 How you met you for lunch day. Welcome to the course. The title of this course is Contemporary issues philosophy of mind and cognition. Now I want to give my daughters 선물. from department of t o walkeding of humanities and social sciences. This course is also said with the proto professor Rajkilo Sornath. We now teach philosophy in humanities and social sciences. аств .  probation . . Ú ні olsuneting  vars ca r n t as .  Kund atem creat ��  Directory as a Hole and Consciousness is a Centrel to Human Life as a Armor and Consciousness is a Studied by different disciplines foreghample people from the Background of Neuroccience Cognitive Psychology and Artificial Intelligence  schizophrenic intellect. ğlition etas guni su��니다  Österreich  때도  Kensuke un dou � nf ଒  Biraz ownik  indisp verk  infring  acoustics or history and what is the aspect of why this question is arise. Now, the single question is relates with human life. . festa. We innit to look at how this question is uses related to life and how this question is sounds the time memorial. I said it at a time memorial because this question has been debated and discussed inUs in governship. Now consider this question is been debated సిరాగొవ నిరాయెవరం. ప్వ్వ్యరాలిరం అదౌి. పార్టి కాంట్లాప్టిరిడికీచింపత్గం఻ఇరిస్రంం ప్వ్యరింసి. మోస్సిఆం మోసిపోాకీనికమో� Now, then if it is a phenomenon which is to be realized and then the question is how do we talk about it because I mean the very talk of this subject becomes a problematic one  DENNIS IS A PART OF THIS SUBJECT BECOMES A PROBLEMATIC ONE BECAUSE IT IS NOT AVELABLE THERE, MEANING THEREBY IT IS NOT AVELABLE IN THE WORLD BUT MANY NATURALISTIC THINKERS IN THE CONTEMPORARY TIME HAVE DISCUSED THAT CONSUCECENCES IS PART OF THE WORLD, CONSUCECENCES IS RELATED TO THE namon. Now, again and again I will be talking about consciousness particularly because consciousness is same as mind we度nt discuss that consciousness is something different from mind. But if you look at bupanishadas howises you know then particularly in buhamanacgova upanishadas this story of two birds that are know one and consciousness is something which is different, which is independent of the mind, which is independent of the mind. In my experience, knowing that the mind is descending, which is very different, which is very different, and knowing that the mind is in a very different state, which is a gebaut ڈ overflow ڈ corrupt ڈ ڈ ڈ ڈ  October 2020 2013,  follows life Really what questions philosophy puts forth to all of us? So, for example, what is justice play toy is discussing this in republic? What is good? In a similar way people are also discussing what is consciousness? So is consciousness real full? Is justice real? নান ন্জটার পার ন্গি অছান্কব মাযাকি সাযাকব অধখাদাযার দা, হ্ব নাদা সিন্কব স diarr�দান্কব নি because we all are conscious human beings and there are also conscious beings in the world. Now, how we are different from other beings? What is our identity as a human being and as one of the distinct, unique being in the reality. So, that is the topic which we will be discussing in this course. Now, consciousness central to our studies, what are the issues that we will be mainly concerned with? The issues here are the problem of dualism, the problem of reductionism, the problem of free will, the problem of personal identity, etc. Now, dualism is a philosophical problem precisely because in the history of philosophy people have been discussing about what is the reality? What is the reality as a whole and as such? Now, philosophers have again and again replied to this metaphysical questions that what is the reality? Philosophical enquiries precisely a metaphysical enquiry and metaphysics provides a foundation to philosophical enquiries. Now, what is reality? Is the reality constituted of matter and some other material elements or is that a reality is constituted of something which is non-material, non-physical, etc. So, when we talk about non-material, non-physical, we do refer to this notion of consciousness, that consciousness is not a physical phenomenon, rather it is a non-physical phenomenon. Now, this debate is very prominent in the philosophy of Dekath. So, we will be discussing about this problem addressing to the contemporary you know philosophers, how this contemporary philosophers like John Searle, Daniel Tannat and Hilary Putnam, P.F. Strusson and many others have you know discussed this problem, whether philosophy really resolve the issues is a matter of debate again. We do discuss problems, we do debate on certain issues, but are this debate continuous? Yes, they are continuous, they are continuous because we need to look at the significance of the debate, we need to understand what is the significance of this debate. So, philosophical analysis, philosophical explanation do aspire for some kind of understanding. Philosophy does not explain away things like as it happened in the case of science, science is mostly concerned with explanation, particularly causal explanations and most of the philosophers of science who have been influenced by the scientific understanding of the reality of consciousness, they have tried to you know explain away the consciousness, the notion of consciousness from the reality. Now, so their whole approach is eliminative. Now, how science talks about this notion of