Understanding Various Concepts In Philosophy

What is a category mistake? Provide your own example of a category mistake.

In the BBC Horizons video “The Secret You”, a study was discussed that bares directly on the free will debate. Explain the study. Next, explain (as best as you can) what the Lau, Rogers and Passingham study shows. How do these two studies pose a problem for free will?

What is qualia? Explain the inverted qualia argument. How is it supposed to pose a problem for functionalism?

Analogical argument

The analogical argument states that two different things might be concluded to be alike in certain respects since they are alike in some other respects (Rosen et al., 2015).

A person might argue the accepted medical fact that the disconnection of the blood supply to the brain of a person would lead to the brain damage of the concerned person. This is then used by the person to make an analogy regarding the education system of the society. The person might compare the education system of the society to the brain of the society and the financial matters to be the bloodline of the same. Thus, the person might conclude that reduction in the financial flow might lead to the damage in the education system prevalent in the society.

The analogical arguments are considered to be weak due to the fact that these arguments are based only on the analogy.

What is type-identity theory? Explain why philosophers have found this view appealing. Next, state one common objection to type identity theory. How is this objection supposed to undermine type-identity theory?

The type-identity theory states that there are some mental states that are identical to some of the brain states. The type identity theory propounders have found this view appealing since the theory states that for every mental state there has to be existent a physical-chemical state of the brain which corresponds to the former (Rosen et al., 2015). The most common objection to this theory states that the mental state might reman the same for two different individuals while there might exist a difference in the physical-chemical brain state. The factual world depicts difference in the reactions of various people in the same mental state. This bars the type-identity theory from achieving the universal recognition.

Explain mind-body causation. What reasons does Princess Elisabeth provide for thinking that mind-body causation is impossible on Cartesian dualism? Do you think that Elisabeth’s objections are decisive? Why or why not?

The mind-body causation states that the intentional actions are a result of the various intentional mental states or the intentional thoughts. Princess Elisabeth stated that the mind-body causation is impossible on Cartesian dualism since the immaterial mind cannot move the body as the latter is a material object. The objections put forth by Princess Elisabeth cannot be considered to be decisive as she proposes another theory on the mind-body causation that states that the mind is a materialistic in nature. This theory that is proposed by Princess Elisabeth is also not considered to be acceptable since the mind is stated to be a materialistic object in this case (Bennett, 2009).

Type-identity theory

What is the Principle of Alternative Possibilities? What’s one common reason people give for thinking it’s true? How does Frankfurt argue that it is false? I’ll give three points extra credit if you develop your own Frankfurt-style thought experiment that shows that the Principle of Alternative Possibilities is false.

The Principle of Alternative Possibilities state that the concerned person might be held responsible for the committed actions only under the circumstances that the person could have acted otherwise in the given scenario (Rosen et al., 2015). The most common reason cited by people for considering it to be true is the fact that the principle stresses on the freedom of choice on the part of the concerned person. Frankfurt argues that the Principle of Alternative Possibilities do not hold good for the situations wherein there are involved the various coercive factors. There might be a situation wherein a person might be held at gunpoint and demanded to give up all his belongings that he is in possession of at that point of time. In this situation, the person is under the coercive force of handing over all the belongings in order to remain alive. In this case, the Principle of Alternative Possibilities is falsified since the concerned person was under threat from the surrounding people.

State one version of the design argument. How would the theist defend each premise? State one objection to the version of the design argument that you presented. How is this objection supposed to undermine the design argument? Do you think that this objection refutes the design argument? Why or why not? Explain your answer.

One of the various versions of the design argument is the Analogical Argument. The theist might defend the analogical argument by stating that most of the parts of the world do resemble machines. This might hint at the fact that there exists an intelligent designer for the universe who might have created those parts of the world so that they might bear similarity with the machines. Thus, the theists might argue that the universe is constructed by an intelligent designer. There are many objections to the analogical argument. One of them states that the justification of a posteriori claims need the experience of the creation of the material worlds which is unavailable thereby making it had to believe the justification of the claim of an intelligent cause (Rosen et al., 2015). This argument however does not completely refute the design argument theory as it does not state the absence of the universe-maker with surety.

Mind-body causation

What is the logical problem of evil? Next, explain why it is thought that the existence of pointless evil is incompatible with the existence of a OOO-God? Remember to define ‘OOO-God’ in your explanation. Also give an example of something that an atheist might think of as being a pointless evil. Finally, do you agree that the existence of evil proves the non-existence of God? Why or why not?

The logical problem of evil refers to the reconciliation of the presence of the evil even with the presence of the omnibenevolent, omnipresent and omniscient God. The argument is considered to be incompatible with the omnibenevolent, omnipresent and the omniscient God due to the fact that the co-existence of God and evil is considered to be very unlikely and impossible. The omnibenevolent, omnipresent and omniscient nature is considered to provide for the superiority of the maker of the universe, God (Rosen et al., 2015). An atheist might consider the suffering of the virtuous due to the actions of the vices to be a pointless evil. The existence of evil does not prove the non-existence of God since it might be believed that the existence of evil serves the purpose of pointing out the difference between the good and the evil.

Each of the following questions count for extra credit only. Starting this exam, any extra credit received that would put you over the 50 point maximum for this exam can be applied to other exams. For example, if you receive 55 points here, 5 points will be applied to an exam that you did not perform as well on. No partial credit will be given for extra credit responses.

A category mistake is a logical fallacy wherein the speaker is found to have confused the properties of the whole element with those of a certain part of the element. A category mistake consists of both the fallacy of division and composition (Rosen et al., 2015). The most commonly cited example of the category mistake is the example of a person who visits a university with the notion that the university is a physical identity and thus fails to recognize the collective presence of the teachers, the students and the college buildings as the university.

In the BBC Horizons video “The Secret You”, a study was discussed that bares directly on the free will debate. Explain the study. Next, explain (as best as you can) what the Lau, Rogers and Passingham study shows. How do these two studies pose a problem for free will?

“The Secret You” discusses the question “who am I?” from a scientific viewpoint rather than from a scientific viewpoint. The documentary concludes that the free will is an illusion that always concludes in a controversy. The Lau, Rogers and Passingham study shows that the perceived onset of the intention is dependent on the neural activities that can be manipulated externally. These scientific studies depict the fact that the existence of the free will is questionable due to the fact that the major neural actions that are responsible for the activity might be manipulated externally.

Qualia might be defined as the individual instances of the conscious experience that might also be termed as subjective. The inverted qualia argument states that the qualia of the two functionally identical creatures are different from each other (Rosen et al., 2015). The inverted qualia argument suggests that it is not necessary that two persons holding different views against the same incident or object would hold the same mental state, thereby posing as a refute to the functionalism.

References

Bennett, J. (2009). Correspondence between Descartes and Princess Elisabeth.

Rosen, G., Byrne, A., Cohen, J., & Shiffrin, S. V. (Eds.). (2015). The Norton Introduction to Philosophy. WW Norton & Company.