Discussing Philosophy of Mind in Introductory Neuroscience Classes

As a field, neuroscience concerns itself with gaining an understanding of how physical processes occurring in the nervous system are related to mental phenomena such as perception, motor control, and complex thoughts and behaviors. As teachers of neuroscience, we are charged with facilitating an understanding of these relationships in our students. Therefore, it seems that an in-depth discussion of philosophy of mind is a critical and foundational part of any introductory course in neuroscience. One cannot talk about how basic physiological processes like action potential generation and synaptic transmission are the “building blocks” of psychological phenomena without first attempting to define general constructs like “the mind” and “mental states”. Yet, it has been my experience that broad and critical discussions of philosophy of mind are often omitted from both introductory neuroscience textbooks and the classes that use these resources. Some introductory neuroscience textbooks do not directly address issues related to philosophy of mind at all, and those that do often limit the discussion to a brief overview of key historical figures such as Aristotle, Hippocrates, Galen, Descartes, Broca, and Hebb. Indeed, even Kandel, Schwartz, and Jessell’s 1,400+ page Principles of Neural Science (2000) dedicates only a few pages to a direct discussion of philosophy of mind. When issues surrounding philosophy of mind are discussed in introductory texts, they are typically framed around the mind-body problem and the oppositional positions of reductive physicalism and Cartesian dualism. I assert that such a superficial treatment of philosophy of mind in introductory neuroscience classes not only prevents students from fully engaging with the true complexity of what we study, but also inappropriately privileges the stale and outdated physicalism-dualism dichotomy. I believe that such privileging is especially problematic, as the nature of the mind appears to be much more complex than what can be described using the traditional physicalist or dualist approaches. I believe that frank and detailed discussions of the many issues surrounding philosophy of mind are critical for student development, particularly in light of how both the field of neuroscience and popular culture often treat this topic. Contemporary neuroscience research strongly asserts reductive physicalism to be true, while dualism is typically implied in works of popular culture (such as the popular TV series Lost and the blockbuster movie Inception). By allowing students to see the significant flaws in both of these positions, space can be created to discuss more complex and potentially more plausible ways to think about the construct of the mind. It is my belief that instructors of introductory neuroscience classes should dedicate a significant amount of class time (preferably early in the semester) to a discussion of philosophy of mind that (at minimum) focuses on the following four points: