The Mind-Body Problem

The MIT Press Essential Knowledge Series

De: Jonathan Westphal

Narrado por: Sean Pratt

Philosophers from Descartes to Kripke have struggled with the glittering prize of modern and contemporary philosophy: the mind-body problem. The brain is physical. If the mind is physical, we cannot see how. If we cannot see how the mind is physical, we cannot see how it can interact with the body. And if the mind is not physical, it cannot interact with the body. Or so it seems.

In this book the philosopher Jonathan Westphal examines the mind-body problem in detail, laying out the reasoning behind the solutions that have been offered in the past and presenting his own proposal. The sharp focus on the mind-body problem, a problem that is not about the self or consciousness or the soul or anything other than the mind and the body, helps clarify both problem and solutions. Westphal outlines the history of the mind-body problem, beginning with Descartes. He describes mind-body dualism, which claims that the mind and the body are two different and separate things, nonphysical and physical, and he also examines physicalist theories of mind; antimaterialism, which proposes limits to physicalism and introduces the idea of qualia; and scientific theories of consciousness.

Finally, Westphal examines the largely forgotten neutral monist theories of mind and body held by Ernst Mach, William James, and Bertrand Russell, which attempt neither to extract mind from matter nor to dissolve matter into mind. Westphal proposes his own version of neutral monism. This version is unique among neutral monist theories in offering an account of mind-body interaction.

©2016 Massachusetts Institute of Technology (P)2016 Gildan Media LLC

Excellent Book

Entertaining even if you’re largely familiar with the topic areas. I learned some new things, and really appreciate the author’s criticism of each system along with their case for neutral monism, which I’m partial to.

An overview of the problem does not profound discussion make

This book takes a magnifying glass to what seems to be a very particular branch of philosophy. I don't think each position is represented very well, and while the book throws around a large number of fancy terms gesturing towards the work of other philosophers, i.e. functionalism, epiphenominalism, behavioralism, panpsychism, etc. it doesn't really explain what those positions actually are. Then presents them as a single flawed idea, and moves on.

The whole book, supposing to speak on the mind body problem, takes the whole question to be of utmost importance, without giving any meaningful examples of philosophies that have solved the problem and moved on. With maybe with an exception for Witgenstein. The author comes from a strictly western viewpoint.

All in all, this book is alright as a very basic introduction to the mind body problem, but feels ultimately not as useful of a read and engaging with the works of philosophy the books points to.

Good Intermediate Text, but a Bit Too Editorial

What did you like best about The Mind-Body Problem? What did you like least?

The book lays out the basic arguments of various positions in the philosophy of mind and puts them in conversation well, at a level appropriate for listening while walking your dog.

What does Sean Pratt bring to the story that you wouldn’t experience if you just read the book?

The narrator nicely conveys the smug superiority that underlies most philosophical texts.

Any additional comments?

The book is not a simple exposition of the various positions in the philosophy of mind. The author will give you his opinion on the arguments he presents. While his treatment of physicalism is somewhat balanced and lengthy, he dismisses panpsychism out of hand and without argument. As a survey text this seems inappropriate. As does his endorsement of neutral monism in the final chapter.

Left me wanting

Sorry, but this left me wanting to, wondering what he meant by “mind” and “consciousness.” I find neutral monism less than satisfying.

Torturous Mental Flagellation

Got through 3 & 1/2 chapters and had to quit. Either this book proves I hate philosophy or that taking a false premise is an exercise in futility. If the former, I plead guilty. If the latter, I hope to find a treatment that doesn't assume itself up its own rectum.. Highly not recommended.