consciousness, as I mentioned earlier that philosophy as a discipline is not religious, philosophy as a discipline is not scientific, but philosophy has its unique position. Philosophy as Wittgenstein once remarked that philosophy is neither above science nor below the science, it is somewhere, somewhere in the sense that it has its unique way of describing the reality. So, therefore philosophical explanations are different, they are unique because they generate understanding, they are not a discipline which we will be talking about dogmas or the disciplines which are nihilistic in approach, philosophy is a rational enquiry and philosophical approach has been critical and so on and so forth. So, as a rational enquiry we would try to locate the issues, we will try to study you know these issues of reductionism, dualism, emergentism etcetera and try to put them in a perspective. So, from that point of view philosophy is a rational enquiry and it is critical because we would examine these issues, we would examine rather says how this total is talking about the concept of soul and how Descartes is feuding such an enterprise and how Descartes further you know refuted, refuted by the contemporary thinkers like Danette and Sir. Our major thesis is centered around this you know some of the important philosophers of mind particularly John Sir, Daniel Danette, Jerry Forder, Michael Teichmann and Paul Churchland and many others. Now, when we discuss these philosophers, the main aim is to go back to the history of the problem. Now, where this problem arised before and how these philosophers are addressing to the issues. Now, this is important because most of the time we find as if philosophers are only you know trying to repeat certain issues, but this is not the case. So, we have to go back to the history of the problem. So, we are only you know trying to repeat certain issues, but this repetition is certainly a philosophical enterprise. Other way of looking at is that they do not just simply disagree. Now, disagreements is something very special to philosophy as philosophical enquiries do not have only one view. Philosophers do disagree and that disagreement causes pluralism. The disagreements enlighten us in many ways in the sense that when two philosophers disagree, they disagree on their approach to the problem. Say for example, Searle and Danette disagrees with each other on this particular notion called consciousness or mind. Philosophers do disagree with each other. Now, their disagreement is based on their philosophical presuppositions. Say for instance, Searle disagrees with Descartes. When Descartes says mind and body are two independent substances, Searle disagrees with that. Searle says they are not two independent substances. Rather mind and body are causally connected with each other. Of course, Searle agrees to this idea that mind cannot be reducible to the brain processes. And when he says that, he also disagrees with his contemporary philosophers of mind. For instance, Daniel Danette. Daniel Danette would rather feel comfortable with this idea that mind is identical with the brain and brain process is something central to the discourse of the mind. So, there is nothing called mind as such that what is there is only the brain processes. So, Danette's position is quite different from the position that Searle will be taking. So, the contemporary debate would not only debate about the existing philosophical theories about the concept of mind, rather the contemporary debate is centered around how this problem can be traced from the history. And we will try to show how our philosophical inquiry we do make progress, not by explaining the facts as it is done in the case of science, but by you know initiating, you know bringing new facts and clarifying the concepts. So, clarity is the major issues here. The clarity is something that we would like to achieve when we talk about consciousness, because for many consciousness is a mystical entity. Consciousness is a religious entity, but for a philosopher consciousness is not mystical. Consciousness is not something which is not there. We are we are not nihilistic about consciousness. We do talk about consciousness and we will be talking about what is the ontological significance of consciousness. So, in this perspective our approach will be both contemporary and we will also look at how the contemporary philosophers are initiating their debate and bringing new ideas to us. That is our aim. When we say that a philosophical knowledge or a philosophy inquiry is conceptual inquiry, we try to find out how certain concepts are difficult to understand, difficult to translate to you know ordinary languages. So, probably the lack of translation, the lack of analysis you know gives us this feeling that consciousness is something mystical. So, in that context philosophy or philosophers are trying to find out how mystical. So, in that context philosophy or philosophers bring new concepts into the discourse. So, that is you know something significant. So, concept displacement as Prof. Pradhan used to discuss that concept displacement is something very significant to philosophical inquiry as disagreement is something significant. Now, concept displacement is something significant. If Descartes is talking about substance dualism, then Searle is