  remainder and spoken. Today we will be discussing about the arguments for a materialistic theory of mind, but before that as we have been discussing about the arguments against materialism and arguing in favour of dualism let us see how far these arguments sustain in philosophical discourses. toilets called?". These arguments, as you know, are are advocated from the point of view of religion, from the point of view of introspection as one of the essential features of mind, from the point of view of parapsychology. All these arguments are discussed in the last class. Barry excelled inise thekoltais in returning this arguments. Particularly here we talk about introspection as a kind of a mechanism to look into the inner experiences of the mind or the mental life of human beings or any other cultures. and that it is very difficult to have these arguments from the point of view of introspection. Now, the question arises here. Does inner observation reveal thinks, reveal the reality? Because when we talk about sight, hearing, touch, etcetera. We say that let us talk about the was told that the citation of a colour of an apple. Now, the red surface is not considered like a matrix of molecules reflecting photons at a certain critical wavelength. So, this is what is the language of science speaking about now Donald materialism would talk about oriented to the place, and thishow of the physical phenomena from the point of view of the scientific understanding of the reality, the scientific understanding of the physical phenomenon. Now, when they would be explaining as what is color and how does aCry当 a red apple look like? Now, if that is the question then . , α interior . , favourite . , . . , . . . . . .  ان  stitches  Christ  shown  Paige ,  speculative  font  -... s ansation of colar or  BENE in the case of either such a的  exemplar outline of color, etcetera, etc. So, introspection will not really refer to the existence of such things. . We will only talk about how an individual feels it is such an experience of pain, whether it is so  듯  듯  듯  듯  듯  듯  듯  듯  듯  듯  듯  듯  듯  though the language of science and the language of philosophy completely differs. In the sense that philosophical description does not strictly hold on to the language of science. philosophy tries to explicate the reality of philosophy of science. The practicality of philosophy has to be explained as the the reality which is embedded in the mental life. So, for example, that the fact that I am very fascinated and being attracted towards this red object called apple is my personal feeling towards that object, I am expressing my personal feeling towards an object. So, that is indeniable. It is not that science is wrong. It is not that the kind of explanation science provides to us is completely meaningless. Philosophers would not argue from that point of view. Philosopher would argue that that let us accept science, let us accept the propositions of science and also not to deny the fact that such a reality exists. The experiences are very unique kind of phenomenon and that exist in reality and particularly when we talk about the human mind. And therefore, the argument of irreducibility is again and again comes back to the discourse of philosophy of mind, whether mind can be completely explained by the scientific terms is the language of science is sufficient enough to talk about human mind. So, there are some challenges and there are some challengeable questions which are often advocated by philosophers of mind who accept that there is something called mind and maybe they are dualist, maybe some of them are idealist who would like to speak from the point of view of religion. I mean idealist would probably talk about the reality and this reality exist depending on the kind of perception that we have and that will be a kind of a philosophical thesis which an subjective idealist would talk about. That is a dangerous thesis in fact because it is dangerous in the sense that a subjective idealist would say that my ideas are only real, reality that is dependent on my idea or constructed by my mind is only real. So, whatever I am presenting is only real. So, that kind of assertions are not philosophically correct. So, philosophers would delve into the issues which are raised by science and scientific community which pursue the research in this particular area called the mind or the mental. So, the argument of irreducibility would is also being challenged. It is being challenged. Let us say reason is not central to human thinking because when you talk about mathematical reason, mathematical reasoning are sometimes created in the very sophisticated robot will create solution to certain mathematical problems probably which kind of a naive mind will not able to comprehend the problems may not be able to imagine that such and things can be solved. But computer can do that and a very sophisticated artificially made robot can solve the problem. So, that is where we can imagine a case where mathematical reasoning is being created by an anthropologist and it is created by human beings of course, but it is created and being put in the machine and machine can operate and demonstrate that you know machine is capable of you know solving the problem. So, that is what is important. It is does not matter who is creating it. It matters how it is being solved. Now, the very fact that it is being solved by a particular robot in a particular way. So, that is what is important. So, that is what is important or by following a kind of a multiple ways. Now, it is something very relevant to the philosophical community, the community who argues for the dualistic thesis of mind because such a challenge can be very dangerous to the dualistic thesis because reasoning is no more any kind of an