Issues facing epiphenomenalist dualism Flashcards
(15 cards)
breifly define epiphenomenalism
poisition according to which mental states or events are caused by physical states or events in the brain but do not themselves cause anything.
what are the three objections to epiphenomenalist dualism?
- introscpective self knowledge
- the challanege posed by the phenomenology of our mental life (ie as involving causal connections both psychological and psycho-physical)
- the challanege posed by natural selection/evolution
what is the challenge to epiphenomenalist dualism posed by the introspection of self-knowledge
- epiphenomenalism does against the common sense view that our volition (will) causes our actions.
- also introspection seems to show that mental states are causally related
give an example to show how mental states are causall related?
the smell of butter on toast may transport my mind back to memories of my grandfathers kitchen.
TH Huxley on human consciousness
‘Consciousness would appear to be related to the mechanism of the body simply as a collateral product of its working, and to be as completely without any power of modifying that working as the seam-whistle which accompanies the work of a locomotive engine is without influence upon its machinery’
Humans he suggested are ‘consciouss atomata’
explain epiphenomenalism
it seems as if our mental life affects our body and via our body the physical world surrounding us: it seems that sharp pain makes us whince, it seems that fear makes our heart jump etc. But in reality these sequences are the result of causal processes at an underlying physical level : what makes us wince is not the pain but the neurophysiological process which causes the pain.
what is the advantage of epiphenomenalism?
epiphenomenalism avoid the cartesian problem of accounting for how non-material substances can cause anything physical. According to EPI we can give a full account of human behaviour in terms of physical mechanisms - so is compatible with science (like evolution, allows for consciousness to have emerged with the evolving brain)
what does Huxley say about the ‘introspective self-knowldege’
- he remind us of the causal close of the physical (that only physical events can cause physical events)
- meaning that the idea of mental states being causally involved (like the toast smell and memories) must be given up
- while we THINK we have conscious control over our actions there is actually nothing in experience that can establish that we do.
- All we can establish is a conjunction with certain mental and actions not a causal relationship
what is the possible evidence to prove Huxley’s theory is correct (dismissises introspective self knowldege)
benjamin libet experiements
what were benjamin libets experiemts
someone connected to EEG and asked to move hand whenever they like and record when they made the conscious decesion to move their hand,
he discovered that brain processes (EEG waves) came before before the conscious descision was recorded.
why is libets evidence not helpful
not a good experiment, we are talking FRACTIONS of seconds, which is EXTREMELY hard to record and also, surely a brain wave would be generates when trying to record when the conscious decision was made, seems flawed.
expplain
2 . The challenged posed by the phenomenology of our mental life
+ evaluate this
if epiphenomenalism is true, mental states dont cause each other, so the qualia of being in pain cannot cause of beleif that we are in pain. therefore it is hard to know how we know we are in pain
not a particularly good objection since surely is epi is true, the nuerological pain processes cause both the pain qualia and the belief i am in pain (jasper)
most powerful objection
3 . Challenge posed by evolution
- according to the theory of natural selection and evolution the traists that evolve over time are ones that causally contribute to the survival and reproduction of the creature.
- we can assume that qualia evolved, but how if they do not contribute to anything physical?? (hence make no difference to reproduction etc)
what is the epiphenomenalist possible response to the challenge from evolution
SPANDRALS (stephen jay gould)
‘The spandrals of San Marco’
He argues that in the same way as an architect sets out to create columns which requires and brings about spandrals as a by product, perhaps the developed compexity of the brain lead to the emergence of consciousness as a by product even though it doesn’t itself have any impact on survival.
evaluation of spandrals
(lia and camille)
spandrals are an architectural necessity that cannot NOT exist with connected arches, its not fair to compare this to conscioussness. We can conscieve of a zombies (w/o) conscioussness, while this objection states a way EPI could still be okay, it definitely need not be the case.
