Mentalism versus Dualism : Replies to Commentaries
نویسنده
چکیده
The target paper’s main point is that mentalism and, to this extent, mentalistic (e.g., cognitive) psychology can only be materialistic and, hence, cannot be dualistic. The commentaries to the paper are insightful and stimulating. A few call for corrections, the rest for further clarification. Most criticize the mind-brain identity theory. This criticism is beside the point, as I did not intend to champion this theory (or functionalism), but only use it to illustrate how mentalism commits us to materialism. Still, all the criticisms of the theory are fallacious (ad hominem attacks against philosophers of mind, commitment to a particular ontology of causation and personhood). Other commentators criticize my focus on ontology, also fallaciously, by arguing ad populum (few scientists are interested in it) and name-calling that misrepresents ontology as antiscientific. Overall, none of the commentaries invalidates the target paper’s main point.
منابع مشابه
Single Versus Multi-Faceted Implementation Strategies – Is There a Simple Answer to a Complex Question? A Response to Recent Commentaries and a Call to Action for Implementation Practitioners and Researchers
متن کامل
Clarifying the Triangular Circuit Theory of Attention and its Relations to Awareness Replies to Seven Commentaries
Replies are given to the commentaries of the seven cognitive science experts. Additional circuit diagrams clarify thalamic operations in attention and basal ganglia operations by which motivation affects attention. Selection-by-suppression and negative priming are accounted for within frontal control areas. Confusions between the terms awareness and consciousness persist, owing to the powerful ...
متن کاملEvan Thompson Reply to Commentaries
Let me express my deep thanks to the contributors for taking the time to read my book, Mind in Life, and for writing their thoughtful commentaries, from which I have learned a great deal. Special thanks are due to Tobias Schlicht, whose hard work and dedication made this volume possible. In what follows, I will respond singly to each contributor (in alphabetical order) and do my best to address...
متن کاملReplies to Critics: Explaining Subjectivity
This article replies to the main objections raised by the commentators on Carruthers (1998a). It discusses the question of what evidence is relevant to the assessment of dispositional higher-order thought (HOT) theory; it explains how the actual properties of phenomenal consciousness can be dispositionally constituted; it discusses the case of pains and other bodily sensations in non-human anim...
متن کاملMentalism, mechanisms, and medical analogues: reply to Wakefield (1998).
J. C. Wakefield's (1998) critique of W. C. Follette and A. C. Houts's (1996) article is addressed by raising questions about (a) mentalism as a framework for studying psychopathology, (b) the nature of inferred mechanisms and the process of making such inferences, and (c) the accuracy of claiming that the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM; American Psychiatric Associati...
متن کامل