essential property of human mind. The reasoning is whether it can be artificially made. Now, the very fact that reasoning is a kind of a faculty, faculty for articulating judgment, for articulating decisions, articulating actions etcetera is artificially or can be artificially made is something very significant to us. Now, therefore, a computational mechanism displays general principle of mathematical reasoning is something very significant. Now, let us talk about the argument from language. Now, language as we mentioned earlier that it is only a human phenomenon. Human beings do have language in the sense that it is a full-fledged sense in which human language is a very important language. Human beings are are capable of analyzing meaning. They are capable of communicating to the others, interpreting others actions. Animals do produce sounds, animals do communicate, you know, among themselves, but do make sounds. But what is important in the case of human sound making is is a typical way in which humans produce sound. Human beings talk, human beings articulate their thoughts, they represent their thoughts. Now, the very fact that human beings are able to interpret this idea of representation and communication are central to human linguistic life. Human beings leave a kind of a full-fledged linguistic life and from the point of view of that life, the forms of life, we are able to interpret others form of life. For example, the form of life of animals, birds, insects, all their behaviors are interpreted from the kind of linguistic categories that we have with us in our form of life, that is the human form of life. So, it is long vision as a form of life. This is the essential aspect which can explain human behavior completely, probably yes, but what is important here is that is language intrinsic to life, is language essentially embedded in life, is being questioned by, you know, the philosophers who definitely like the dualistic theory of mind. They question that language can be artificially met, like reason is artificially formed. Similarly, we can form language in a in a artificial way and as you know that computational mechanism that we are talking about is fully developed by developing a kind of an artificial language, java, photons, c plus plus, all these things that you are learning are nothing but artificial language. So, artificial language can also be met and it can run in the machine and perform certain linguistic activities. It is something very significant to to us, because if language can be artificially met, then we will be able to develop a kind of an artificial language. So, artificial language can also be made and it can run in the machine and perform certain linguistic activities. So, we will have linguistic beings, probably those beings are also artificial beings. So, there is nothing specific about human life per se, which will suggest that human beings are linguistic beings, whether there are other beings who have this and therefore, they are able to, you know, comprehend certain things. They have certain extraordinary power of comprehending and solving the problems. So, a being is empowered or can be empowered by, you know, by language and this language can be artificially met. So, there is nothing and therefore, you know, specific about human life per se. So, we will be able to develop a kind of an artificial language. So, we will be able to develop a kind of an artificial language. So, it is only a matter of degree. It is only a matter of complexity that is involved here. So, language use is can also be there in the case of physical systems. So, like robots have language computers or computational processes are performed by using artificial language. Now, here is an argument which creates no problem for materialism or materialistic theory of mind or a scientific theory of mind. So, that is what is, you know, the non dualist root are equipped about, the non dualist who are, you know, represents no problem for materialism for materialistic act of science of light or a scientific theory of mind so, that is what is non-dualist roots are about So, the non-dualist who are in fact non-idealists in fact there are realists or you can tell that, there are physicalists who say that passat it does note it is like success is only??? We will have some discussion on materialism at today, but what is important is to look at the arguments from the points of view of introspection, argument against irre Follow Rom, reference to reason and language and then weíll find that regarding the intrinsic qualities of sensations that, there are document for science organizations .urez rist . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .看 the mystery about the mind that is what is interesting to them now we would located the no son of para sky college hello para psychology is evolution theory at all for example para p agencies would have some kinds of mystery in it when we talk about TVT we So, we d ou have the sense of feeling that, yes, my mother is remembering me or this is what he must be thinking right now. And if you call him, you will find out, yes, exactly, he is thinking that if parapsychology is a successful theory of mind, how far it is scientific in the sense that how far it is rational to be engaged in such kind of a discourse, some philosophers of mind would also find that when we talk about telepathy, we will also find that there is some kind of a radiation, now electromagnetic wave radiation happening at the speed of light. Now that is very amazing, amazing evidences that we find in the case of scientific explanations. So, wave have effects and when we say that somebody else is remembering me or thinking about me, probably his mind is acting like a receiver or a transmitter who is transmitting one mind transmitting thought, another mind trying to capture that wave length and you know so in that sense there is a kind of a connection established through this wave length. So, the electromagnetic wave length that happens when we start thinking means we are not a sleeping mind, we are actively engaged in thinking. So, that is what when we think and this wave length is being created, the effect of this wave length is also being felt and what matters is probably the intensity of thinking, if the intensity of thinking is more probably the wave length is more and the wave length is effective. So, from that point of view we cannot really deny the kind of you know wave length, the electromagnetic wave length that radiates, that cannot be denyable, there may be somebody who is thinking what I am thinking right now that is possible, that is unobservable, but what is observable is that there is a magnetic wave being received by an individual. That is what is significant, you can call it telepathy or you can call it something else. So, science would in fact go with this kind of evidences because science would try to prove things to us that yes this is what is happening in the mind, this is what is happening in the mind when we are contemplating on telepathy. So, what we call telepathy or what a religious person will talk about telepathy or a parapsychologist will talk about telepathy, the neuroscientist would say that no there is a electromagnetic wave radiation happening and what matters most to us is the intensity of this wave, how it is being received by the other mind. The mind is not only creating the wave, the mind is mind also acts acts as a as a receiver and that is you know a kind of a significant evidence to explain that telepathy is not a mystery, rather telepathy, if telepathy happens then it is not a mystery, it is not a mystery. So, telepathy happens then it happens in a more scientific way. So, with this of you arguments, we would conclude that there are points of views which does not really strengthen the arguments that are put forward by the dualist, the dualistic conception of mind cannot hold the on to the arguments of introspection, cannot hold on to the argument of a language or a reason and cannot hold on to the evidences that are given by the parapsychologist or the religious people. So, the dualistic theory must come up with a new kind of language, new vocabulary, and it does not really have a new theory that would strongly put forth their case. So, let us conclude that that mind can be explained by science more significantly than whatever we understand from these arguments that are given by dualist. So, the scientific notion of mind is in fact would help us to look at what are the physical operations, what are the you know neural functions that are happening inside the brain, because we are almost sure in 21st century that it is the brain which is which controls all our voluntary actions. It is the brain which is responsible for our experiences, feelings, sensations, etcetera, etcetera. Now, if that is true, let us see how far the brain mind's dichotomy is going to be. So, the brain mind's dichotomy is going to be. Now, from this, I would like to discuss on materialism. Before talking about materialism, I would rather try to understand the arguments against dualism and conclude that materialist methodology is somehow very close to close to the scientific understanding of mind and what matters for the materialistic theory of mind is the physical existence of the matter and the properties that this material body have. So, and how simply these properties can be explained. So, simplicity is retained and the arguments are ought to be simple, as Ockham Schroeder tells us that in order to explain mind, we need not exaggerate the mind. Probably the kind of mind that we have is the kind of mind that we have. The kind of argument which Churchland is mentioning is something try to exaggerate the notion of mind. The kind of theorization which if these arguments are valid, the kind of theorization that is made is more complex. So, what is important for us and what we can achieve here is this that if we adhere to the argument of simplicity and science particularly ends at this notion of simplicity that it tries to clarify things. It tries to clarify the more complex phenomenon and try to show us that, yes, this is how things can be explained and these are with reference to some evidences. So, that is what is you know very significant about the scientific understanding of mind. So, the explanatory devices that are available to us is you know particularly with reference to the materialistic theory of mind will talk about the neuroscience and that fulfills the demand of simplicity. So, the existing microstructure and the causal relationship that the brain mechanism holds with the bodily organism is something very significant. So, and that is true when we talk about pain and pain behavior and the eradication of pain. So, the entire brain processes, the entire neurological processes in the brain not only control our behavior, but also are fairly responsible for making voluntary actions and that is what the materialistic theory of mind would talk about. So, the brain is the center of all this you know the materialistic theory. So, what you really talk about is say in the case of a trauma or traumatic experiences or in the case of any other experiences, how do we recognize that the brain is the materialistic theory of mind. So, what you really talk about is say in the case of a trauma or a traumatic experiences or in the case of any other experiences. That is important. Now, recognition through neural devices, linguistic ability and learning. Now, all these are important factors. How do we learn things? What is the mechanism