Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that If mental state types cannot be systematically identified with brain state types, then type-identity theory is false as a general account of mind.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
Token-identity theory preserves physicalism without requiring type-level identification of mental and brain states.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Brain state types may be too coarse-grained; more precise neurochemical identifications might yet vindicate type-identity.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
The claim conflates what type-identity theory actually requires with an overly rigid interpretation of 'systematic identification.'
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Multiple realizability shows identical mental states occur in different brain states across species and individuals.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Neural plasticity allows the same mental state to correlate with varying brain configurations over time.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
If type-identity requires systematic one-to-one mapping, and empirical evidence denies this, the theory fails.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Next step
Based on where you are in your exploration
Strongest counterpoint
Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.