
Zombies Must Be Dualists - teslacar
http://nautil.us/issue/37/currents/zombies-must-be-dualists
======
CuriouslyC
I once took a philosophy of mind course, and I discovered that most
philosophers are arguing over the definition of consciousness (and in many
cases, of the word "is"). What was really insane to me was philosophers
arguing that the mind doesn't exist. My general opinion of philosophers
dropped pretty hard after that.

~~~
brudgers
Existence is not a predicate. An ontological argument for the mind is no
better or worse than an ontological argument for god in Kant's day. Philosophy
has a history and the language and terminology _evolves_ to intersect with
current ways of thinking. There isn't really progress, just better and worse
philosophers, Kant is among the former. _Critique of Pure Reason_ is highly
regarded for a reason and worth the effort it takes to read for someone
interested in how we got to where we are today in regards to psychology (which
wasn't even a science 130 years ago when the pragmaticist philosopher William
James cooked up _Principles of Psychology_ ).

One of my favorite books is Julian Jane's _Origins of Consciousness in the
Breakdown of the BiCameral Mind_. It's a fun read and not particularly
academic. One of my favorite ideas and one that stuck with me from my
Philosophy of Mind class is John McCarthy's (yes that one) statement that
thermostats have beliefs. It is mentioned in Searle's _Minds Brains and Logic_
(both McCarthy and Searle were out in the bay area, Searle at Cal, McCarthy at
Stanford). _Minds Brains and Logic_ is where Searle lays out the 'Chinese
Room' problem with artificial intelligence in particular and the ordinary way
of reconciling the mind body problem with physicalism in general.

McCarthy's approach comes closer to the radically more honest take on
physicalism: minds are an ordinary property of matter.