of learning and how do we express those ideas? These are the things which are very important for us. And so physical, chemical and electrical properties are necessary to formulate physical laws. It is through the law we can explain the behaviors. We can predict the behaviors of human beings. So, laws are important. So, we can predict the behaviors of human beings. So, it is with the help of law we explain things. So, explanation of mind depends on how the laws are formulated and how these laws, let us talk about mental laws, perform their activities. So, that is important. So, laws are based on evidences, facts and it is through those observable facts of those properties, physical, chemical and electrical properties of the brain will give us or in fact will explain what is the notion of mind we have. So, with this understanding of the notion of mind, let us go back to the kind of argument which were advocated by Gilbert trial. Now, I mentioned that Gilbert trial is giving a kind of a behavioristic interpretation of the mind. Now, there are various schools of materialism. Behaviorism is one of them. The question that is, that is put to us is this, is Ryle a behaviorist. Now, what is behaviorism? Behaviorism tells us that there is nothing called mind, whether mind can be known as a behaviorist. So, what is behaviorism? Behaviorism is with the help of behaviors. It is as simple as this. Behaviorists are observable phenomena and by observing these behaviors, the patterns in which a particular individual behave or a particular group behave or a particular community behaves, we can formulate certain laws and with the help of laws, as I said earlier, we can explain their mind, we can predict their mind, etcetera. Now, when Ryle says that Descartes's concept of mind is like a ghost in the machine, when Ryle says that Descartes is committing a kind of a mystic which can be called category mystic, because mind and body are not categorically too independent. So, when Ryle says that Descartes's concept of mind is like a ghost in the machine, when Ryle says that Descartes is committing a kind of a mystic which can be called category mystic, because mind and body are not categorically too independent. These behaviors are taken into account by some of these entities. So, whether what is significant and available to our observation is behaviors, how does an individual behave in the world or how does an individual behave when he is interacting with a world. So, behaviors are significant and behaviors, if behaviors are taken into account, then it will eventually get into a  려 byzeche   r y l l y  y y m     y u    n beyond the behaviorism, as an experimental science. Now, today, let us briefly locate what is the Raelian behaviorism all about? What are the philosophical presuppositions behaviorists maintain when they advocate this thesis that සඳනයයකලලයකලයකලයේලයේ. Let us look at this. The one point, which is very clear to us, is that, behaviourism denies dualism.  GLORIA  grammar has put this concept that mind is cylinders says mind is a symptoms and what it is important for rilee is that how an individual interact with the world philosophy emandang rhal in his terms a mental state that can be further tubes without loss of meaning that which you good We know, make it with context, let us understand this concept of peening or into a long and complex sentence about what observable behavior would result if the person in question were in this or the other observable circumstances. This is how you know such land would describeandırsasha chைa boister che ca bkich he Book B genial chைa Chைa konohai sto minnda, the problem about the philosophy mind and Holland finds thatburger isengosaurusна alongoughe of conductilism is a problem standard. Philosophical behaviourism is also indicated by Platon,我 pardon was also dedicated by Helary Whatman in his essay the brain and the behavior. So I would like to talk about particularly what is philosophical presuppositions. What is hypothetical behaviorism or these words are . Now is pushing that they are talking about the meaning of the concept of mind, what does constant of the mind really mean to us? Is this meaning available, does the meaning that the kind of term that the book foretelling  hydraulics endra a her絮                  b os jbeddeod          . i n r u n i s gracias instruction   , n d h s r a          , r r a k y o u  nc s a  Double A kur there were under the influence of logical positivists. Now, according to logical positivists what is real is observable what is meaningful is observable if something is meaningful if an expression is meaningful  engagements                                                                                                                                                                                                                              philosophical problems arise because there is some kind of a linguistic and conceptual confusion and once this conceptual confusion are dissolved through analysis then the problem is dissolved so a philosophical problem arises because of the use of language the vocabulary as serle points out Descartes dualism is problematic because the kind of vocabulary that is used by Descartes so all the time they are referring to language so philosophical problems are problems of language the kind of language that has been used to theorize mind so the kind of language that has been used to theorize mind so logical positivist as you all know reject metaphysics according to them metaphysical problems are pseudo problems metaphysical problems are not found idealist like Hegel would say that absolute is real and whatever is real is rational so the absolute can be rationally comprehended the absolute can be rationally grasped now you do not