Philosophy of the Mind

Philosophy of Mind

One can say or try and dissect the brain and try to figure what’s going on inside of it and that’s what Philophers today try to do that. Why is that why must the brain be dissected? This question is raised for the simple fact that Philophers really want to know why whats going on the human brain. This can also go back to “knowing” and believing in something. We will also take a look into emotion with a emphisis on facil expressions. Reading the human face could be a difficult task. Last but not least I will talk about the Philosphy of life and why it is important to have an outreach like that in life, futhermore this has an emphese on belief. Learning a lot this busy semester the topics above will be though out and discussed so that we can get a better understand of each of them.

David Hume is a very famous philosopher for the methods that he takes to attack certain objects that he has a strong opinion on. He is the type of philosopher that will attack some of the simple things that we accept as humans and have grown to believe over time. He questions the validity of these arguments in regards to the methods that one took to arrive at their desired conclusions. He most notably takes a deeper look into induction and generalization. Induction is basically moving from some type of fact to formulate a specific conclusion about something. Generalization, on the other hand, is making broad assumptions on things usually with insufficient evidence. These two distinct points are the basis of David Hume’s argument expressed in, “An Inquiry Concerning Human Understanding.” The main question that he poses is whether inductive reasoning overall can lead one to gain knowledge.

The two general problems posed ...

... middle of paper ...

... make fewer assumptions about things and move more into a check and balance system that one sees in just about every form of government from big to small and national and local forms. There have been countless mistakes and errors made from one persons judgment or individual beliefs. People may say that there are times when things need to be justified or not. I think Hume has adequately shot down those arguments with the relations of ideas and matter of fact methods he discussed. He said what was appropriate to be further explained and those things that are obvious and would be repetitive if examined too far. This argument that Hume brings up will continue to be a controversial issue that will be up for debate in the future. If one learned anything from this paper, just read the previous/final sentence, everything in the past will not be the same as the future.