Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Topic-neutral formulas must still individuate the target ... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→The identity theorist need not use the word 'mental' in the topic-neutral formula

    Topic-neutral formulas must still individuate the target phenomena, and 'mental' carries irreducible intentional content that no neutral descriptor captures.

    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Intentionality (aboutness) is constitutive of mental states; no purely physical or functional description captures 'of-ness' without circularity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Topic-neutral language abstracts away the qualitative character that individuates specific mental contents from their physical implementations.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Historical attempts at neural or computational reduction have failed to preserve first-person content, suggesting it requires distinctive vocabulary.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Intentional content itself may be a complex functional property analyzable via causal-relational frameworks without irreducible 'mental' primitives.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The felt irreducibility of 'mental' language could reflect practical limitations in our current descriptive apparatus rather than metaphysical necessity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Even if 'mental' captures something distinctive, it may still supervene on topic-neutral properties without being *reduced* to them.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Connections

    2 topics

    Consciousness & Mind1 linkedPhilosophy of Language1 linked

    Related

    Even if 'mental' captures something distinctive, it may still supervene on topic...Historical attempts at neural or computational reduction have failed to preserve...Intentional content itself may be a complex functional property analyzable via c...Intentionality (aboutness) is constitutive of mental states; no purely physical ...
    +3 moreShow less
    The felt irreducibility of 'mental' language could reflect practical limitations...The identity theorist need not use the word 'mental' in the topic-neutral formul...Topic-neutral language abstracts away the qualitative character that individuate...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    2 (1 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit