dive into the subject matter of why I disagree with Turing, we must inquire about what exactly is thinking. Some have tried to define thinking as having conscious thoughts; but thinking and consciousness are not terminologies that are mutually exchangeable. While thinking is a state of consciousness, consciousness is not thinking. Even as we process information necessary for reasoning, much of our brain activity and processing takes
ways in which they alter reality and the lives of others. Being and Nothingness defines every individual as just that: a lone individual. The nature of our being is truly isolated from the nature of other beings and the world around us – while our actions and essence contain an implicit interconnectedness with the world, while meaning can only come from the existence of external phenomena, our true self is like an island surrounded by impenetrable nothingness – pregnant with the potential for possibility
2015 I. Intentionality and Consciousness and the Characteristics of “The Mental” All of us try and explain the great mystery that has pondered ancient and modern philosophers. What constitutes our mental thoughts? Putting characteristics together to describe “The Mental” is something that Graham has done in order to try and explain the ongoing phenomenon of the Mind-Body problem. Philosophers and writers, including Graham, have developed, and held onto the ideas that Intentionality and Consciousness
does not necessarily mean the existence of the self, ."..all consciousness is perceptual, even the consciousness of ourselves."
to the mind-body problem and how our brains are not causally determined the same way many things in our universe appear to be. I will then discuss why Searle thinks that behaviorism falls short and ultimately cannot explain why or predict human actions. I will then discuss Searle’s conclusion on just how all of these elements culminate in us being free agents in a deterministic world. I will then follow this up with my own thoughts on the subject matter and why Searle fails to fully convince me
Emile Durkheim, a social fact is a manner of acting, thinking and feeling engaged by individuals because and on condition that other members of the social group are also engaged in the same thing. He said that social facts exist outside human consciousness because it is external, objective and inherited. It is not in the mind of the person, it is in the environment. Social facts also have a coercive power that can have a causal influence. We often realize and be aware of the social fact if we stay
(p. 130). Personal Experience According to Watson (2002), a caring moment occurs through intentionality and a caring consciousness with each patient interaction. Watson (2002) also states, “When one declares intentionality toward an object or action, whatever resistance may be within tends to mobilize and dissipate, allowing manifestation of intention to be realized” (p. 14). Through this intentionality, nurses are then able to enter into the domain of the patient’s spirituality. Once this entrance
Searle argues that the intentionality in human beings is a product of the brains and its mental processes. He also notes that the certain brain processes are sufficient (indicating that there is at times a bare minimum of processes) for the “intentionality.” He also states that the instantiation of a computer program can be done by a human but the program would still lack the relevant intentionality. Searle also states that, “any mechanism capable of producing intentionality must have casual powers
states. They are the psychological persons, legal persons and moral persons. He attributes mental or cognitive nature to psychological persons , rights and obligations in a community of to legal persons whereas the moral persons are accountable for actions under a moral code. Law and morality being social conventions, it seems clear that legal and moral persons are constituted entirely by social
committed to seeking authentic connections and caring-healing relationships with self and others? Are those involved “conscious” of their caring-caritas or non-caring consciousness and intentionally in a given moment and at an individual and system level? Are they interested and committed to expanding their caring consciousness and actions to self, other, environment, nature and wider universe? Are those working within the model interested in shifting their focus from a modern medical science-technocure