Combining Texts

Ideas for 'The Epistemology of Modality', 'Philosophy of Mind' and 'Modal Logics and Philosophy'

unexpand these ideas     |    start again     |     choose another area for these texts

display all the ideas for this combination of texts


4 ideas

15. Nature of Minds / A. Nature of Mind / 1. Mind / c. Features of mind
Mind is basically qualities and intentionality, but how do they connect? [Kim]
     Full Idea: It is generally held that there are two broad categories of mental phenomena - qualitative states and intentional states (but what do they have in common?).
     From: Jaegwon Kim (Philosophy of Mind [1996], p. 23)
     A reaction: I am happy to accept this orthodox modern analysis. Putting it more simply: minds exist to enable experience and thought. I judge a priori that the two aspects are not separate. Qualia exist to serve thought, and qualia are necessary for thought.
15. Nature of Minds / A. Nature of Mind / 3. Mental Causation
Mind is only interesting if it has causal powers [Kim]
     Full Idea: Unless mental properties have causal powers, there would be little point in worrying about them.
     From: Jaegwon Kim (Philosophy of Mind [1996], p.118)
     A reaction: This doesn't, on its own, actually rule out epiphenomenalism, but it does show why it barely qualifies as a serious theory. One might, in fact, say that we simply can't worry about something which has no causal powers. The powers might not be physical…
Experiment requires mental causation [Kim]
     Full Idea: Experimentation presupposes mental-to-physical causation and is impossible without it.
     From: Jaegwon Kim (Philosophy of Mind [1996], p.128)
     A reaction: So an epiphenomenalist can't do experiments? Kim implies that there is some special mental assessment of the feedback from physical events, but presumably a robot or a zombie could do experiments. Spiders do experiments.
Beliefs cause other beliefs [Kim]
     Full Idea: A brief reflection makes it evident that most of our beliefs are generated by other beliefs we hold, and "generation" here could only mean causal generation.
     From: Jaegwon Kim (Philosophy of Mind [1996], p.128)
     A reaction: This seems right, and yet implies an uncomfortable determinism, as if all our beliefs just happened to us. I don't claim proper free will, but I do say there is an element in belief formation which is just caused by bunches of beliefs. Call it character.