behaviourism

Question 1

what are the 2 types of behaviourism

Answer 1

-hard behaviourism
-soft behaviourism

Question 2

who came up with hard behaviourism

Answer 2

Hemple

Question 3

define hard behaviourism

Answer 3

-words used to describe the mind mean the same thing as words used to describe behaviours
-mind is nothing more than behaviours
-if you describe all behaviours in physical terms then you have described the mind

Question 4

what does hard behaviourism conclude

Answer 4

all mental states are reduced down to mental behaviours

Question 5

what’s an example of hard behaviourism

Answer 5

a person indicating they are in pain of some sort, like a footballer that has been fouled, or have they?

Question 6

who came up with soft behaviourism

Answer 6

Ryle

Question 7

define soft behaviourism

Answer 7

where propositions about mental states are propositions about behavioural dispositions

Question 8

what’s an example of soft behaviourism

Answer 8

-if you have a tooth ache your don’t necessarily weep in pain, you may hide the fact you are suffering
-if your thirsty but don’t get yourself a drink

Question 9

what does soft behaviourism conclude

Answer 9

analyses mental states in terms of behavioural dispositions, not just actual behaviours

Question 10

define behavioural dispositions

Answer 10

how something will/is likely to behave in certain circumstances

Question 11

what’s an example of behavioural dispositions

Answer 11

-a wine glass has a disposition to break when dropped on a hard surface
-the wine glass has this disposition even when it hasn’t been dropped yet and is in perfect condition
-someone with the mental state of pain will have a disposition to say ouch even if they don’t

Question 12

what do these examples show about behavioural dispositions

Answer 12

behavioural dispositions are hypothetical behaviours as well as actual behaviours

Question 13

what can be used to argue against behaviourism

Answer 13

Chalmer’s zombies

Question 14

how does the zombie argument argue against behaviourism

Answer 14

-zombies have behaviours but no qualia
-zombie has all behavioural dispositions associated with pain but doesn’t have mental state of pain

Question 15

what does the zombie argument conclude

Answer 15

-if zombies are possible, the behavioural disposition of pain is separate from the mental state
-if behavioural dispositions can be separate from mental state then behaviourism is false.

Question 16

how does behaviourism respond to the zombie argument

Answer 16

-zombies are inconceivable
-mental states are behavioural dispositions and so mental states without behavioural dispositions are inconceivable

Question 17

how does Ryle respond the the zombie argument

Answer 17

to think mental states are distinct from their associated behaviours is to make a category mistake

Question 18

what’s an example of a category mistake

Answer 18

-someone wants to know what Oxford uni is
-so you show them the library, lecture theatres, teacher, students etc
-after the tour the person says ‘you’ve shown me all this but where is Oxford uni’
-there isn’t one thing you can point out and say ‘that is Oxford uni’

Question 19

how does the Oxford uni example apply to behaviourism

Answer 19

-Ryle argues, showing someone the various behavioural dispositions associated with pain is to show them what the mental state of pain is.
-there is no single thing you can point to and say ‘that is pain’.
-concludes it it a category mistake to do so

Question 20

how can you respond to Ryle’s Oxford uni example

Answer 20

Super Spartans

Question 21

who came up with the idea of super spartans

Answer 21

Hilary putnam

Question 22

define super spartans

Answer 22

people who completely suppress any outward demonstration of pain

Question 23

how do super spartan’s show behaviourism is false

Answer 23

-they are an example of mental pain without associated behavioural dispositions and therefore seperate
-therefore behaviourism is false

Question 24

what do super spartans conclude

Answer 24

p1-bahaviousism says to be in pain is to have a disposition to behave in certain ways
p2-super spartans can be in pain but not have a disposition to behave in those ways
p3-so, pain is not the same as behavioural dispositions
c-so behaviourism is false

Question 25

define knowledge of my own mental states

Answer 25

-direct knowledge

Question 26

define knowledge of someone else's mental state

Answer 26

-indirect knowledge -we have to infer how they are feeling from their behaviour

Question 27

what's an example of self knowledge and knowledge of others

Answer 27

if I'm in pain there is no way I could be mistakes however if I see someone scream I may thing they are in pain but they could be acting

Question 28

what does this example show about behaviourism

Answer 28

p1-bahaviourism seems to rule out any asymmetry between self knowledge and knowledge of other people's mental states p2-there clearly is asymmetry between self knowledge and knowledge of others mental states c-so behaviourism must be false

Question 29

how does Ryle respond to the argument of self knowledge and knowledge of others

Answer 29

-self knowledge and knowledge of others mental states are the same thing -we acquire this knowledge the same ways, paying attention -asymmetry is an illusion from having more info about self knowledge than knowledge of others

Question 30

what's an example that asymmetry is an illusion

Answer 30

-internal speech and external speech are the same external behaviour -the fact one is private and one it external isn't important -both the same behaviour

Question 31

what does asymmetry being an illusion conclude

Answer 31

-there is no difference between self knowledge and knowledge of others -you know what someone is thinking by paying attention to what they say, you know what you are thinking by paying attention

Question 32

what responds to asymmetry is an illusion

Answer 32

qualia

Question 33

what does qualia argue

Answer 33

-no amount of knowledge of a persons behaviour and behavioural dispositions gives you knowledge of their qualia -so, there will always be asymmetry between self and other knowledge

Question 34

mental states are nothing more than behavioural dispositions

Answer 34

p1-intro -behaviourism is wrong -define key terms p2-argument 1 -zombies p3-response 1 -category mistake (Ryle) p4-response 2 -super spartans p5-argument 2 -asymmetry between self and others knowledge p6-response 3 -asymmetry is an illusion (Ryle) p7-response 4 -qualia p8-conclusion -mental states are not the same as behavioural dispositions.

Question 35

who responds to Ryle’s category mistake

Answer 35

Hilary Putnam

Question 36

what is Hilary Putnams argument

Answer 36

super spartans