Class Notes (834,979)
Canada (508,839)
Philosophy (1,521)
PHL240H1 (52)

May 21.docx

2 Pages
Unlock Document

Lana Khule

CUES NOTES – Identity Theory JCC Smart, Identity Theory came J.J.C. Smart – identity theory dates back to the 1950s from an ‘after-image’ - Afterimage – the experience of seeing something when it really isn’t there anymore - Smart says: “There is no ‘sensation’ or ‘experience’ that you’re having.” o He is not talking about causality - Experiences with brain processes o Again he is not talking about two states correlating o He also argues that the word ‘experience’ means the same thing as ‘brain process’ – not correct to say that we are using different words to mean the same thing - “In so far as ‘after-image’ or ‘ache’ is a report of a process, it is a report of a process that happens to be a brain process” o He is truly saying: An experience IS a brain process  IS = strict identity The mind is the brain – is = Qualitative Identity: two things are qualitatively identical if they share all the numerical identity same qualities/properties – the identity can fluctuate depending on where you want to draw the connection – ie. dogs vs. breed of dog Numerical Identity: stronger form of identity than qualitative identity. It require absolute, or total, qualitative identity, and can only hold between a thing and itself – the word ‘same’ is used to indicate two things located at the same time and space; therefore only talking about one thing - I am numerically identical with myself Strict Identity is Numerical Identity - When he says an experience IS a brain process, he is saying an experience and a brain process are one in the same thing – therefore we cannot talk about causality or correlation - **The nature of the mind will be scientifically described as the brain Motivation: Why you want to like Identity Theory Ockham’s Razor – “The principle that in explaining anything no more assumptions should be made than are necessary.” - Dualism is not the simplest way of explaining the interaction of our body/mind = mental/physical laws - One way out of the problem is to posit these mental/physical laws – however, they would be a brute an unexplainable relationships where mental processes ‘dangle’ from physical processes - nomological danglers - According to Smart – Dualism leads to Nomological Danglers - If we can explain a phenomenon with a simpler theory, we should not want to go with anything more complicated – we don’t want any nomological danglers - Dualism is an intelligible option but it is not the most appealing (Smart) Objection 1 – One can talk about Objection 1: I can know nothing about brain processes and still speak perfectly A without knowing an identical well about my mental states. Thus, the things I can talk about when I describe B exists my mental states cant be brain states Reply: “An illiterate peasant can talk about lightning though he knows nothing of electricity.” This doesn’t change the fact that lightning is electricity. Objection 4 – The thing I see is Objection 4: “The after-image is not in physical space. The brain process is. So the content and the experience is the after image is not a brain process.” the vehicle Reply: It’s not the after image that’s a brain process it’s the experience that is a brain process… The thing I see is the content and the perception or experience of that object is the vehicle. Objection 5 – The mind and the Objection 5: The ways we describe brain processes don’t carry over to the way brain don’t have the sa
More Less

Related notes for PHL240H1

Log In


Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.