I had an assignment to survey 10 people about chocolate and need to interpret results by dualism, physicalism?
Q. physicalism and the dual-aspect theory. Any philosophy majors out there willing to help me out...I am so confused!
Asked by helicopterjen - Sat Jan 26 20:38:17 2008 - - 1 Answers - 0 Comments

A. When you get your results, be thinking in these terms: 1. Is the person just telling you about the chocolate from simple physical terms. Taste, texture, etc... 2. Is the person telling you about how great it is from a psychological or metaphorical perspective. You may need to "coax" this out of the willing (probably those who love chocolate) 1 is physicalism and 2 is dualism.
Answered by M O R P H E U S - Mon Jan 28 01:30:24 2008

how to formalize an argument for philosophy- POINTS!?
Q. Mary is confined to a black-and-white room, is educated through black-and-white books and through lectures relayed on black-and-white television. In this way she learns everything there is to know about the physical nature of the world. She knows all the physical facts about the environment...Physicalism is not the noncontroversial thesis that the actual world is largely physical, but the challenging thesis that it is entirely physical...It seems, however, that Mary does not know all there is to know. For when she is let out of the black-and-white room or given a color television, she will learn what it is like to see something red, say. This is rightly described as learning--she will not say "ho, hum." Hence, physicalism is false. He… [cont.]
Asked by Meg - Mon Oct 27 21:47:13 2008 - - 2 Answers - 0 Comments

A. As with a lot of modern day issues and philosophies, you cannot fully understand your own position, or that of your opposition, until you actually experience it from their perspective. Almost no one is unbiased enough, willing to argue their oppositions argument, in order to see whatever truths may exist on that side: Im not a subjectivist. I dont believe that perspective effects truth. It only effects our understanding and perception of that truth. Like many arguments I see against religion, for example. Most are just ignorant and bigoted. Few actually get down to the nitty-gritty metaphysical matter. And even then, a slight reinterpretation of a fact changes the validity of the argument. I would like to see a universal logic… [cont.]
Answered by CogitoErgoCogitoSum - Mon Oct 27 22:00:33 2008

What it is like to be a bat? Explanation of argument?
Q. I don't understand exactly how Nagel's argument creates a problem with physicalism with regards to Philosophy of the mind. I know it has something to do with subjective experience, but I don't understand how it refutes physicalism and supports substance dualism. Help needed!
Asked by x-Gay Boy-x - Thu Dec 18 06:53:15 2008 - - 6 Answers - 0 Comments

A. He seems to be saying that there's no way to experience 'what it's like to be a bat' unless you ARE a bat - in which case, it's just going to feel like normality. How would you explain to a cloud what it's like to be a human? What terms would a cloud understand? But how his critics go from this perfectly sensible-sounding insight to describing Nagel as a duallist is beyond me. There's an absolute connection between mind and body, which Nagel acknowledges - and that connection is intrinsic to the neural connection and memories that a person (or bat) has. Cain't have one without the other.
Answered by Super Atheist - Thu Dec 18 07:10:05 2008