Over the years, philosophers have attempted to establish the relationship between philosophy of science and philosophy of mind. The renowned philosopher Thomas Hobbes established a foundation for determining this association, with precursor studies showing that the mind depends on the body just the same way machines work (Chung & Hyland, 2011, pp. 61). Therefore, one acknowledges that it is possible to test the mechanical laws that define the working relationship between the mind and body. In chapter 4 of their book "History and Philosophy of Psychology," Chung and Hyland describe how in philosophy, the association between brain and body and the relationship's scientific perspective. For example, atomism's principle is founded on the philosophical principle that reality is made up of an infinite number of atoms that are entangled in different places in an infinite space (Chung and Hyland, 2011, pp 62). These atoms have subjective qualities, a quality that form the basis for different perspective by different people on a subject matter. The argument relayed in the chapter agrees with Descartes's philosophy on knowledge, which he explains using the human brain and body. The philosophical principles on knowledge by Hobbes and Descartes show that human mental states and processes have similarities with the physical processes. It is apposite to argue that there is a relationship between philosophy of mind and science of science that helps understand naturalism and can be scientifically investigated.
The Theories of Naturalism and Atomism: Perception and Thought
Regardless of their inherent nature, all beings and events in the cosmos can be explained from a scientific perspective. Naturalism philosophers of the 20 th century, such as John Dewey and Sidney Hook, concentrated their efforts to connect philosophy with science. One of their philosophical postulations was that reality could be investigated using scientific methods ( Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, n.d . ). It implies that knowledge of the universe can be explained from a scientific point of view. While naturalism does not suggest the existence of supernatural realities, it recognizes the fact of a supernatural, given that supernatural entities can influence natural objects. These foundations of the principles of naturalism resonate with those of the atomism theory. Atomism theorists such as Democritus of Abdera laid their claims on the approach assumed by natural scientists. According to the atomism theorists, nature's reality can be perceived to contain incalculable atoms, which are infinite motion and space (Chung & Hyland, 2011, pp 62). Since the atoms are in continuous motion in an infinite space, then it is expected that they will knock on each other, creating an endless entanglement. However, what is important about this behavior of the atoms is their subjective characteristics. The knowledge of these subjective attributes is dependent on the experiencing subjects. Therefore, how one perceives an occurrence in the universe depends on their mind and experiences, with the latter being related to one's body.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The above explanation of atomism and naturalism can be separated into an ontological and a methodical component. The ontological element focuses on elements of reality, arguing especially the discrediting of the supernatural place. On the other hand, the methodological part is concerned with ways of understanding reality using scientific methods. However, it is the theory through the subjective characteristics of an object in nature that gives an in-depth insight into perception and thought. For example, a visible object will radiate the atoms with different shapes, the eyes of humans will receive these radiations through sight, thus experiencing different qualitative feelings (Chung & Hyland, pp. 62). This explains why people have different experiences from the object in the external space. According to atomism theorists, a human mind will collect these atoms through the five senses of the body, which are not real but lead a person's mind to the truth about reality. Resultantly, the atomism theory provides an argument on how the human body and mind work in relation to the universe's dynamics.
Creating Realities in Nature
The influence of science in understanding human nature and how individuals discern reality cannot be ignored. Hobbes is one of the renowned theorists to explore the link between science and understanding the universe's nature. The philosopher assumed a materialistic approach to understanding this link whereby he perceived the humans as mechanical beings (Chung & Hyland, 2011, pp. 63). Hobbes' position is buttressed on the notion that a person's actions must be understood from the perspective of how their body behaves and the forces influencing this behavior. Hobbes' school of thought agrees with the atomist and naturalists about the independent existence of a supernatural spirit from a human body. Such a position created a need to understand what then drives one to understand nature and its characteristic objects vents. One realizes that the atoms making the human body must be in continuous motion, colliding with atoms from other objects, which affects human senses consequently a motion in these senses. Once this motion is initiated in a sense such as human sight, it subsequently creates another in the brain, which in itself is the reality of that object. Like atomists, naturalists, through their ontological perspective, argue that there is nothing more to the human mind, biological and social realms than the presence of entities that can communicate to bodily senses. Hobbes' argument is conceptualized around the constructs of perception, attention and concentration, thought, and dream.
