JOHN SEARLE THE REDISCOVERY OF THE MIND PDF
The rediscovery of the mind / John R. Searle. p. cm. – (Representation and mind). “A Bradford book.” Includes bibliographical references and. Abraham Witonsky, Georges Rey, Contemporary Philosophy of Mind: A Contentiously Classical Approach, Contemporary Philosophy Series, Minds and . John R. Searle, The Rediscovery of the Mind. Cambridge, Mass., and. London: MIT, a Bradford Book, 1. Introduction. In this remarkable work, the author.
|Published (Last):||5 November 2017|
|PDF File Size:||1.69 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||17.48 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Goodreads helps you keep track of books you want to read. Want to Read saving…. Want to Read Currently Reading Read. Refresh and try again. Open Preview See a Problem?
Thanks for telling us about the problem. Return to Book Page. In this major new work, John Searle launches a formidable attack on current orthodoxies in the philosophy of mind. More than anything else, he argues, it is the neglect of consciousness that results in so much barrenness and sterility in psychology, the philosophy of mind, and cognitive science: What is going on In this mnd new work, John Searle launches a formidable attack on current orthodoxies in the philosophy of mind.
What is going on in the brain is neurophysiological processes and consciousness and nothing more — no rule following, no mental information processing or mental models, no language of thought, and no universal grammar. Mental events are themselves features of the brain, “like liquidity is a feature of water.
The Rediscovery of the Mind by John Rogers Searle
But he does not embrace dualism. All these “isms” are mistaken, he insists. Once you start counting types of substance you redizcovery on the wrong track, whether you stop at one or two. In four chapters that constitute the heart of his argument, Searle elaborates a theory of consciousness and its relation to our overall scientific world view and to unconscious mental phenomena. He concludes with a criticism of cognitive science and a proposal for an approach to studying the mind that emphasizes the centrality of consciousness to any account of mental functioning.
In his characteristically direct style, punctuated with persuasive examples, Searle identifies the very terminology of the field as the main source of truth. He observes that it is a mistake to suppose that the ontology of the mental is minf and to suppose that the methodology of a science of the mind must concern itself only with objectively observable behavior; that it is also a rediwcovery to suppose that we know of the existence of mental phenomena in mnd only by observing their behavior; that behavior or causal relations to behavior are not essential to the existence of mental phenomena; and that it is inconsistent with what we know about the universe and our place in it to suppose that everything is knowable by us.
Paperbackpages. Published July 8th by Bradford Book first published To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up.
To ask other readers questions about The Rediscovery of the Mindplease sign up. Be the first mid ask a question about The Rediscovery of the Mind. Lists with This Book. Feb 13, Matt rated it really liked it Shelves: It covered all the ideas in Minds, Brains and Science, plus a little more.
Review of Searle, The Rediscovery of the Mind
The additional information on already covered topics was useful at times and overly redundant at other times. I think his criticisms of contemporary philosophy of mind are great, but the more involved his theory gets, the more holes there are. Overall, I really appreciate Searle because he stresses what so many other philosopher’s of mind have left out: He says that we all know we have one with the colors and th It covered all the ideas in Minds, Brains and Science, plus a little more.
He hhe that we all know we have seafle with the colors and the pains As a non-Christian, Searle feels the need to avoid dualism, but I think dualists should give him a wink and a nod for an amenable position. Jul 08, Grasped in Thought rated it liked it. I always enjoy reading Searle; he is a great writer and can make the driest of subjects easy to read.
This is his most recent book, and it is essentially an all-out attack on contemporary philosophy of mind. Searle believes that the vocabulary being used in the field is a source of a whole lot of confusion.
There was a problem I encountered throughout this book, though. He constan I always enjoy reading Searle; he is a great writer and can make the driest of subjects easy to read. He constantly refers to consciousness as a biological process of the brain with a first-person ontology. He then goes on to say that consciousness is irreducible because he is convinced by the arguments from the existence of johj.
Other than joyn consciousness has a first-person ontology and is irreducible, he doesn’t really have much to say in a positive sense. The rest of the book is an attack on computational theories of mind. I’m actually torn regarding the strength of his arguments against computation.
The first time I read this book, the arguments seemed very strong nearly decisive ; but upon further reflection, I’m not certain that he really did the damage that he claims he did.
I recommend getting familiar with Searle’s earlier works on the philosophy of mind before reading this book. Jun 19, Trevor rated it it was amazing Shelves: And there in lies the problem, I think. It requires much more focused attention than the Reith lectures. Well, him and Proust. But does this stop me buying new books? Does this even make me prioritise the books on the shelf? But what this becomes later in the book really is something else.
