• Identity Thesis 
• mental states are just physical states 
• the identity thesis only gets meaning in contrast to dual behaviorism 
• belief states are a kind of physical state 
• Functionalism 
• Dual Behaviorism 
• menal state 
• physical state 
•  mental states 
• "mary belives the election is Tuesdays means something about belief behavior
• token types 
• for ever mental type there is a physical type 
• minimal identity thesis 
• the richer thing comes in functionalism 
• functionalism is to deal with the problems of behaviorism 
• let's suppose you have a kind of machine 
• your computers are functionally understood 
• you treat your computer behavioristically 
•  there is a black box with outputs and inputs 
• what we think is going on is that there is a database to see if the word is used in that way 
• or uses a variation that could be that word using an algorithm 
• what Aristotle says is that one of the marks of sensation are the sense that we are sensing or that we perceive that we are perceiving 
• what armstrong does is he picks this up 
• my driving is happening whether i am aware of it or not 
• the driver in a state of automisim is aware of the road or he would be in a ditch 
• i concieve of conciousnes as kant talks about an inner sense 
• each of us has the power to percieve our own minds 
• the conclusion is there are unner states in purly physical states 

• What is the best [ scientific?] theory of the mind 
• What is consciousness
• behavioriesm 
• john watson
• john broadens 
• B.F. Skine 
• modifications 
• Gilbert Ryle 
• dualism 
• physicalism 
• the question can be put this way 
• there are 2 sorts of predicates 
• there are purely physical predicates 
• there are person predicates 
• psychological state predicates- anais has feeling about the elction, anais is in pain and so forth 
• in all anais is the subject 
• is mind a substance 
• if your a cartesian you'll say yes 
• if your gilbert ryle you'll say no 
• anais is in pain 
• what is th meaning of the predicate? 
• there is the first person feature and the third person feature 
• third person: behavior 
• vickenshting thinks it is wrong to think of pain is a smoething but its not right to say its a nothing
• category mistake 
• zugma- a yolking; something yolked,; bound together 
• disposition exhibit pain behavior 
• disposition 
• propensity 
• feeling pain is to have an inclination to exhibit pain behavior
• armstrong was a leader of Australian philosophy - a school which wanted to argue that in one for that every statement in this form is equvelant to a statement of anisis in such in such a physical state 

• nasty joke- a student makes a joke about cambridge and says wheres the university 
• if we are brains in a vat we don't need more than one brain in a vat 
• other minds 
• reverse spectrum question 
• what is conciousness? 
• "it hurts" 
• "Does it hurt you?" 
• molijeux 
• first person use of pain 
• third person use of pain 
• both go into the language of pain and are crucially part of the language of pain 
• third person use is exclusively about behavior 
• subjective - it depends on the subject for its truth 
• objective - something that is independent of a given subject 
• solopsism 
• analogy in me 
• a causes b 
• judiciery pain 
• pain calculation 
• category mistake 
• makes joke a little nastier i dont want to know where the building is i want to know where the university is 

• the infinite being 
• simple minds 
• something else 
• ideas 
• material bodies 
• epiphenomenon 
• elizabeth is an epiphenomenon she doesn't play a role in the story 
• minds can clearly cause themselves to do things 
• how do bodies by producing ideas cause minds 
• how does causality even occur? 
• what is causality ? 
• spinosa ends up saying that part of the issue is in the definition of the word substance 
• in decartes principles he defines it a something completely independent of anything else 
• god is constantly recreating the universe 
• the issue becomes how many substances are there 
• the only real substance is god 
• spinosa takes decartes picture and the only substance is god 
• god and matter are bits of the same thing 
• for spinoza when i kick thing and it makes it the same as the sound it makes 
• there is no time and space they are just causality 
• this is the best of all possible worlds 
• why bother with material objects they are doing nothing in the story 
• for barkley all there are are ideas which are the visual and sensory feel 
• if it is a congry of sensations there is nothing being sensed therefore it doesn't exist 
• the ordinary person doesn't have a concept of material bodies 
• john locke - set the british ball rolling by being an imericist  
• impiricist- someone who things all of our knowledge comes from our experience 
• hume is coming from the ideas of barcly and locke mainly 
• hume thinks Barcly is crazy but right 
• hume says we clearly think there are material objects 
• we think that objects continue to exist when they aren't looked at 
• we think that the tree doesn't depend on me preconceiving it now and is independent of me 
• deosexmachina - don't kill your son and make him a priest ( god from the machine) ie something being brought in to save the day 
• what makes us think objects are continuous? 
• the vulgar - the common person 
• hume and barcly thing they are defending the view of the vulgar 
• humes point is tha we think things exist independent without humans 
• we have a prepensity that objects continue to exist when we don't look at them 
• material bodies cause our ideas 
• once you recognize that there are material objects becasue of a propensity to believe there are material objects 
• what is it to be a skeptic? 
• to be a skeptic means to say I don't know 
• hume is going to look at 2 questions 
• do my ideas, the object i see when i am no perceiving them ? 
• do objects continue to exist when i am not seeing them ? 
• are objects independent of being percieved? 
• substance 
• sensation 
• reason 
• imagination 
• there is nothing that the sense faculty says that 2 sensations are the same thing 
• there is nothing in your sensory faculty that doesn't come from sensation 
• given that everyone's ideas different the only thing you can do is that there is a similarity between idea A and idea B but it doesn't tell you they are the same object just similar ideas 
• there is a relation between your first idea and your second idea 
• certain things are followed by certain other things 
• the only thing that can be causing this is a strong disposition from our memory that ther are  these types of things but there is no reason to think that 
• what you see when someone kicks the table is sensory and auditory 
• you believe that by kicking the table he caused the noise but there is nothing in your sensation that has cause 
• we believe the noise happens because the one sort of event is commonly followed by the other 
• there is no rational cause of induction 