The three pillars form a foundation for understanding the philosophy of mind and philosophy of science. First, human perception comprises three elements sensing, discriminating, and recognizing (Chung & Hyland, 2011, pp. 63). The human sense functionality receives atomic signals from an object and then compares those impacts to retained signals, thus allowing one to compare and differentiate different objects. Therefore, one can either discriminate or recognize a certain object depending on previously available information. Second, attention and concentration happen when a strong and persistent motion impacts human sense parts, causing the flow of the resultant signal waves to the heart, causing the subject sense organ to receive or register other motion (Chung & Hyland, 2011, pp. 63). Due to this, the human mind will condition that sense organ to pay attention and concentrate on the initial persistent motion. Human thought is the third aspect that supports Hobbes' argument. The human mind is important in coordinating the reception and decoding of signals from the universe. However, differently, dreams are stored memories of stored sensation collected over time and, since they do not have an end to themselves, cannot lead to new ideas (Chung & Hyland, 2011, pp. 63). The key point from the three constructs is the mechanical aspects that characterize understanding nature. From a subject radiating signals, the human's body sense functions receiving the signal to the brain decoding the nature of the signals, all comprise of a mechanical process.
The functionalism theory of mind can be used to expound on the relationship between the philosophy of mind and philosophy of science and their application in understanding naturalism. Although atomists and naturalists do not believe in the existence of supernatural beings, functionalists believe that immaterial substances are conceivable, which influence the worldview of human beings (Heil, 2019, 88). The functionalism theory of mind offers solutions to historical, philosophical riddles about the human mind and its relation to the human body. From a functionalist perspective, the working relationship between the human mind and the human body can be compared to that of computing machines. Considering the working of a computing machine, one must abstract its operations from its hardware. Therefore, one can view humans as a computing machine while the body representing the hardware. A human mind can be viewed as having the ability to perform different kinds of operations emanating from signals that the rest of the body sends (Heil, 2019, 90). For instance, the eyes, which houses the sensory functions of sight, will receive signals from an object in the external world and send them to the mind for discernment. The mind will process those signals using information stored in it from past experiences to decode what the object is and thus enriching the already stored details. Such preliminary characterization only works to impart functionalism, which lays a foundation for the argument that humans are mere mechanical machines, but they have computing power that is rigidly programmed to behave as they do.
Naturalism is based on cogito, which is the principle that posits that for one to establish the existence of an object or being, the process must stem from thinking or being aware. Cogito is the fundamental condition for thinking, reasoning, and perceiving one's surroundings. According to Chung and Hyland (2011, 66), human beings are essentially thinking beings, a function that is occasioned through their minds. Descartes believes that the fact that humans can think and still exists makes them incorporeal beings, which lays the foundation for the previous problem of body and mind. According to Descartes' logic, the human mind is purely for thinking while the body is mechanical and thus can be influenced by physical laws. The human body is the entry point for all signals that emanate from the external environment, while the nerves serve to mechanically relay information to the mind. The notion of dualism implied above indicates that the human mental states and processes are identical to the physical states and processes. Identity philosophers argue that a specific type of mental state which results in certain knowledge can only be correlated to an identical neural event (Chung & Hyland, 2011, 68). The identity theory is based on the idea that the human brain state can explain the existence of a given object. However, the identity theorists seem to negate the role of the body in developing or enriching the already available knowledge. The working relationship between mind and body can be explained through the philosophy of science.
The Philosophy of Science factor
As mentioned above, human beings are mechanical beings with enhanced computing power, which is executed in their minds. The human brain, which is part of the mechanical body, constitute the hardware on which the mental software which is the brain runs. One must understand that minds are not just abstract systems that are causally associated with the bodies, but they are higher-level material systems (Heil, 2019, 111). For example, feeling pain can not be simplistically be described as mere brain processes, but it should be viewed as a computational process. This analogy lays a foundation for a functional viewpoint, which is characterized by both two strands, explanatory and ontological perspectives. The explanatory perspective provides that human beings with their computational abilities try to understand how something works. For example, if a person is given a machine that they have never encountered before, they will attempt to use reverse engineering approaches to understand how it works. This will require one to observe the inputs and outputs while conjecturing its computational operations and testing the resultant hypotheses with new inputs and outputs (Heller, 2019). This whole process is scientific in nature, as supported by functionalists who propose that the human mind is analogous to a computational machine. Differently, the ontological viewpoint can be described as attempting to understand the alien machine from a mechanical perspective. One will want to know how the machine is put together and how it functions mechanically. For example, the interest of a mechanical engineer is physical in nature. One realizes that the interest of a mechanical engineer and that of a programmer are heavily varied. However, it is important not to think of both the computational functionality and mechanical aspect of an object as being distinct, but they are interdependent.