bringing that property dualism. So, people before Searle probably did not talk about property dualism as you know it has been talked about contemporary philosophy of mind. So, people only thought that yes there is only one kind of dualism that is called substance dualism and consciousness is does not have any property or consciousness is not a property. So, concept displacement is a part of the discourse of philosophy of mind. Now, philosophy as a foundational discipline would definitely initiate this question what is consciousness and how consciousness is related to human life. So, in this context we will be pointing out some of the issues which as I mentioned earlier that philosophy talks about the reality and philosophical questions are fundamental questions. They are not general questions, usually general questions are the questions which deals with a facts. Now, philosophical questions are of course they deal with facts, but here the nature of facts probably is something different. So, for example, when I say there are 50 students in my class I am just stating a fact that there are 50 students in my class. So, I am just describing the fact, but when it comes to the philosophy we are concerned with the questions which are very fundamental like say for example, as I mentioned before that what is justice, what is consciousness, what is life these are fundamental questions and philosophers are concerned with these questions. Now, when it comes to the philosophy and when it comes to the philosophical debates these questions are viewed from various perspectives, particularly the monist say for example, have tried to suggest a perspective where they think that only consciousness is real, only mind is real, but the other way this could be also the other way. So, for example, a materialist monist then I may say that the matter is only real and there is nothing called mind and if at all there is something called mind then that has to be explained by nature of the material principles. Now, matter is fundamental and it is fundamental because it is ontologically real and that constitutes the entire reality. So, the foundational principles on which the reality is constituted is matter. So, a materialist monist would certainly eliminate the notion of consciousness from the discourse of consciousness, but this elimination is something significant it does tell us something very unique about consciousness that is consciousness is a bright product of certain function of the materialist bodies that are existing in reality. When I suggest that consciousness is by product what I mean is this that consciousness is an epiphenomenon. Now, as an epiphenomenon it does not have any ontological status. So, to have ontological status of consciousness either we talk about the monist who accept that consciousness is real and if I say both consciousness and matter or mind and the matter both are real then I am no more a monist I am a dualist. So, dualist do accept that there are two fundamental principles which help us explaining the nature of reality. Now, so, but dualist do have certain other philosophical problems. So, consciousness has to be or the mind has to be viewed from different perspectives. So, they have to show us I mean these philosophers would really enlighten us how these perspectives are in the sense that they are important for achieving clarity. As I mentioned that clarity is an important thing in philosophical enquiry and that has to be achieved because we do not want to just make a claim that consciousness is something mystical. Consciousness is something spiritual. Just saying that it is mystical does not really make any sense to all of us, but since it is real it has to be viewed how it is real and therefore, we need to talk about different perspectives from which this particular concept is being viewed this particular concept has been understood by its perspectives. So, from that point of view consciousness is a rational study in the domain of philosophy. So, philosophers do talk about consciousness and that talking is different from the scientific understanding of consciousness, but philosophers do share their understanding with the scientific understanding of consciousness. If you look at the present study in consciousness, most of the functionalist philosophers of mind do borrow their philosophical presuppositions from the achievement of science. So, it is not that there is no dialogue between philosophers and the scientists, it is not that philosophers study in their own way and that is totally different from the way scientists look at the problem. It is not that way. So, philosophers do talk about the issues that sometimes are enlightened by the scientific achievements, but philosophical progress is different from the scientific one. The progress in science is judged in terms of scientific productivity, scientific achievements, but philosophers progress is judged from the point of view of clarity, from the point of view of lucidity, how clarity, one particular theory of mind, so biological naturalism brings clarity about the nature of consciousness. So, that is and how it refutes the substance dualism that has been debated in the history for centuries. So, that kind of clarity we consider as a progress now in philosophy. So, this is one thing I think we need to talk about.