Skip to main content
Log in

The Two Factor Theory of the Mind–Brain Relation

  • Published:
Brain and Mind

Abstract

The analysis of mental concepts suggests that the distinctionbetween the mental and the nonmental is not ontologically fundamental,and that, whereas mental processes are one and the same things as thebrain processes with which they are correlated, dispositional mentalstates depend causally on and are, thus, ''distinct existences'' fromthe states of the brain microstructure with which 'they' are correlated.It is argued that this difference in the relation between an entity andits composition/underlying structure applies across the board. allstuffs and processes are the same thing as is described by a descriptionof their microstructure. In all cases where the manifestation of adisposition extends beyond the ''skin'' of the dispositional propertybearer, dispositions invariably depend causally on the structure,usually the microstructure, of the bearer.

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

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Armstrong, D. M., 1968: A Materialist Theory of the Mind, Routledge, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Armstrong, D. M., 1997: A World of States of Affairs, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Armstrong, D. M., Martin, C. B. and Place, U. T., Crane, T. (ed.), 1996: Dispositions: A Debate, Routledge, London.

  • Cartwright, N., 1989: Nature's Capacities and Their Measurement, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davidson, D., 1970–1980: Mental events, in L. Foster and J. W. Swanson (eds), Experience and Theory, Duckworth, London. Reprinted in D. Davidson, Essays on Actions and Events, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 207–227.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geach, P. T., 1957: Mental Acts, Routledge, London.

  • Medlin, B., 1967: Ryle and the mechanical hypothesis, in C. F. Presley (ed.), The Identity Theory of Mind, Univ. of Queensland Press, St. Lucia, pp. 94–150.

    Google Scholar 

  • Place, U. T., 1956: Is consciousness a brain process? British J. Psychology 47, 44–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Place, U. T., 1967: Comments on H. Putnam 'Psychological predicates', in W. H. Capitan and D. D. Merrill, (eds), Art, Mind and Religion: Proceedings of the 1965 Oberlin Colloquium in Philosophy, University of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh, pp. 55–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Place, U. T., 1971: The infallibility of our knowledge of our own beliefs, Analysis 31, 197–204.

    Google Scholar 

  • Place, U. T., 1987: Causal laws, dispositional properties and causal explanations, Synthesis Philosophica 2(3), 149–160.

    Google Scholar 

  • Place, U. T., 1998: Ryle's behaviorism, in W. O'Donohue and R. Kitchener (eds), Handbook of Behaviorism, Academic Press, San Diego, CA, Chapter 13, pp. 361–398.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ryle, G., 1949: The Concept of Mind, Hutchinson, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ryle, G., 1954: Dilemmas, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wittgenstein, L., 1953: Philosophical Investigations, English Translation by G. E. M. Anscombe, Blackwell, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Place, U.T. The Two Factor Theory of the Mind–Brain Relation. Brain and Mind 1, 29–43 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010087621727

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010087621727

Navigation