Skip to main content

Recurring Dilemmas on Other Minds

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Human Minds and Cultures
  • 28 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter critiques the notion of identity, a philosophical reaction in the Quinean sense that vindicates another significant hypothesis, which is called the “No entity without identity” theorem. Here, the identification of an entity relies upon its identity. The first segment of this chapter revisits the following question: How do we encounter the concept of a subjective “mind”? Could we “infer” or “experience” the concept of “mind” in our daily lives? Every entity has some characteristics that prompt comparison with similar entities. Although I think that other minds have a subjective periphery and that other minds have an objective periphery lurking behind this (privileged access), we can construe the relationship in a subjective way (individual mind). In the second section of the chapter, I address a different point by considering why the idea of “other minds” causes philosophical dilemmas. Can “other minds” exist as a substance in one’s own mind? The category of human knowledge encompasses the reality of minds and other minds. The other minds remain an accompanying part of the individual mind since the expression, belief, and mental content of the individual mind merge in the linguistic expression in a split manner that we may ascribe as privileged access (subjective incorrigible knowledge) and corrigible knowledge. But I think that the relation between minds and other minds sounds especially idiosyncratic in its own identity. Despite becoming diverse, the individual mind can still be intimate by blending and attunement between the subjective and objective dichotomy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Let me clarify here that Dennett holds a wonderful position and writes, “As creatures of our own attempts to make sense of ourselves, the putative mental activities of folk theory are hardly a neutral field of events and processes to which we can resort for explanations when the normative demands of the intentional system theory run afoul of a bit of irrationality” (Dennett, 1995, 190). I agree with him about this startling and relevant discussion, but here my true concern is to understand how we could acquire the development to get involved in it.

References

  • Anscombe, E. W. S. (1977). First person. In S. Guttenplan (Ed.), Mind and language. Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bilgrami, A. (2017). Norm and failure in mind and meaning. Argumenta, 3(1), 69–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cassam, Q. (2009). The possibility of knowledge. Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chakraborty, S. (2020). The labyrinth of mind and world: Beyond internalism-externalism. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dennett, D. C. (1995). Making sense of ourselves. In W. G. Lycan (Ed.), Mind and cognation a reader. Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, R. (1975). Dilemmas. Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, R. (1976). The concept of mind. Penguin Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, F., & Mitchell, D. B. (2007). Philosophy of mind and cognition. Blackwell Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ludwig, K. A. (1994). First-person knowledge and authority. In G. Prayer, F. Siebelt, & A. Ulfig (Eds.), Language, mind, and epistemology: On Donald Davidson’s philosophy. Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGinn, C. (1996). The character of mind. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGinn, C. (2017). The philosophical provocations. MIT Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Nagel, T. (1995). Wittgenstein: The egocentric predicament. In Other minds: Critical essays 1969–1994. Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Popper, K. (1994). Knowledge and the body-mind problem. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Putnam, H. (1986). Other minds. In Mind, language and reality (Vol. 2). Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quine, W. V. (1977). Mind and verbal dispositions. In S. Guttenplan (Ed.), Mind and language. Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rhees, R. (1971). Could language be invented by a Robinson Crusoe. In O. R. Jones (Ed.), The private language argument. Macmillan St Martin’s Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strawson, P. (1977). Individuals. Methuen.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2024 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Chakraborty, S. (2024). Recurring Dilemmas on Other Minds. In: Chakraborty, S. (eds) Human Minds and Cultures. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-56448-2_10

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics