A Mystery That 's Never Been Solved

Everyone has the experience of interaction with another person. To be certain of the existence we perceive of theses experiential beings that are human I must first prove, or assume, that my experiences are real. Let’s assume that my experiences of the world are not true. This world and everything in it would not exist. All my experiences are just a phenomenon inside my head. I am not aware of what this would look like, perhaps a computer program or a brain in a vat scenario. However, I can try to make sense of this. In this world that does not exist. As I am typing this paper I see a table holding my computer up. That is to say, I have the phenomenon of seeing a table, but as we have already established I do not really see a table. Instead, I just seem to be seeing a table. Though I may be

The study of consciousness in modern day psychology is becoming increasingly difficult to explain. In the early days of consciousness studies it may have been explained as our experience or awareness (Blackmore, 2010). However, over a number of years, there have been many psychologists who have contributed many important theories towards the explanation of how consciousness works, and its initial existence. As Chalmers states: “There is nothing that we know more intimately than conscious experience, but there is nothing harder to explain” (Chalmers, 1995 p.200). Being one of the leading philosophers in consciousness, David Chalmers introduced the idea of the Hard Problem in 1994. Chalmers defined the hard problem as: “The questions of how physical processes in the brain give rise to subjective experience” (Chalmers, 1995 p.63). Chalmers suggested that he found it difficult to understand how a small mass of grey matter such as the brain could produce conscious experience. These ideas of a ‘hard problem’ in consciousness were rejected by a number of theorists, which will be discussed later in the essay. Another idea which Chalmers has put forward is the zombie. A zombie, according to Chalmers is a being identical to you and I, speaks like you, acts like you, but is not conscious (Blackmore, 2010). A zombie contains no qualia (a physical conscious experience). The idea of the zombie put forward by Chalmers is extremely important in the explanation of consciousness and has been

The mind is a complex myriad of thoughts and psychological systems that even philosophers today cannot entirely grapple. It is composed of the senses, feelings, perceptions, and a whole series of other components. However, the mind is often believed to be similar or even the same as the brain. This gives rise to the mind-brain identity theory, and whether there exists a clear distinction between the physical world and the non-material mind. In this paper, I will delineate the similarities and differences between mind and brain, describe the relevant ideas such as functionalism and materialism, and provide explanations on how these theories crystallized. Further, I will discuss the differing views of this concept from multiple philosophers’ perspectives and highlight the significance of each. Ultimately, I will defend the view that the mind-brain identity theory is false by analyzing its errors and examining the invalid assumptions it makes about consciousness.

This author ascribes to the empiricism paradigm. This paradigm is similar to empirical knowing in that it is based on the premise that what is known can be verified through the senses, or

As the tool of scientific investigation increase, the relationship between the mind and the brain has never been more intimate. Chemical changes in our brain could lead to heightened euphoria or it can lead to the most profound depression. Damages to the brain can lead to changes that can eliminate the some abilities of the brain, such as smell, vision, or even the ability to recognized faces. Therefore, this is at that vary lease a powerful correlation between the state of the mind and state of the brain. But this is not enough for the Identity theories, so they go above and beyond this to explain this profound view.

* to explain the connections of the elements of consciousness to the nervous system. (New World Encyclopaedia 2008)

To quote Karl Popper, “Every solution to a problem, raises another unsolved problem” (Williams, 2003, p. 2). It has been a topic debated for centuries, still, a definitive solution is yet to be found that universally satisfies the problem of mind brain identity. The most logical answer comes in the form of monism. Therefore in this paper I will argue that the mind and the brain are identical, as the mind exists only as a property of the brain. David Lewis and D.M Armstrong give support for the causal relationship between mind and brain states in the form of the identity theory, and deal with the multiple realisability argument provided by Hillary Putman. Gottlob Frege provides his support for materialism by showing that mental states are determined by the function of the brain, while discounting Thomas Nagel’s argument which proposes the idea of Qualia. Both the functionalist theory and identity theory reach agreement on the materialistic view that the mind and brain are of the same substance.

The brain has been determined to be the control centre for all nervous messages in humans. The complexity of the brain allows us to interpret these nervous messages into thoughts which in turn allow us to respond to them. To be able to have a sense of consciousness the brain must receive some form of stimulus. Type physicalism/identity theory which was first developed by Place (1956), which describes how different mental states are triggered due to the firing of the corresponding fibres. Philosophers like Place (1956), Smart (1959), Feigl (1972), and Armstrong

Thesis: The mind-body problem arises because of the lack of evidence when looking for a specific explanation of the interaction of mental and physical states, and the origin and even existence of them.

A close cousin of the classical method is the evidential method. The evidential method uses a “one-step” approach, beginning with implementing a display of facts, both scientific and historical, to defend the central claims of Christianity . A problem may arise due to different interpretations of fact that some evidentialists may not take into account; for example, a Jew may become convinced that Jesus rose from the dead but that does not mean that they will become convinced that Christianity is true . The advantage of using the classical method is that it is beneficial to establish the truth of theism before presenting historical

that gives us knoledge of the supernatural. Therefore, then point out the main principles that alloow us to affirm that God exist, its real ans is close.

exists except from matter so therefore the mind and the body (brain) work together and

When we look at this approach to our existence we must first deny that any sensory data that we receive is

Consciousness allows a person to recognize their existence, and subsequently, to form their essence. The

When St. Thomas wrote this section of his ground breaking essay what he ultimately was claiming, was that through philosophy and observation, there is a way to see how the natural world points to there in fact being a God. Although to some it may seem absurd, modern day science based upon observation and experimentation, does not completely discredit or debunk the first, second, third, and fifth arguments from St. Thomas Aquinas’s Five Ways, but rather it suggests substantial evidential credibility, in regards to his theories on God’s existence.Concepts, theories, and laws drawn from the