Michael Lacewing enquiriesalevelphilosophycouk Michael Lacewing Eliminative materialism Eliminative materialism the way we commonly think and talk about the mind is fundamentally flawed ID: 634412
Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "Eliminative materialism: objections" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Slide1
Eliminative materialism: objections
Michael Lacewingenquiries@alevelphilosophy.co.uk
© Michael LacewingSlide2
Eliminative materialism
Eliminative materialism: the way we commonly think and talk about the mind is fundamentally flawedAt least some of our mental concepts, e.g. consciousness, belief, desire, are so
mistaken
that they refer to things that don’t exist (this will be shown by neuroscience)
(By contrast, reductionism says that properties corresponding to these concepts exist, but they are physical properties)
© Michael LacewingSlide3
The intuitive certainty of mental states
Objection: Nothing could be more certain to me than the fact that I have mental
states
Reply: but what seems obvious can be false
Does the Sun move around the Earth?Am I a thinking thing?The Churchlands do not deny the existence of psychological phenomena – they deny
that folk psychology is the right account of these phenomena
Can we be certain of a
theory?
© Michael LacewingSlide4
Folk psychology is the best hypothesis
Objection: Folk psychology cannot explain much about the mind, e.g. mental illness, intelligence, sleep, perception, learningReply: This is no objection. It is only
meant to explain human action
It
explains and predicts action very well, much better than neuroscience!© Michael LacewingSlide5
Folk psychology is the best hypothesis
Objection: Folk psychology has not progressed in 2500 yearsReply: Folk psychology is the basis of developments in scientific
psychology
Objection:
all this is superficial, unintegrated, and folk psychological explanations are very weak compared to other areas of scienceObjection: Intentionality can’t be reduced to neuroscience
© Michael LacewingSlide6
Self-refuting?
Eliminativism tries to change our beliefs by presenting argumentsArguments are expressions of beliefs and rely on the meaning of wordsYet
eliminativism
claims there are no beliefs and no meanings!So any argument for eliminativism refutes itself – its conclusion contradicts its own assumptions© Michael LacewingSlide7
Reply
The objection begs the questionIt assumes that folk psychology (Intentionality) is the correct account of meaning
Cp: ‘there is no vital force; life is chemistry’ ‘If there is no vital force, you would be dead! The fact that you speak refutes you.’
© Michael LacewingSlide8
Objection
It is a conceptual truth that claims and arguments are ‘about’ something
This can’t be eliminated in
favour
of some alternativeIt is inconceivable that folk psychology is false, since the very idea of ‘being false’ depends on folk psychology being trueAt least until we have a new theory of meaning
Folk psychology is not an empirical theory, but a condition of intelligibility
Therefore, it cannot be eliminated
© Michael LacewingSlide9
Implication
If Churchland is right that folk psychology doesn’t reduce to neuroscience, then it is irreducible, not eliminable
© Michael Lacewing