Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
41 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
Why is the mind important? |
Relevant in other philosophical pursuits and other areas of life e.g. knowing, learning, experiences, interests and preferences. |
|
|
What are paradigms? |
Most obvious and least controversial examples of the phenomena we want to explain. |
|
|
Examples of paradigm cases of who has a mind? |
Entities with minds e.g. adult humans, entities lacking minds e.g. inanimate objects. What about babies, animals, robots etc.? |
|
|
Examples of paradigm cases of what does the mind do? |
Mental activities (believing, wanting, wishing, imagining, seeing and feeling) Non-mental activities (Sweating, breathing, digesting, urinating etc.) |
|
|
Definition of the mind-body problem? |
The issue of how mental activities and non-mental activities are related. How are mind and body related? What is the relationship between the mental and the physical? |
|
|
What was Descartes' view on the mind-body problem? |
Minds are thinking things that are not extended (i.e. don't take up space, not physical) and bodies are non-thinking things that are extended. Mind and bodies are two radically different kind of things. |
|
|
What is Descartes' substance dualism? |
The idea that the world is made up of two distinct things, physical and mental. |
|
|
What are four opposing ontological views on substances? |
Dualism, idealism, physicalism, monism. |
|
|
What is Dualism? |
There are two different kinds of things in the world, physical and mental. Everything that exists is either one or the other, it can't be both. |
|
|
What is the Modal Argument for Dualism? |
P1: I can conceive of my mind existing without a physical body existing. Is this possible? P2: If I can conceive of something, it must therefore be possible. Can you conceive of impossible things? P3: It is possible for my mind to exist without any physical body existing. P4: If it is possible for my mind to exist without any physical body existing then my mind is not identical to any physical body. C: My mind is a thing distinct from any physical body. |
|
|
Why reject dualism? |
If the dualist is correct, then how do we move? Our brains. Therefore there must be some connection between the two things. |
|
|
What is the argument from Elisabeth which argues for an interaction in dualism? |
P1: If dualism is true, then bodies are extended and minds are not. P2: Extended things cannot causally interact with things that are not extended. P3: If dualism is true, then bodies cannot causally interact with minds. P4: Bodies and minds can causally interact. C: Dualism is not true. |
|
|
Definitions for Epiphenomenalism, occasionalism, parallelism? |
E: The body causally impacts the mind, but the mind doesn't causally impact the body. O: God intervenes to keep the mental and physical in line anytime there is a need for one of these acts. P: God set up the universe to that the mental and physical stay separate. |
|
|
What is universal idealism? |
The view that nothing is mind-independent. |
|
|
What is Solipsism and who rejected it? |
Solipsism is the idea that the only thing that exists are things that are known. Therefore, the only thing that exists is my own mind and its activities. Berkeley rejected the idea of solipsism. |
|
|
On what grounds did Berkeley reject Solipsism? |
Believed that S couldn't explain what caused the activities in his mind. (Why those things, what is causing you to think you can hear my voice right now?). However, he didn't believe that anything physical was the cause of his mental activities. And he was an idealist about everything. |
|
|
What is Berkeley's master argument for idealism? |
P1: If idealism is false, then it is possible for something to exist without any mind existing. P2: If something is possible, then i must therefore be able to conceive of it. P3: I cannot conceive of a thing existing without conceiving. P4: Whenever I conceive of something, my mind exists. P5: Therefore, I cannot conceive of something existing without any mind existing. P6: Therefore, it is not possible for something to exist without any mind existing. C: Idealism is true. |
|
|
What is physicalism? |
The view that everything that exists is a physical thing. ( If physicalism is true, then all of these mental activities (believing, wanting, wishing) are ultimately some kind of physical activity. |
|
|
What is the Knowledge argument about physicalism? |
P1: If physicalism is true, then Mary knows everything there is to know about colour vision. (P will claim that there is more to knowing what its like than knowing facts. I know how to ride a bike, i'm just not good at it.) P2: Mary does not know everything there is to know about colour vision. (P will claim that there is nothing Mary doesn't know.) C: Physicalism is false. |
|
|
What is Jackson's Mary? |
Paradigm case/thought experiment. Mary knows everything there is to know about seeing the colour red but she has never seen red. Therefore, does Mary know what it is like to see red? If we let her out of her black and white room will she learn something? If she learns something aren't there some non-physical features of the world? |
|
|
What is the argument for Strong AI? |
P1: I can conceive of genuine artificial intelligence. P2: If i can conceive of something it must therefore be possible. C: Genuine artificial intelligence is possible. |
|
|
What is strong AI and weak AI? |
Strong AI: believe that a machine could be intelligence, Could be true even if no machines that actually exist are intelligent. Weak AI: could only every simulate intelligence. |
|
|