have this notion of absolute there as a fact Hegel idealism will talk about the realization of the absolute through a no dialectical process and that is something to do with experience and experience is something internal so logical positivist on the other hand would talk about the existence of reality corresponding to an external facts because that which is external can be observable and can be demonstrated so logical positivist were very much influenced by the methodology of science as you know science go with this idea of observation and experiment and there are many more but these two concepts are very basic to scientific understanding not only conceptualize or create hypothesis but also they try to prove the hypothesis now the proof of the hypothesis lies there in the fact in the observation of facts so corresponding to the hypothesis there must must be certain facts in the world in the reality and these observable facts are to be further now experimented following a kind of a methodology and then we can suggest that yes or we can form laws and explain things so scientific suggestions are always for the explanation of the hypothesis particular facts and they are always about demonstration that which can be demonstrated and observed from the third person's point of view they are not about the internal experiences so scientist are mostly externalist now the scientific explanations are always demonstrated we can prove our scientific thesis by producing instances by producing facts which are observable and verifiable so logical positivist were influenced by this idea of verification and observation now the verificationist principle suggest that if a statement is said or is articulated in a particular philosophical theory then this statement must have meaning corresponding to the facts that are there in the world so there is some kind of a correspondence theory of truth advocated by the logical positivist if it does not corresponded to a fact then it is meaningless it is nonsensically so it is not that there will be always a kind of a one to one correspondence whether a kind of a now a set of sentences are meaningful if and only if they in general or if they are unified must represent a fact so let us do not talk about this but what is important for us to note here is this that philosophical behaviorism is influenced by the kind of thesis which was advocated by logical positivist so what is important for logical positivist is that if something is philosophically correct if something has to be philosophically correct then it must be verifiable and observable that is the propositions and the second one is that most of the philosophical problems which are metaphysical in nature arise due to the misuse of language so they are linguistic problems and these linguistic problems can be you know can be dissolved by proper analysis of language and therefore verification the theory of verification notion of meaning is one of the theories of meaning that talks about truth that if there is a proposition then proposition must corresponds to the fact and that is how it can establish the truth now rile is talking about philosophical behaviorism or logical behaviorism we can say that logical behaviorism would try to solve the metaphysical thesis that is been advocated by some of the philosophers of mind particularly Decadde Decadde's metaphysical thesis that is substance dualism and rile finds that philosophical problems are also associated with the metaphysical thesis problems are also problems with reference to you know the language the use of language and and that is particularly evident when we he talks about categories that they are new to separate categories so for example when we go to buy globes in winter we do not ask the subkeeper give me right hand glove give me the left hand glove rather we ask for give me a pair of gloves now such expressions are expression proper according to rile that there are there are there are many examples rile gives but I think this is something very significant that they are together mind and body are together and what is mind is exhibited in behaviors in various forms of behaviors now how this exhibition takes place and there we can relate to the behaviorist according to rile this exhibitions happens probably because there are certain mental dispositions so dispositions manifest into behaviors dispositions are exhibited the exhibit behaviors like say for example a glass is brittle now the brittleness is a dispositional property of the glass and once it is hit by a hard object then it breaks down so brittleness of the glass is manifested whenever it encounters any kind of an external cause so there is a kind of a causal relationship causal relationship which we find when we talk about the exhibitions of behaviors when we talk about the manifestation of behavior say for example in the in the case of the brittle the the hard object hitting the glass is a kind of a you know external force that the glass encounters now so this external force once it you know is the reason for the manifestation of you know of breaking down the glass so the glass that breaks down exhibits a particular kind of behavior which is there in the glass in the form of dispositions so that is what is riles argument about philosophical behaviorism is that there are mental dispositions and mental dispositions do cause behaviors so with this let us conclude this thesis of dualism and in our next class we will be talking about the varieties of materialism including behaviorism how experimental behaviorism started and contributed a lot to the discovery of the mind so the knowledge of the mind and along with behaviorism we will be also talking about the identity theory how mental and the physical are identical in our next class thank you