Graduate studies at Western
Theoretical Medicine 14 (2):89-100 (1993)
|Abstract||Physics says that it cannot deal with the mind-brain problem, because it does not deal in subjectivities, and mind is subjective. However, biologists (among others) still claim to seek a material basis for subjective mental processes, which would thereby render them objective. Something is clearly wrong here. I claim that what is wrong is the adoption of too narrow a view of what constitutes objectivity, especially in identifying it with what a machine can do. I approach the problem in the light of two cognate circumstances: (a) the measurement problem in quantum physics, and (b) the objectivity of standard mathematics, even though most of it is beyond the reach of machines. I argue that the only resolution to such problems is in the recognition that closed loops of causation are objective; i.e. legitimate objects of scientific scrutiny. These are explicitly forbidden in any machine or mechanism. A material system which contains such loops is called complex. Such complex systems thus must possess nonsimulable models; i.e. models which contain impredicativities or self-references which cannot be removed, or faithfully mapped into a single coherent syntactic time-frame. I consider a few of the consequences of the above, in the context of thus redrawing the boundary between subject and object.|
|Keywords||Brain Causality Mind Objectivity Physicalism Science|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Owen J. Flanagan (2003). The Problem of the Soul: Two Visions of Mind and How to Reconcile Them. Basic Books.
J. J. C. Smart, The Identity Theory of Mind. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Benny Shanon (2008). Mind-Body, Body-Mind: Two Distinct Problems. Philosophical Psychology 21 (5):697 – 701.
Reza Zamani (2010). An Object-Oriented View on Problem Representation as a Search-Efficiency Facet: Minds Vs. Machines. [REVIEW] Minds and Machines 20 (1):103-117.
Mark Sacks (2000). Objectivity and Insight. Oxford University Press.
Clive Vernon Borst (1970). The Mind-Brain Identity Theory: A Collection of Papers. New York,St Martin's P..
Gabriel Vacariu (2005). Mind, Brain, and Epistemologically Different Worlds. Synthese 147 (3):515-548.
G. Northoff (2001). “Brain-Paradox” and “Embeddment” – Do We Need a “Philosophy of the Brain”? Brain and Mind 2 (2):195-211.
Michael Lockwood (1989). Mind, Brain, and the Quantum. Oxford University Press.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads39 ( #34,755 of 739,303 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,243 of 739,303 )
How can I increase my downloads?