What is the behaviorist solution to the problem of other minds?
However, in an important sense, the behaviorist solution to the problem, isn’t really a solution at all, but rather a rejection of the problem in the first place. The behaviorist thinks that the problem of other minds is only a problem because it assumes a mistaken view of the nature of the mind.
What is the problem of other minds in philosophy?
problem of other minds, in philosophy, the problem of justifying the commonsensical belief that others besides oneself possess minds and are capable of thinking or feeling somewhat as one does oneself.
Can we ever have any knowledge of other minds?
Therefore, according to Dretske, we can have direct perceptual knowledge of another’s mental states in the following sense: we can see that others are in pain, angry and the like, even though we cannot see another’s mental states or know that solipsism is false.
What is the thesis of the argument from analogy for other minds?
Russell believes that there are other minds because he can see actions in others that are analogous to his own without thinking about them. He believes that all actions are caused by thoughts, but what happens when we have a reaction resulting as an action of something forced upon one’s self?
What does behaviorism say about mental states?
A behaviorist, so understood, is someone who demands behavioral evidence for any psychological hypothesis. For such a person, there is no knowable difference between two states of mind (beliefs, desires, etc.) unless there is a demonstrable difference in the behavior associated with each state.
Who created the problem of other minds?
The traditional answer was formulated by J. S. Mill: the argument from analogy. You are a human like me, you behave a lot like me, you use language like me. I have a mind; isn’t it rational to suppose that you have one too?
Why is philosophy of mind important?
The main aim of philosophers working in this area is to determine the nature of the mind and mental states/processes, and how—or even if—minds are affected by and can affect the body.
What is the interaction problem for dualism?
Problems of Interaction. The conservation of energy argument points to a more general complaint often made against dualism: that interaction between mental and physical substances would involve a causal impossibility.
What is Russell’s argument from analogy for the mental states of other minds?
I know through introspection that I have mental states, but how do I know about the minds of the others? I need a principle that justifies my belief in other minds. Mere behaviour cannot be enough, because also machines can exhibit behaviour (tape recorder, robot…)
What is dualism Descartes?
Substance dualism, or Cartesian dualism, most famously defended by René Descartes, argues that there are two kinds of foundation: mental and physical. This philosophy states that the mental can exist outside of the body, and the body cannot think.
What causes solipsism?
Periods of extended isolation may predispose people to solipsism syndrome. In particular, the syndrome has been identified as a potential challenge for astronauts and cosmonauts on long-term missions, and these concerns influence the design of artificial habitats.
What problem might arise for the argument from analogy?
An unintended consequence of an analogy is something that is a direct result of an analogy, but that is unacceptable to the person presenting the analogy. A disanalogy is another way in which an analogical inference can be weakened. When we point out differences between two or more things, we create a disanalogy.
How can we argue by analogy?
To argue by analogy is to argue that because two things are similar, what is true of one is also true of the other. Such arguments are called “analogical arguments” or “arguments by analogy”. Here are some examples : There might be life on Europa because it has an atmosphere that contains oxygen just like the Earth.
What makes an argument from analogy successful?
The strength of an analogy depends upon the number of similarities. Similarity reduces to identical properties and relations. Good analogies derive from underlying common causes or general laws. A good analogical argument need not pre-suppose acquaintance with the underlying universal (generalization).