2.1 Cartesian Dualism: Ms <---> Nonphysical ubstance that interacts with the body. Body and mind and
different substances. Conclusion: Descartes deductive arguments are valid but unsound Empirically
speaking thereis no immaterial substance. Thus Cartesian theory asi stands is not viable.
Logical Behaviorism behavioral dispositions MS <---> BhS. where BhS are behavioral dispositions. C/E
'Perfect pretender Super Spartans. Qualitative content (qualia the unique pr ivate feeling
mental states). Conclusion: Logical Behaviorismi materialist theory because doesn't postulate the
translated into behavioral dispositions. But doesn't account for the quality of mental states: and
translati ion between behavior and mental states that it envisions cannot be performed.
Identity Theory: MS <-=-> BrS. where BrS the passing of elec tro/chemical signals from cell to cell. C/E
"Nagel's Bat' and "Lewis Pained Martian. (You must be able grasp and understand these
counter examples and derive conclusions). Conclusion: Identity theory superior to behaviorism
because explain mental causation But there reason doubt that mental states and identical
to brain states because brain states are knowable by empirical investigation while mental states are
not. Moreover having brain doesn' seem to be necessary condition for having mind (since an
alien or computer could have mind).
Conscious exper rience: Nagel's bat experiment shows that menta states have this cha racteristic that
can be felt from the inside from first person POV But physical propert lies can all be known from the
outside from a third person POV Since complete knowledge of physical properties cannot yield
knowledge of mental properties, the mind cannot be identi ified with the brain.
2.3 Functionalism: MS <---3 FS. According to functionalism to have mind is to have the ability to
perform certain functions. C/E "Lewis Pained Madman and Putnam' inverted spect rum (imagine a
color blind driver driving like we do, only he inverts green with red). 'Turing Test for Intelligence:
C/E Searle's Chinese Room. Intentionality (the ability of mental states to be "of" or about anything).
2.5 Property Dualism:
the view that non physical mental properties (such as beliefs, desires and emotions) inhere in
some physical substances (namely brains).
Primitive Property (intentionality as primitive property).
Emergent Property and Downward Causation
Causal Determinism (every event has cause that makes it happen laws of nature) and Hard
determinism (the doctrine that there are no Free actions). Hard determinism assumes that if CD is true,
then there are no free actions because as our bodies made up of matter, we must be subjects to the
same laws of causation In class we discusseo an argument to problematize HD. If HD true, then
there is no human responsibility: i.e we are not free we cannot be responsible for our actions
(since one is responsible if and only if one can make choices).
Indeterminism: the view that certain events are not caused deterministically That is since the
advent quantu mechanics and according the Copenhagen interpretation, the most basic
constituents of matter can behave deterministically. But that was the case. there not freedom
either, that is, if my brain event caused by probabilistic event, and not my own causing it.
Compat ibilism the belief that free will and determinism are not mutually exclusive
Soft determinism: Determined actions car evertheless be free. One 'soft theory Traditiona
Compat bilism (Free actions are caused by one's will and not externally constrained). The
Principle alternative possibilities: one can be held responsible for doing something only if one could
have donc otherwise. "could have done otherwise means 'if you had chosen otherwise then you would
have donc otherwise, Think of our "fork -example" of student being late for class He chooses A)
'having coffee with lots of traffic, instead of (B) "not having coffee and no traffic. For Traditional
Compati ibi ism the student is responsible for being late since "if he had choosen (B) instead of (A), he
would have been on time for class.
C/E Taylor's Ingenious Physiologist In class we discussed how TV can 'plant" desires. So in way is a
kind of ingenious physiologist.
'Hierarchical Compatibilism: First and Second Or der Desires: Second Order Volitions. Remember: first
order desire directed to an object state of affairs second order desire isa desire about desire,
a second order volition is : secono order desire one decidedly acts upon. Harry Frankfurt's three drug
(Let's calla first order desire: FOD. second order desire: SOD. second order volition: SOV) So we get
Wanton addict: FOD not SOD. not SOV, not free.
Happy Addict: FOD. SOD. sov. free.
Unwilling Add ict: FOD. SOD (only this desire is against his taking the drug not SOV. not free) C/E to
Hierarchical Compatibilism: Slote's Hypnotized patient and The Willing Bank Teller One proves that
SOV can be manipulated from the inside. The other shows rthat SOV can be manipulated beyond our
Punishment: How docompatibilists see punishment? 203 Punishment cannot be retributive (eye for
an-eye). The only legitimate way of punishment is rehabilitation and deterrence. Criminal act ions
dictated by genes and habits (nature and nurture). Retributive punishment makes sense it's deserved
But nothing people do is up to them.
Event and Agent Causation. Event event or Agent event
Libertarianism holds that agents can cause events. How? remember we talked about the possibility
that the mind causes the brain. There are two arguments:
Argument from Experience. Argument from deliberation.
Libet's Neurophysiological challenge: it seems to show that consciousness of decision arises only after
the decision has already been made (the 300 millisecono gap between the decision press the button
and the brain signal). Rebuttal bv libertarians: There's ifference between making "conscious
decision" and "meta conscious decision' (meta conscious awareness second order). For the
libertarian. the subject Libet's report not having 'conscious but meta conscious decision
it's no surprise that happens after the conscious decision was made.
Radical Libertarianism (Existentialism) Jean Paul Sartre's kind of libertarianism (known
asExistentialism) holds that the self is essentially free. When he says: "L'existence précède l'essence'
he means that we exist first, and are 'defined later. Sartre puts as such: 'il n'est rien d'autre que ce
qu'il fait de vie.
We cope with this heavy "weight of our own FREEDOM by creating fictitious justifications what Sartre
calls mauvaise foi 'bad faith" We 're always responsible for our actions because ever when we think
we don't choose, we choose. The only possible constraint is our facticity (the stuff we don't choose
like being born and having certain name and parents). La mauvaise foi' in practical sense means
that what counts is the intention c'est l'intention qui compte"; Sartre rejects the freudian
unconscious as well as other forms of determinisms. As he puts it: L'homme est condamné
This material may consist of step-by-step explanations on how to solve a problem or examples of proper writing, including the use of citations, references, bibliographies, and formatting. This material is made available for the sole purpose of studying and learning - misuse is strictly forbidden.