Materialism 2. Eliminative Materialism 3. Biological Naturalism
In addition to your ‘summary’ of the
theories, make some notes about any
problems with these theories.
Enjoyment of ice-cream
Experience of ‘redness’
Love
Thoughts about life
1. Reductive Materialism
BUT: Correlations are not explanations
2. Eliminative Materialism
Enjoyment of ice-cream
Experience of ‘redness’
Love
Thoughts about life
C-fibres firing
Stimulation of frontal
lobe
Neural transmitters
firing
Increase of
dopamine
Notions of thoughts and minds are old fashioned ‘hornswaggle’
BUT: ‘I am only what I can be proved to be through science’ =
fallacy
3. Biological Naturalism
MM
MM
‘Dualism in sheep’s
clothing’?
Physicalism P s
Idealism‘It is indeed an opinion strangely prevailing
amongst men, that houses, mountains, rivers, and in a word all sensible objects have an existence
natural or real, distinct from their being perceived by the understanding. But with how
great an assurance and acquiescence soever this principle may be entertained in the world; yet
whoever shall find in his heart to call it in question, may, if I mistake not, perceive it to
involve a manifest contradiction. ‘P1: We perceive ordinary objects (houses, mountains, etc.);
P2: We (are able to) perceive only ideas;
C: Therefore, ordinary objects are ideas.
M s
Idealism M s
Berkeley does not deny the existence of ordinary objects such as stones, trees, books,
and apples - he holds that only an immaterialist account of such objects can avoid scepticism about their existence and nature. What such
objects turn out to be, on his account, are bundles or collections of ideas.
Where is the texture of an
apple?Where is the colour of the
apple?
Where is the ‘sweetness’ of an
apple?
Where does the sound of eating an
apple exist?
Hierarchy of Ideas
Substance Dualism
Property Dualism
Monism
M s P s
M p
P s
P p
P s
Interactionism
Parallelism/Occasionalis
m
Epiphenomenalism
No exp. of interaction necessary.
M sOR
&