Combining Philosophers

All the ideas for H.Putnam/P.Oppenheim, Anon (Tor) and Churchland / Churchland

unexpand these ideas     |    start again     |     specify just one area for these philosophers


7 ideas

14. Science / D. Explanation / 2. Types of Explanation / j. Explanations by reduction
Six reduction levels: groups, lives, cells, molecules, atoms, particles [Putnam/Oppenheim, by Watson]
     Full Idea: There are six 'reductive levels' in science: social groups, (multicellular) living things, cells, molecules, atoms, and elementary particles.
     From: report of H.Putnam/P.Oppenheim (Unity of Science as a Working Hypothesis [1958]) by Peter Watson - Convergence 10 'Intro'
     A reaction: I have the impression that fields are seen as more fundamental that elementary particles. What is the status of the 'laws' that are supposed to govern these things? What is the status of space and time within this picture?
15. Nature of Minds / B. Features of Minds / 3. Privacy
A full neural account of qualia will give new epistemic access to them, beyond private experience [Churchlands]
     Full Idea: When the hidden neurophysiological structure of qualia (if there is any) gets revealed by unfolding research, then we will automatically gain a new epistemic access to qualia, beyond each person's native and exclusive capacity for internal discrimination.
     From: Churchland / Churchland (Recent Work on Consciousness [1997])
     A reaction: Carefully phrased and hard to deny, but something is impenetrable. What experience does an insect have when it encounters ultra-violet light? Nothing remotely interesting about their qualia is likely to emerge from the study of insect brains.
15. Nature of Minds / B. Features of Minds / 5. Qualia / c. Explaining qualia
It is question-begging to assume that qualia are totally simple, hence irreducible [Churchlands]
     Full Idea: One of the crucial premises of the antireductionists - concerning the intrinsic, nonrelational, metaphysical simplicity of our sensory qualia - is a question-begging and unsupported assumption.
     From: Churchland / Churchland (Recent Work on Consciousness [1997])
     A reaction: This is a key point for reductionists, with emphasis on the sheer numbers of connections involved in a simple quale (I estimate a billion involved in one small patch of red).
The qualia Hard Problem is easy, in comparison with the co-ordination of mental states [Churchlands]
     Full Idea: The so-called Hard Problem (of qualia) appears to be one of the easiest, in comparison with the problems of short-term memory, fluid and directable attention, the awake state vs sleep, and the unity of consciousness.
     From: Churchland / Churchland (Recent Work on Consciousness [1997])
     A reaction: Most of their version of the Hard Problems centre on personal identity, and the centralised co-ordination of mental events. I am inclined to agree with them. Worriers about qualia should think more about the complexity of systems of neurons.
24. Political Theory / A. Basis of a State / 1. A People / a. Human distinctiveness
God made man in his own image [Anon (Tor)]
     Full Idea: And God said, let us make man in our image, after our likeness.
     From: Anon (Tor) (01: Book of Genesis [c.750 BCE], 1.26)
     A reaction: Since we are obviously not identical in every way with God, we can presumably choose in which respects we think of ourselves as being like Him. Reason, understanding, beauty, goodness, consciousness? A troublesome verse, challenged by Darwin.
26. Natural Theory / B. Natural Kinds / 5. Reference to Natural Kinds
The names of all the types of creature were given forever by Adam [Anon (Tor)]
     Full Idea: Whatsoever Adam called any living creature, the same is its name. And Adam called all the beasts by their names, and all the fowls of the air, and all the cattle of the field.
     From: Anon (Tor) (01: Book of Genesis [c.750 BCE], 02:20)
28. God / A. Divine Nature / 6. Divine Morality / b. Euthyphro question
And God saw the light, that it was good [Anon (Tor)]
     Full Idea: And God saw the light, that it was good.
     From: Anon (Tor) (01: Book of Genesis [c.750 BCE], 01.04)
     A reaction: The text seems to suggest that God did not decide that it was good, but that it conformed to a standard of goodness.