• davidderi
• possible worlds
• exploited by saul kriepke
• nearness relations of 2 possible worlds
• describing a view of Hilary Putnam
• kripke developed a theory of meaning which is part of the modal argument
• is a perfect life but its not real a life worth choosing
• water refers to that thing that we identify as water
• there are events
• causal theory of meaning
• if you refer to someone other people can refer to them through you
• the meaning is fixed by a rigid designation
• the meaning of the word water is just that stuff
• twin earth argument
• there is earth and twin earth
• twin earth almost exactly like earth
• everything is exactly the same except water is H20 on earth and twin earth water is something else
• twin allen utters the sounds "this water is good"
• earth allen utters the sound "this water is good"
• on earth water refers to h20
• on twin earth it refers to schwater
• what's the difference?
• strong AI
• there is no reason not to think that the thermometer thinks its 80 degree
• if you think this you have a different view of the way the world is structured
• the word to water is something different when twin Allen utters it then what it means when uttered by Allen
• "we might be brains in a vat"
• the word water gets its meaning from the true and false sentences of English etc.
• consider whether that sentence can be true
• objects, images and me
• quiz - mostly multiple choice need a scantron with places for writing will send a study guide, it might be open book, we will be covering the antological argument, humes argument the leibnetz passage, Putnam is legitimate game

• dream
• any
• it is possible I don't have any body
• I have a clear and distinct idea that I am a thinking thing
• I have a clear and distinct idea of body
• body is extension 
• These can be apart I have a clear and distinct idea of this
•  saul kripke- smartest person in American philosophy
• Lebniz Law a=b - everything of a is true for b
• a = b imples if b of a ( of a - b)
• box p it is necessary that p
• box p it is possible that p
• if a = b it follows that if box a  = a - box a = b
• the second thing
• box a = a - ( a=b - box a = b)
• if p is the case then q is the case then r is the case is equvelant to if p and q is the case then r is the case
• if Christina is a California resident then if Christina has a drivers license then Christina has a California drivers license
• this is equivalent to if Christina is a resident in California and has a drivers license then she has a California drivers license
• every rule of logic says a=a
• a= b necessarily if a=b
• not a = b the a doesn't = b
• if Christina is in los angeles she is in California
• if chirstina is not in  California then she is not in Los Angeles
• water might be h3O
• dream argument is a thought experiment
•  decartes is a mechanist
• all physical things are just extensions with geometrical space
• newton overthrew mechanism
• the basic picture for the mind is an un extended substance
• the point where the mind and body connect is the brain
• the core to dualism is that the physical world consist of matter
• how does an extend thing cause an extend thing to move
• Decartes think all of your memories are contained in your brain and your soul observes the information in your brain

October 3, 2016

• c&d = clear and distinct
• all of my clear and distinct ideas are true - argument
• If there is even one clear and distinct idea that's not true then I am not certain that of I exist an once thinking thing
• I am certain that I exist and am a res cogitans
• Therefore, there is not a single clear and distinct idea that is false
• because of the Suarez argument I am a thinking thing
• just as I know that wax whether it exists or not it is flexible and changeable
• If you get rid of one of them you get rid of the while lot
• if you make the argument that you are dreaming now it holds when you have perceived real objects
• This is the only thing that can gives us certainty is that you perceive things clear and distinctly
• argument goes back to the stoics
• they were fighting off ancient skeptics
• if you have an impression that is almost like another it can't be the same
• Suarez
• meditation 3 : I have a concept of god as an infinite perfection
• if god is infinite perfection there is a problem of evil
• how is it that god makes me someone who can be wrong, doubted or deceived
• meditation 4 - god does give me something perfect, god gives me an infinite will
• I have the ability t decide to believe or not to believe
• since god gives me infinite will because he gives me finite judgment
• its my fault if I choose to decide to act outside my finite judgment
• its dangerous if I act outside my clear and distinct ideas
• because there is a demon I don't know if my images are based in reality
• god is not a deceiver
• everything I clearly and distinctly grasp must be true
• god will not deceive me in my memory of what I perceived to be true
• god also guarantees that my memory of clear and distinct ideas is secure
• even if I am dreaming those aren't things I clearly and distinctly perceive only things that I clearly distinct and perceive are real
• I am a res cogitans
• God exists ( no evil demon)
• mathematics is true
• even if there are no material objects and none of us exists the special images are coherent
• this doesn't give you that the external world exists this gives you that the imagination is okay
• what about physical objects?
• 2 arguments
• the argument is for physical objects existing
• the other is that the mind and bodies are distinct ( although my mind and my body are tightly connected)  - princess Elizabeth puts pressure on this argument
• the corner Descartes encounters is the main problem of dualism
• physical objects can exist ( mathematics)
• anything I c&d perceive is possible
• I c&d geometric objects
• god can make what's possible
• god can make physical objects
• distinguishes between things I can imagine and things I can understand
• I conconjecture that physical objects exist
• I am inclined to so believe that my impressions of physical objects come from physical objects and not something else
• if there are no physical objects god is a deceiver
• If a is distinct from b clearly and distinctly then a and b can exist apart
• If clearly and distinctly perceive a apart from b than a I distinct from b
• By process of doubt I perceive c&d only that I am a thinking thing as opposed to a thinking thing with a body
• I am distinct from any body and so by ( a and b are existing apart) can exist apart form it