Intentionality And Consciousness And The Characteristics Of The Mental

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

In essence, Cartesian Dualism attempts to solve the mind-body problem – that is, what is the relationship between the mind and the body? The answer, according to this theory, is that the mind and the body are two distinctly different substances that constitute each person. Here, “mind” can be described as a nonphysical thing that thinks and “body” as a living physical thing that does not think. The mind can also exist independently of the body, and both can causally affect one another.

In metaphysics, the problem of distinguishing the mind versus the body has persisted throughout time and remains a highly debatable topic in philosophy today. Two opposing perspectives in particular remain especially favorable in modern philosophy. Dualism, considers the mind and the body to be separate in that humans are, in effect, immaterial non-physical beings—people are souls. René Descartes examines in Meditations on First Philosophy the incompatibility of a reality in which the mind and body exist as a singular, strictly physical entity. In opposition to this perspective is materialism (or physicalism). Materialism argues that the human person is one with the human organism, and therefore exists solely as a physical being. In an

Dualism is defined as a belief that mental occurrences are more than just a physical act. Humans are composed of two kinds of substances which are immaterial and physical. The immaterial substance consists of the mind or soul and the physical substance consists of the body. Moreland attempts to make nonbelievers believe in the immaterial soul by mentioning that there are numerous non-physical entities that we believe in, such as numbers, goodness and moral laws. This ultimately leads to the defense of dualism and rejecting the physicalism worldview that is present with those that deny that the mind and body are separate entities.

Daniel Bor, a psychological researcher, and author, wrote an article titled “When Do We Become Truly Conscious” published on September 4, 2012 and in this article he discusses the idea of consciousness. Through use of deductive reasoning Bor refers to early opinions viewing consciousness as magic and discusses the science behind demystifying consciousness. Bor also discusses the ethical arguments behind learning for about consciousness. Bor also lists some of the emotional arguments centered on human awareness. Bor’s use of rhetorical strategies is designed to state his opinion in a simple and easily read way.

At the start, I will talk about the argument from the religion aspect for dualism. Most major world religions are based on separating the ‘mind’ and ‘body’. The eternal ‘mind’ or soul either ends up in heaven or hell, free from the ‘body’ itself. According to a number of religions, there is some sort of life after you die; a good example of this is angels which some call the ‘mind’ of god exists without any physical presence. This is what we come to know as substance dualism or something that is very relative to a form of substance dualism. As a result, "seeing how uncertain dualism is, in principle, the similar would be a willing to also be uncertain in one 's religious tradition, which a lot of people find challenging to do". [Churchland] Yet, it must

The idea that mental states are non-reducible properties of brain states is the central tenant of a theory of mind called property dualism. However, before we can assess the theory we must be aware that the question assumes the existence of mental states and as such we cannot answer this question from some perspectives (e.g. eliminative materialism)

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.

An Argument for Interactionist Dualism in Contrast to Property Dualism This philosophy study will define the importance of interactionist substance dualism as a form of dualism that makes the most appealing argument against property dualism. The polarization of substance and property dualism typically defines a separation of physical and mental states. In this context, the function of separating mental states from the physical states illustrates a complete disconnect in the strict terms of substance dualism. In contrast to this, property dualism finds that there are only physical states, but that there can only be non-physical properties of physical substances. In both cases, the disconnect of the mind/body relationships has been reduced to abstracted mental states or a division between the mind and the body.

The mind is a nonphysical thing and the body is a physical thing. The mind-body problem says that nonphysical things cannot interact casually with physical things, but states that the mind and body interact casually. There are three theories that have different ways of explaining how the mind and body do interact casually. Dualism is the theory that the mind and body are sperate things and they can interact casually. This theory says that nonphysical things can interact with physical things.

     For centuries philosophers have debated on monism and dualism, two different philosophical views of the human person. Philosophers have been trying to decipher whether the person is made up of the mind, the body, or both. Monists hold the belief that existence is purely based upon one ultimate “category of being” this means that either the person is made up of only the body or only the mind (Morris p155). Dualists hold the belief that existence is based upon the body as well as the mind and its mental properties (Morris p155).

Dualism The mind-body problem, is an ongoing debate about how the mind and the body correlate with one another. There are many feasible and persuasive theories about how this problem could be answered and/or perceived. Dualism, for one, is a theory that the mind and body are completely different entities, and the doctrine of interactionism is a form of dualism that claims even though the two entities are completely different, the two also interact with one another. With the use of supportive conceptions, comparisons, and reasoning, the doctrine of interactionism gives a more plausible answer to the fundamental question raised by the mind-body problem.

A more contemporary version of dualism is property dualism. P. F. Strawson, in the papers “Persons” (1958) and “Self, mind and body” (1966) explore the concept of person, and he is not agree with the Cartesian view, that a person is just ‘a mind’. As a result, Strawson leadership a view of the person comprise of a body and a mind equally applicable to an individual, not just as two separate substances. But how this new view of the person derives in a new kind of dualism? The answer can be found in the Strawson’s definition of a person; Strawson proposes that there are two predicates that are equally applicable to the concept of person. Strawson (1958/1991) explicitly said that:

Cartesian dualism is based on the concept that the mind and the body are separate entities, and that the mind – the

Second, there’s intentionally which means consciousness is about things. Saying that one is only conscious when material things are involved. As in a table, then there leaves the argument of how can one be conscious of matter. Or maybe one is conscious only when