What is Searle's Chinese room thought experiment? |
A computer is placed in a room, and fed chinese words (input), it uses a computer program to create other Chinese words (output). It does it so convincingly that it can convince a Chinese person that it is a native speaker. It is strong AI or weak AI? |
|
|
What is the Chinese room argument? |
P1: If strong AI, then any system or entity that runs the so-called Chinese program thereby understands Chinese. P2: Searle can run the so-called Chinese program without understanding Chinese. P3: There is at least one system or entity that runs the Chinese program without thereby understanding Chinese. C: Strong AI is false. It is not actually understanding Chinese same as Searle if he was doing the same thing |
|
|
What are turing machines and what are their significance for us? |
Finite-state machines, only in one state at a time. Programmed with a rule-book, tells them how to manipulate symbols to transition from state to state. Follows programmed rules to produce outputs given its inputs. Came up with a test to determine whether they were acting intelligently or just simulating? |
|
|
What is the Turing Test? |
If a human cannot tell the difference between a machine and other humans by engaging them in conversation then the machine passes the turing test. And if you think this test is not suitable then you must believe that there is some difference between humans and machines. |
|
|
What is the silicon chip replacement argument? |
If all your neurons were gradually replaced with artificial neurons would there be any change in you mental life and at what point? |
|
|
Silicon chip argument for Strong AI? |
P1: If intelligent computers are possible, then strong AI is true. P2: It is possible that we could develop microchips which send and receive information exactly as neutrons do? (Can we?) P3: It is possible that we could replace a human's neurones with these microchips. (can we?) P4: If an intelligent humans are replaced, there would be no change to the intelligence of that human. P5: We could in principle create a computer as intelligent as human. C: Strong AI is true. |
|
|
What is functionalism? |
What makes a mental state the state that it is, what is the functional role it has? Characterised by what they do rather than what they are made of. |
|
|
What is identity theory? |
A form of physicalism. Theory that every mental state is identical with some brain state. |
|
|
What are two types of identity? |
Type: Every type of mental state is identical with some type of physical state. Token: Every token of mental state is identical with some token physical state. "Tut, tut. It looks like rain" 6 word tokens. 5 word types. (noun, onomatopoeia etc.) |
|
|
What are three characteristics important for a mental state (according to functionalists)? |
(1) the inputs, (2) the transitions and relations to other states (3) the outputs. |
|
|
What is multiple realisability? |
The idea that the same type of mental state can be reproduced/realised in different types of physical states as it is a simple input-process-output system. Token identity might be true, but makes type identity false as it claims that a type of mental state is identical to another type of physical state so can't be reproduced on multiple levels. |
|
|
What is a philosophical zombie? |
A functionalist duplicate of a human person who has no mental qualities. |
|
|
What is the philosophical argument against functionalism? |
P1: If functionalism is true, then it is impossible for there to be two being exactly alike functionally but different in that only one of them is a zombie. P2: It is conceivable that two beings are alike functionally but only one of them is a zombie. (is this conceivable?) P3: If something is conceivable then it is possible. (usual premise) C: Functionalism is false. |
|
|
What is eliminativisim? |
eliminativism about something is the position that it doesn't exist and reference to it should be eliminated. You could be an eliminativist about the mind or just some of the things it supposedly does. |
|
|
What is eliminative materialism: |
The idea that nothing that exists is mental. Argues that everything that we think we know about the mind is just a theory and taught to us since childhood. |
|
|
What is an argument for eliminativism? |
P1: E is true if and only if we should not accept that mental entities exist. P2: We should accept that the entities a theory posits exist if an only it is a good theory. P3: Folk psychology is a theory that posits mental entities. P4: Folk psychology is not a good theory. (if we reject this we have an argument for the other conclusion.) P5: We should not accept that entities exist. C: Eliminativism is true. |
|
|
What is an argument against eliminativism? |
P1: E is true and only if we should not accept that mental entities exist. P2: We should accept that the entities a theory posits if it is a good theory. P3: Folk psychology is a theory that posits that mental entities exist. P4: Folk psychology is a good theory. P5: We should accept that mental entities exist. C: Eliminativism is false. |
|
|
Why is it important that folk psychology is a good theory? |
Needs to be good enough that we should accept the existence of the mental entities that is posits. Can the theory make successful explanations and predictions, generate fruitful research questions etc? |
|
|
What is folk psychology? |
Is a human capacity to explain and predict the behavior and mental state of other people. Processes and items encountered in daily life such as pain, pleasure, excitement, and anxiety use common linguistic terms as opposed to technical or scientific jargon. |
