The Mind-Body Problem.edited
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Grand Canyon University *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
BIT-200-O5
Subject
Philosophy
Date
Dec 6, 2023
Type
docx
Pages
5
Uploaded by BrigadierHeatSnake76
1
The Mind-Body Problem
Student's Name
Institutional Affiliation
Course
Instructor's Name
Date
2
The Mind-Body Problem
The mind-body problem is how the brain or "mind" is intimately linked to the human
body and physical environment. Scientists have addressed this question through an examination
of patterns and categories of what they termed "the data"—what they tested, observed, and
reasoned in relation to. It is an important part of modern science because it helps us test
hypotheses and reformulate theories.
The Issues Related to the Mind-Body Problem
The mind-body problem is an investigation that investigates how the mind and body
interact, which leads to whether or not the mind is merely a product of brain activity. Many
scientific theories have been proposed to explain this interaction between self-awareness and
neurological function (Young, 2020). The mind-body problem is ontological, posed in
epistemology and philosophy of mind. Some of its prominent issues are: How can the brain be
studied scientifically? What is the relationship between consciousness and identity? How much
do mental processes depend on material properties? The mind-body problem is that sense of the
relationship between our mental lives and underlying physical structures. Most philosophers
agree on some conditions of the problem. The first step in resolving it is to understand the mind-
body relations. The process can be difficult since multiple definitions may vary from scientists to
theologians and others (Young, 2020). No matter how hard scientists try, they can only
sometimes explain what their experiments are finding. This is especially true of the mind-body
problem because it is so difficult to construct a theory that describes the relationship between
what happens in our brains and our behavior.
Philosophical Solutions to the Mind-Body Problem
3
Type identity theory is the first and most serious to confer physicalism to mind-body
interactions. It is a traditional way to approach the mind-body problem, which asserts that there
is no difference between your mind and brain. The theory argues that our minds work like brains,
using all their parts together. Type identity theory states that only one substance—the mind—
exists in 3 different forms (conceptual, bodily, and behavioral) (Vintiadis, 2021). Functionalist
physicalism asserts that mental functions exist and are constructed from parts that the scientist
can see. The theory states that mental phenomena have a physical basis which functional
relations between brain mechanisms can explain. Property dualism holds that different
substances and functions exist within each other. Property dualism states that the mind and the
body are fundamental but separated into two radically different types of substance (Vintiadis,
2021). Substance dualism posits that multiple substances or substances have different properties
depending on how they were created or formed. Substance dualism suggests that mind and body
are different aspects of the same underlying entity.
The mind-body problem is a philosophical problem regarding the relationship between
mind and body. Philosophers have proposed various views to resolve it but have yet to gain
consensus. The most notable position is identity theory, which states that mental events are
identical to physical ones. Functionalism maintains that there are functions of the brain and the
mind which determine how we perceive and behave. Property dualism is an influential
hypothesis claiming the mind has properties separate from the brain; substance dualism proposes
that minds are distinct from brains in immaterial substances.
Substance Dualism
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
4
Substance dualism is the best way to solve the mind-body contingency problem. The
physical identity theory that animals are only magical creatures initiated by material things,
common sense conversely states that we are minds and bodies simultaneously with each other
(Blum, 2019). This is because bodily sensations and thoughts can be experienced both for
themselves and their relationship with the body and the things around us. The function of our
philosophical position would be to describe the mutual relationship between mind and body but
also argue how mental states are linked to physical states. In this case, a functional interpretation
of dualism relies on a different approach to interpreting mental and physical and a different
ontology. Philosopher John Searle argues that we are no more than brains in a vat. Thus, he
believes the mind and body are just different parts of the same thing. Philosopher Donald
Davidson persists that mental events and physical events are fundamentally different. He argues
that an event cannot be described merely by referring to its location or time (Blum, 2019). So
depending on how one answers these questions, one can look at mind-body dualism or
materialism differently.
Conclusion
A conclusion of the mind-body problem refers to a theory that would try to explain
whether our mind and body are different or simply different aspects of ourselves. This theory
would propose that our mind is an immaterial part of ourselves, essentially behaving as a
software program that talks to the brain to produce free will, emotions, consciousness, and other
things that we often attribute to the spiritual realm. Intelligent solutions to the mind-body
problem assert some dualism. This is a tricky issue because distinguishing between these theories
can often take time and effort.
References
5
Blum, P. R. (2019). Substance dualism in descartes.
Introduction to philosophy: Philosophy of
mind
.
Vintiadis, E. (2021). Property dualism.
Some Problems of Philosophy
.
Young, R. M. (2020). The mind–body problem. In
Companion to the history of modern science
(pp. 702–711). Routledge.