In understanding naturalism, one must view science as the process of producing knowledge and also acknowledge epistemological conflicts that characterize this viewpoint. For example, a primary question of concern pertains to the definitive source of knowledge. From the empiricism perspective, humans develop knowledge from experience. If a person wants to know what their environment is like, they have to engage to their senses such as sight, smell, and taste, among others. Relatedly becomes challenging to describe the actual meaning of the knowledge of the world compared, for example, with that of mathematics. Empiricism is often associated with John Locke, who held that human experience is the ultimate source of ideas (Hitchcock, 2004, 4). For example, a person must first feel pain and register it in their mind, a process that culminates in experience. Experience is enough to justify human beliefs about their universe. After a person undergoes an event and registers it in their mind, they can formulate hypotheses without the need for sensory input. However, empiricism differs from the rationalism school of thought identified with the likes of Rene Descartes. Descartes holds that human reason is the definitive source of knowledge. According to this philosopher, knowledge should be established using mathematical models that will allow people to infer conclusions (Hitchcock, 2004, 4). Understanding naturalism is a science because it is cumulative, whereby new ideas are added to the previously acquired experience.
Problems associated with philosophy, such as the relationship between body and mind and the related subject on knowledge generation in an entirely material universe, are shaped by scientific findings and theories. Science relies heavily on inductive arguments, which move from determinate sets of data to general theories (Rosenberg, 2005). These sets of data arise from interacting with one's environment and, over time, forming the experiences mentioned earlier. Scientific processes do not exist in the form of a chain of separate inferences and refutations, but these components are connected whereby the link is defined by the available data. The metatheoretical suppositions that form the basis for scientific knowledge creation agree with the empiricism argument provided earlier. Observations that happen through the body's sensory functionalities give humans direct insights into the reality of the universe. Similarly, realities can be explained in empiricist terms, which, however, demands a more thorough assessment of epistemology of thought process that leads to knowledge creation. Therefore, one acknowledges that observational evidence plays a crucial role in supporting scientific supposition on the relationship between mind and body and creating reality in the universe. It is possible to explain the entire process of decoding reality using scientific analogies of the human mind has a semblance to a computing system. On the other hand, the human body works as the receptor of signals from objects and events in the universe.
Conclusion
Contributions by different philosophers have shown that there is a connection between philosophy of mind and philosophy of science. Hobbes laid a basis that shows that the mind relies on the mechanical functioning of the body to develop knowledge about the universe and its objects and events. Thus, it is possible to apply scientific rules to test the relationship between the mind and body. One of the most appropriate principles that can be used to describe this association is the atomism construct that provided the foundation to how knowledge of reality is created. Descartes escalates this philosophical theorizes a notch higher by explaining how the human brain and body work together to establish reality about the universe and its elements. However, it is the naturalism theory that directly postulates that reality can be investigated using scientific methods. On the one hand, the atomist's reality of the cosmos can be perceived to have incalculable atoms that radiate signals, which are in turn received by human sensory functionalities. The underlying principle behind the atomism theory is their subjective characteristics, which form the basis for knowledge creation. One must recognize that knowledge is the sum of all experiences that a person has about a specific object or event. The ontological perspective of the relationship between atomism and naturalism is that both seem to discredit the existence of a supernatural being while the methodological focus on understanding realities using scientific methods. Hobbes further attempts to evaluate the link between science and the discerning reality. Hobbes significantly relies on atomism to show the relationship between mind and body and its connection to knowledge creation. Together with functionalism theory, the naturalism and atomism theories expound on the link between the philosophy of mind and philosophy of science and their arguments for understanding naturalism. The human thinking process can be explained using the cogito principle, which explains how science can be used to explain the relationship between the human mind and the body's mechanical nature.
References
Chung, M. C., & Hyland, M. E. (2011). History and Philosophy of Psychology . John Wiley & Sons.
Heil, J. (2019). Philosophy of mind: A Contemporary Introduction . Routledge. https://silo.pub/philosophy-of-mind-a-contemporary-introduction.html
Heller, M. (2019). How is Philosophy in Science possible? Zagadnienia Filozoficzne w Nauce , (66), 231-249. http://cfejsh.icm.edu.pl/cejsh/element/bwmeta1.element.ojsissn-2451-0602-year-2019-issue-66-article-482/c/482-483.pdf
Hitchcock, C. R. (2004). Introduction: What is the Philosophy of Science. https://authors.library.caltech.edu/44793/1/hitchcock-2004.pdf
Rosenberg, A (2005). Philosophy of Science: A Contemporary Introduction . Routledge. https://is.muni.cz/www/rostanek/041534316X.pdf
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. (n.d.). Naturalism . Retriessved https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/naturalism/
