Total Posts:12|Showing Posts:1-12
Jump to topic:

Epiphenomenalism

The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2012 11:27:15 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
The Fool: One of the problems that the typical naive empiricist is faced with is epiphenomenalism. That is the view in philosophy of mind that our entire consciousness/mind, is like an accident of physicality. In that it provides no function and served no purpose. We can give it the Razor, and it would affect nothing about the universe, for they are all mere illusions.

Thoughts?

Arguments?
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/11/2012 3:22:53 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
I have mentioned this before. Consciousness is to physicality much like dreams are to life. Dreams have no function and are simply the product of turning off certain parts of the mind and leaving others on, as is optimal for our needs.

Then again, that's a very narrow standard I am using to go about it. I would never resort to calling that a true statement.

But it's a true statement.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
Kinesis
Posts: 3,667
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/11/2012 4:28:56 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Seems absurd, at least prima facie. Epiphenominalism entails that my intention to type on this keyboard has absolutely no causal role in my typing. It's just a causally inert by-product.

It could be true, but I'm going to assume it's false until I see a good reason to believe it.
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/11/2012 4:58:06 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/11/2012 4:28:56 AM, Kinesis wrote:
Seems absurd, at least prima facie. Epiphenominalism entails that my intention to type on this keyboard has absolutely no causal role in my typing. It's just a causally inert by-product.

It could be true, but I'm going to assume it's false until I see a good reason to believe it.

Why is not the reason which has the burden of proof?
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/11/2012 11:23:41 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Being an Epiphenomenalist is like being a Behaviorist who simply admits that you get to watch a movie along the way...

Behaviorism died for a reason.... That is, because it would seem your being self-aware and being able to come to understandings of things very much influences what you do.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/11/2012 11:25:29 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/11/2012 11:23:41 AM, mattrodstrom wrote:
Being an Epiphenomenalist is like being a Behaviorist who simply admits that you get to watch a movie along the way...

Behaviorism died for a reason.... That is, because it would seem your being self-aware and being able to come to understandings of things very much influences what you do.

It is needed to explain your behavior.. Your functioning as you do doesn't make sense BUT that you have a mind.. Have thoughts about things.

Your mind clearly Does play a role in your behavior.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/11/2012 11:40:55 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/11/2012 11:25:29 AM, mattrodstrom wrote:
At 7/11/2012 11:23:41 AM, mattrodstrom wrote:
Being an Epiphenomenalist is like being a Behaviorist who simply admits that you get to watch a movie along the way...

Behaviorism died for a reason.... That is, because it would seem your being self-aware and being able to come to understandings of things very much influences what you do.

It is needed to explain your behavior.. Your functioning as you do doesn't make sense BUT that you have a mind.. Have thoughts about things.

Your mind clearly Does play a role in your behavior.

your mental events ARE physical events...

and those events DO have effects upon further physical events.

It only makes sense to even Think of something like Epiphenomenalism if you kind of Lean toward Dualism in the first place.. Separating Mind from the physical...

Physical events which occur in a certain system Are synonymous with experience and understanding occur occuring... They don't Lead To Experience/understanding which is of a different sphere.. They ARE it.

And so those phsical events, that experience/understanding, can and does cause other physical phenomena... and is not Separate or Unconnected.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/11/2012 3:43:26 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/11/2012 5:31:11 AM, Kinesis wrote:
At 7/11/2012 4:58:06 AM, FREEDO wrote:
Why is not the reason which has the burden of proof?

...what?

You are saying the burden of proof is upon showing that consciousness does NOT have a reason.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
belle
Posts: 4,113
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/11/2012 4:54:59 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/11/2012 4:28:56 AM, Kinesis wrote:
Seems absurd, at least prima facie. Epiphenominalism entails that my intention to type on this keyboard has absolutely no causal role in my typing. It's just a causally inert by-product.

It could be true, but I'm going to assume it's false until I see a good reason to believe it.

isn't it possible that both the intention you experience and the action of typing are both produced by some unconscous event on the brain such that they seem linked but in fact are not? Its far from the normal way we think about things but I don't think it's entirely absurd... The implications are pretty uncomfortable though, I will give you that. I think it was Daniel Wegner who wrote an interesting book on the topic called the illusion of conscious will... Its a really good book you should check it out
evidently i only come to ddo to avoid doing homework...
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2012 3:33:10 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
The Fool: It would awsome to see if anybody could refute it. Prove it wrong. I people try give it a shot. If you really don't like it.The only people who can't get out are the Positivist.
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2012 7:42:53 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/10/2012 11:27:15 AM, The_Fool_on_the_hill wrote:
The Fool: One of the problems that the typical naive empiricist is faced with is epiphenomenalism. That is the view in philosophy of mind that our entire consciousness/mind, is like an accident of physicality. In that it provides no function and served no purpose. We can give it the Razor, and it would affect nothing about the universe, for they are all mere illusions.

Thoughts?

No.

Arguments?

Our conscious minds has enabled humanity to have direct influence on the entire planet, and extend humanity's general understanding outside into the universe.

This isn't to say that this grants consciousness function and purpose, but it's certainly relevant.