Mind - A Brief Introduction by Searle - Literature review Example

? Searle, J.R. (2004). Mind: A brief introduction. Oxford: Oxford Press Introduction As has been noted, it is right to allege that some of the most indispensable technique that philosophy applies is still the cause of its major problems in application. Searle (1998) in his book poses a brief introductory indeed. The main reason that could be given to explain this might be based on the fact that the book goes beyond introducing the user to a philosophical subject that is very catching and this he does in a very clear and accessible language. One would argue that Searle is more ambitious in his brief introduction when he argues that there is need for a radical break from the whole tradition after Cartesian and subsequently, all of its conceptual frameworks (Searle, 2004). This paper reviews Searle, J.R. (2004). Mind: A brief introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press by trying to point out and discuss some of the major issues and concepts raised by this author in the book. Mind: A brief introduction Review It appears that according to Searle, the human mind could be delinked from its biological form and that this mind could occur as forming part of the nature itself. The main concepts that appear in this book are the dualism arguments by Descartes, the emergence of materialism in the contemporary thoughts of trying to adapt to the issues of artificial intelligence and the ideas of social science together with its theories. Searle notes that the mind’s philosophy is very unique when it comes to the pool of philosophical subjects. He attributes this argument on the basis of these philosophical subjects being false despite their fame and influence in philosophical thinking. When he refers to theories, Searle implies all forms of positions held by dualists and the materialistic approaches fronted by others. The truths and lies are thought of as being able to fit within the realms of the human mind and then relating this to the natural world (Searle, 2004). The biggest problem with many philosophers originates from their conceptualization of the minds in their scholarly arguments. People do believe in the dualism in which case man is endowed with both mind and body. The philosophers in the current world do believe in the application of materialism and shunning immaterialism as far as the soul is concerned (Searle, 2004). The dozen problems that Searle tries to explain here, he alleges originate from the legacy left by Descartes towards philosophical thinking. The dozen problems he points out are the classical ‘mind-body problem’ where he argues that the body and mind do belong to very different and quite incompatible metaphysical orientations which are physical and spiritual in nature (Searle, 2004). The other problem is that of other minds where the mental lives of other beings could only be inferred to thus legitimizing the existing sceptical perceptions envisaging their ownership of a mind. The third problem Searle identifies scepticism of the external world and this is coupled with the fourth problem of perception analysis. Perception seems as the most obvious route to gain entry into the external world. Ideas mediate perception and access to the external world. The fifth problem is that of free will. Even when the process of making decisions is as a result of the inability to establish the degree of quantum of events by use of the mind, the outcome would not give man the free will. It would rather provide a simple random element that is not predictable in the behaviour and decisions made. The sixth problem identified is the ‘self and personal identity’ in regard to the facts of experience and person over time (Searle, 2004). In the seventh problem, Searle debates whether animals have minds or not. Descartes avoided the religious problems associated with this question on the basis of immortality since mind is soul and soul does not die with the body and thus if animals had minds, they would also inherit the kingdom of God! The eighth problem is that of sleep. When one stops being conscious, that person stops existing. Cartesian and Descartes’s arguments are put into perspective. In his ninth problem of intentionality, Searle argues that Cartesianism does not limit intentionality but that this concerns the general mind. Intentionality is linked to the capacity that the mind has in terms of mental states. He wonders how it is possible to have events which appear in the brains to be used in referring far away from themselves and how comes the minds possess intentional contents that are specific to themselves. The concept of intentionality that is intrinsic and derivative arises (Searle, 2004). The tenth problem is the ‘mental causation and epiphenomenalism’. The general allegation is that the conscious experience has its roots in brain processes but the choice of making sense of these experiences is left open. It baffles him the way mental states that are not physical and not existing in the physical world could cause actions in the physical world. The eleventh problem is that of ‘the unconscious’ and he wonders the kind of facts related to the brain that are able to transform them into mental and simultaneously do so to the unconscious. The final problem is the ‘psychological and social explanation’ which poses the seen variations in logical structure between physical and psychological explanations (Searle, 2004). Conclusion In the chapters that follow, Searle exhausts his discussion based on the concepts mentioned above. He thoroughly addresses the many versions of materialism from ancient to current artificial intelligence. He further gives classical arguments that are critique of dualism and materialism. The issues of consciousness as related to structure and interaction of the body and mind are also touched. The epilogue on the philosophy and scientific view of the world is a serious defence of the ontological realism that is both fascinating and convincing. Searle poses that his method applied in philosophy is geared towards forgetting the history of any given problem and delinking self from the ways of tradition about such a phenomenon and simply state the given facts the way we perceive them. He points out his strategy of addressing this as starting with very simple cases that are also unproblematic and from there build onto the difficult and puzzling ones (Searle, 2004). The only problem that might occur with Searle’s approach, however, is the distinction that exists between the naive knowledge that is seen to be ordinary and the scientific knowledge, which is most of the time blurred. The observation of reality in terms of relativism and independence might also be other issues that might lead him into problems. However, the book is quite a philosophical masterpiece that needs to be well read, understood, and concepts build upon in trying to correct the mess that ancient philosopher did either intentionally or mistakably! List of References Searle, J.R. (2004). Mind: A brief introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press Read More