Combining Texts

Ideas for 'Croce and Collingwood', 'Papancasudani' and 'Philosophical Investigations'

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

display all the ideas for this combination of texts


5 ideas

15. Nature of Minds / A. Nature of Mind / 4. Other Minds / c. Knowing other minds
I don't have the opinion that people have minds; I just treat them as such [Wittgenstein]
     Full Idea: My attitude towards him is an attitude towards a soul. I am not of the 'opinion' that he has a soul.
     From: Ludwig Wittgenstein (Philosophical Investigations [1952], II.iv)
     A reaction: This seems to be precisely Dennett's 'intentional stance', where we conjure up minds in things like chess-playing computers, irrespective of whether we believe they are conscious.
15. Nature of Minds / A. Nature of Mind / 4. Other Minds / d. Other minds by analogy
It is irresponsible to generalise from my own case of pain to other people's [Wittgenstein]
     Full Idea: If I say of myself that it is only from my own case that I know what the word 'pain' means - must I not say the same of other people too? And how can I generalise from the one case so irresponsibly?
     From: Ludwig Wittgenstein (Philosophical Investigations [1952], §293)
     A reaction: This is the best known objection to Mill's Argument from Analogy for other minds. It appears to be induction from a single instance. The better approach seems to be ABduction (best explanation), in which my own case is just some evidence.
To imagine another's pain by my own, I must imagine a pain I don't feel, by one I do feel [Wittgenstein]
     Full Idea: If one has to imagine someone else's pain on the model of one's own, this is none too easy a thing to do: for I have to imagine pain which I do not feel on the model of pain which I do not feel.
     From: Ludwig Wittgenstein (Philosophical Investigations [1952], §302)
     A reaction: I just don't feel a deep problem here. Wittgenstein didn't know about mirror neurons, which trigger in me a reaction like the one causing your behaviour.
15. Nature of Minds / B. Features of Minds / 3. Privacy
If a lion could talk, we could not understand him [Wittgenstein]
     Full Idea: If a lion could talk, we could not understand him.
     From: Ludwig Wittgenstein (Philosophical Investigations [1952], II.xi)
     A reaction: How does he know these things?! We could at least know whether they talked or merely grunted, by studying their correlated behaviour. Cf. dolphins. I think he is wrong. All talk is understandable to a degree, even God's.
If a lion could talk, it would be nothing like other lions [Dennett on Wittgenstein]
     Full Idea: I think that if a lion could talk, that lion would have a mind so different from the general run of lion minds, that although we could understand him just fine, we would learn little about ordinary lions from him.
     From: comment on Ludwig Wittgenstein (Philosophical Investigations [1952], II.xi) by Daniel C. Dennett - Consciousness Explained 14.2
     A reaction: This is rather more sensible than Wittgenstein's famous enigmatic utterance.