I am intensely interested in questions like, If someone is oc do they still know seearle Paris is the capital of France? Are they still able to know how to speak German?
The answer is that there are many, many background assumptions that one just has to accept and know to understand just about any sentence of any language — and it is this background that is intensely interesting. I do like the philosophy of the commonplace. My job sometimes allows me to be in the office at lunchtime — often not, as this is when people are most likely to want to meet with me, but often enough.
I am even prepared to admit that one of those local newspapers is owned by Rupert Murdoch — well, none of us is perfect. There was a time when I thought rediscoveyr would be very difficult not to know what was going on in the life of Paris Hilton — I now know it is remarkably easy to know nothing of her at all. There are backgrounds and backgrounds. This is another reason why I will need to read this book. Searle grounds consciousness very firmly in biology — rdiscovery Darwinian biology.
He reminds me of Aristotle and therefore he reminds me once again of the oc that my mind is nothing like the minds that I am most impressed by. It is one of the most beautiful things there is. I need to read this one again, but at present that will mean reading it in my next life, or perhaps the one after that — but read it again I reviscovery.
Oct 15, Bent Andreassen rated it it was amazing. A brilliant book by one of the most famous philosophers of the mind-body problem. Not an introduction to this topic. Jan 18, Joshua Stein rated it really liked it Shelves: IT’s easy to see what this is a seminal work for Searle. It’s witty and thoughtful, and Searle makes all of the points that are at the core of his view of consciousness which largely consists of why everyone else’s view of consciousness is not reasonable and so it’s worth reading.
Searle makes for a great critic, even if his own attempt at thr theory is frustrating, as it postulates that phenomenal consciousness is not accessible in wany way that can be processed by third person, objective metho IT’s easy to see what this is a seminal work for Searle.
Searle makes for a great critic, even if his own attempt at a theory is frustrating, as it postulates that phenomenal consciousness is not accessible in wany way that can be processed by third person, objective methods.
That’s all fine, and the text is really worth the read for those who have a strong interest in the field. There are few who have more weight than Searle, or who come up more often in discussions of consciousness. While it’s important that Searle is controversial and he seems fully aware of which of his ideas receive popular dissent in the philosophical community and exactly why, or at least a version of why Searle does a very, very good job at articulating his reasons for holding the positions that he does, and does not get defensive over the positions that are controversial.
This really is a text for those familiar with some of the terminology of consciousness, though Searle is more accessible than most of the writers in the field, so it is worth a try for those just getting an introduction. That said, it is worthwhile to be highly skeptical of Searle’s presentation of the arguments of others, because while Searle admits that he doesn’t always understand the arguments that he critiques or, at least, that he feels his understandings are too absurd to be held by any rational, analytic philosopher he does engage in those critiques as though he had a full understanding.
What I mean by that is that he does not critique more than one interpretation of any particular view; he critiques what he thw is the interpretation of that theory, and that is the end of it. All around, though, it is a great text and should be strongly recommended to those interested in contemporary philosophy of mind, as it does a pretty good job of dealing with the groundwork and addressing most of the problems thoroughly, albeit with considerable bias.
Mar 13, yyy rated it liked it. I was enjoying my summer making good money, preparing for my second year at the good ol’ UofM. Every day that I worked I received a half-hour and a ten-minute break. It’s not uohn, but it’s the only book I’ve ever read while on and only while on break from a job.
The Rediscovery of the Mind (Representation and Mind)
Also, because it was a bookstore, I just grabbed the bookstore copy off the shelf and read that. After that week, I decided I didn’t want to read books from the bookstore anymore because I couldn’t write in them and I wanted to eat lunch on my breaks sometimesso I switched to doing the daily crossword.
Sep 09, Daniel Toker rated it really liked it Shelves: This book accomplished what not many philosophical books have accomplished: I’ve been largely sympathetic to property dualism – the idea that really there’s just one substance that has both physical and phenomenal properties.
That’s the position defended by David Chalmers. I haven’t fully abandoned property dualism, but I’ve become much more sympathetic to Searle’s biological naturalism. Biological naturalism is certainly as good This book accomplished what not many philosophical books have accomplished: Biological naturalism is certainly as good as, or perhaps better than, property dualism as a theory of consciousness.
Dec 06, Mark Haag rated it really liked it. Challenges the mistaken presumptions behind most materialist views of the mind. Will we be able to talk about thinking by merely talking about brain processes?
Can computers think like people? Searle does a good job cataloguing materialist ideas and showing their origins in mistaken philosophical premises.