Chruchland's Argument Analysis: The Hornswoggle Problem

The Hornswoggle Problem In this paper I will examine “The Hornswoggle Problem” in which Patricia Chruchland makes some strong claims on the argument about consciousness. I agree with Chruchland’s argument on about that Chalmers argument on consciousness isn’t a good argument. my conclusion is that Chalmers makes some valid points which helps make his argument an ok one but not strong enough for it to be a good one. I will show parts of what Chalmers is saying is a valid to his argument and what Chruchland’s find to be insufficient support for these ideas. On the part of her argument that I agree with. Chruchland’s idea that all arguments from ignorance is a bad argument I agree with it. Churchland is saying that even thou we have seen sciences progresses they still haven’t progressed …show more content…
but on the other side of this line we have conscious on its own .and when we have the idea of easy problems it implies that we can understand all the phenomenal one the list above on what consider to be easy problems. But the truth is we still have unanswered questions about the ‘easy problems ‘so why is the line made at that particular spot in the first place. drawing that line based on the current ignorance is stupid because there is still research to be done in the futre so saying it dosnt go further then what you saying is like say that any research is impossible .but with science anything is possible .Chalmers makes an argument that even if we were able to answers the easy problems it wouldn’t inform us of the hard problems but what evidence would support the idea if we did understand the easy question’s we still wouldn’t understand the hard ones .so the hard problem is the ignorant part of this premise that Chalmers made .if the method to understand a problem hasn’t been made then we can’t just dismiss it right away as being unsolvable . Chalmers proper, poses the danger of inventing an exploratory chasm where there really