Announcments: Lectures at U of O at the EMU at noon in subjects related to Philosophy. The Condition of Suffering Feb 7th; The Bible and The Koran Feb 28th.
Professor Borrowdale will not be in class next week, Tuesday and Thursday. Role will be taken. There will be either/and a guest lecture/video.

I. Dualism & Materialism
A. Reductive Materialism (eliminative materialism)
1. There are no mental states or things
2. All things thought of as "spiritual" are physical
Example: The God Zeus hurling thunderbolts from the heavens. In reality, two clouds rubbing against one another cause thunder and lightening.
Mental States = Brain States
B. Generic Materialism (mind-brain identity theory)
1. Hard Behaviorism
2. Folk Psychology fits in here- two descriptions of same phenomena does not cancel out the reality of its existence.
Example: water=H2O
water= a clear, colorless liquid that, when drunk, quenches thirst.
Both the truth/merely different ways of saying the truth.
Example #2: the morning star= the evening star
In reality these two phenomena are one and the same brilliant object in the sky...the planet Venus.
C. Eliminative Materialism
1. All things are physical.
Both views are equally valid.

Richard Taylor
There's no mind-body problem. There's no mind. All things are physical.
Prof. B reading from Abel: page 217 "So the "mental" is discriminated..." and alter..."A person is not something that has..."
Taylor says, " A person is merely their human body. period. A person is a human body. If a "person" means "mind", we would not say, "I need to loose some weight". My mind is not "fat".
some one = some body = some person
Student question: "Does Taylor represent/support eliminative materialism or general materialism?"
answer: "Taylor holds by eliminative materialism."
He works with the ordinary usage of language to prove his points.
self = person
person = body
thus if a person is a body
then there is no soul.
Taylor refutes Descartes Theory:
reading from Abel (pg 219) First Argument...It's hard to say that a "person", a "body" loves his country, etc...
also Argument #2 (pg 220) and Argument #4 (pg 222)

Taylor's logic is correct, in a sort of circular logic that boils down to two main points:
1. Ordinary language about persons supports materialism as well as dualism (equally)
ie.:we have language that assumes we are bodies
and we have language that assumes we are minds.
2. Appeals to 1st person experience fails. Descarte "I think, therefore I am."

Descarte was proving the material world exists.
Taylor was proving the truth of the existence of the soul.

Descarte said that it was a matter of logic, that you cannot refute that you are a conscious thinking being having experiences when this is your experience. You know this directly. The material world is a theory.

Prof. B read from page 221 #3 Argument reply:
"Now surely..." and "What for instance... a "physical state".
Pain is physical, and therefore so is the mind. But why can we not "see" pain? It is an object of consciousness.
Pain is physical. Therefore consciousness is physical.
Descarte says "Pain is mental".
two different descriptions:
1. what it "feels" like to be in pain
2. what the neurons are doing in the body when pain occurs. " The dance of the neurons".
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
IMPORTANT QUESTIONS TO ASK:
WHAT IS EPISTEMOLOGICALLY BASED? WHAT IS OUR FOUNDATION OF KNOWLEDGE? A.)Consciousness (direct experience)
B.)The Material World