The study of the mind, similar to the study of emotions, has had its significant challenges with establishing itself as a scientific study. As a result, the majority of scholars prefer to call it the philosophy of the mind, which is a study into the nature of the mind. Different concepts, including consciousness and mental states are considered in this study. This paper delves into how various scholars have undertaken the concept of the mind and how it is now considered widely.
The mind-body problem is one that is considered from two main perspectives – dualism and monism (Bernstein, 2000). These two schools of thought attempt to explain different areas of study for the mind, including consciousness, mind-body relationships as well as mental events, functions and properties. Substance dualists prefer to think of the mind as an independent substance, while property dualists think of the mind as an amalgamation of different substances coming together to form the mind. On the other hand, monism considers the mind and body as interdependent entities, where the mind would not operate without the body.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Different arguments are made in favor of both schools of thought. One such argument in favor of dualism is the intuition arising from one’s common sense. The layman’s answer to what the mind is reflects their personality and identity – an entity that is innate and intimate to themselves. Often, it is not possible to relate the mind to simply being the brain because of the risk of sounding mechanical or for the lack of connection to that part (LeDoux, 2002). Additionally, dualism finds its support among individuals and scholars who find a critical difference between mental processes and physical processes. In the case of mental processes, some aspect of control can be exerted on them leading to a connection, while physical processes are not subjected to the individual’s control. Therefore, a person cannot ask what a physical process in the brain feels like, but could ask what good music sounds like, or what a sweet drink tastes like, as these are mental processes compared to the former, which is a physical process.
Monism, however, finds no significant difference or divisions between the two. This is the accepted mode of thinking among eastern philosophers. Physicalist monism is the most common form in the west, from where behaviorism finds its expression (LeDoux, 2002). Behaviorism is a mode of thinking that seeks to investigate internal thinking patterns to form predictive outcomes that can be made empirical and counted on as scientific. As a result, behaviorists sought to quantify the internal processes of the individual to come up with a scientific study of the mind and its processes. Nevertheless, behaviorism faced the singular challenge of being counter-intuitive in that the theory could say that the person is expressing behavior whereas the individual had a headache.
Other modes of thinking came in to cater for the failures of behaviorism, including the identity theory, which sought to identify brain state with mental state. This theory suggested that if a mental state A existed in an individual, a corresponding brain state was existing within the same individual. Therefore, the effect of this theory was to suggest an intimate connection between the brain and the mind – almost suggesting that the two were one unit.
Notwithstanding, wide acclamation has not been found to consider the mind studies as a science as behaviorism would not adequately classify this. Therefore, in conclusion, the study of the mind remains a philosophy yet to find the theory of best fit to describe mental processes and the nature of the mind. As a result, different arguments continue to come forward.
References
Bernstein, B. B. (2000). Pedagogy, symbolic control, and identity: Theory, research, critique (No. 4). New York: Rowman & Littlefield.
LeDoux, J. (2002). The Synaptic Self: How Our Brains Become Who We Are. New York: Viking Penguin.
