Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Phenomenology as a philosophy
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
In a world of over seven billion people, one can often feel alone due to factors such as social isolation, lack of intimate connections, and general stress. This feeling of loneliness is often times made worse by the presumed understanding that these seven billion people are alive and conscious. But why is it that humans assume anyone aside from themselves possess true consciousness and a developed mind? This idea that everyone has a mind is not, in fact, inborn. Children do not exhibit development of a theory of mind, the understanding that other humans possess thoughts, consciousness and intentionality, until around the ages of three or four. Past this age, those questioning whether others could have a mind are considered to be either philosophers …show more content…
Though not a fixed, philosophical movement, phenomenology acts in contrast to the Cartesian method which sees objects as acting and reacting with one another. Phenomenologists utilize five basic assumptions in their studies: objective research is not possible; analyzing human behavior can help understand their consciousness; people can be examined in the ways they reflect the society in which they live; conscious experience is prefered to data; and phenomenology should be more so focused on discovery than anything else. From this field comes the idea of intentionality, the topic often discussed in modern artificial intelligence (AI). Intentionality is the idea that consciousness is always consciousness of something, or that consciousness is always about some object. This phenomenological idea contrasts a traditional theory of consciousness which states that consciousness cannot be fully studied as reality is only grasped in perceptions, not in anything concrete. Similarly to cognitive psychological approaches, the most mainstream methods utilized by phenomenologists have subjects describe phenomena as the phenomena are perceived. While the field’s father, Husserl, believed consciousness to be the essence of the mind, others within the field, such as Martin Heidegger, thought consciousness is not the primary aspect of one’s existence, and so the mind is more of an effect of a being among stimuli. This shift from the philosophical-psychological study to philosophical-ontological study altered the future of the field and allowed for the rise of ideas such as the unconscious
In the article entitled, “An investigation of first-order false belief understanding of children with congenital profound visual impairment,” a detailed look at the development of ToM was performed. Theory of mind (ToM) is defined “as the ability to impute mental states to others and to interpret and predict behavior in terms of those mental states” (Green 1). In order to examine ToM, the study performed a series of false belief tests. False belief can also be explained as misunderstanding which connected to false reasoning. In the case of the children in this study, the false belief would be if they can correctly identify how another person would respond to a specific task, if that person had limited information that the children were previously made privy too. These tests are important because, as they article explains; the testing false belief is the most direct way to access if a person has a fully developed theory of mind (Dennett c...
Genetic phenomenology is Husserl's philosophical successor to his earlier eidetic phenomenology; it represents the highest development in Husserl's project. Husserl's eidetic phenomenology holds that both the structure of intentional acts and the intentional object are given (Detmer 165). Husserl later comes to doubt the givenness in eidetic phenomenology; these structures and objects of consciousness must have developed throughout history (Detmer 166). This is the process of sedimentation: patterns of understanding and expectations gradually influence later experiences (Zahavi 94). Intentional acts themselves have eidetic structures that are not immediately given; they must be analyzed if the phenomenological project is to continue. A close
One much discussed issue in contemporary philosophy is the relation between consciousness and intentionality. Philosophers debate whether consciousness and intentionality are somehow "connected" (see Searle, chap. 7); whether the one or the other is the "theoretically fundamental" one (see Dennett); and whether we have reason to be more optimistic about an "objective" or "scientific," or "third-person" "account" of intentionality ...
In order to make sense of the ambiguous and complicated world we live in we need a way in which to perceive phenomena. For any given event there could be numerous causes, and instinctively we choose the cause of most significance. These causes are generally ones that represents a humanlike agent. As these agents are not always easy to detect - we often assume there is a humanlike agent behind phenomena regardless of whether we can identify their presence. He notes that Wegner and Mar and Marcae propose we are inclined to see agency even in things such a geometric figures or 'abstract non living
"Artificial Intelligence and Consciousness." Encyclopedia of Consciousness. Oxford: Elsevier Science & Technology, 2009. Credo Reference. Web. 26 April 2011.
Humans are always reluctant to figure out new information and for this we have had centuries of incredible thinkers, artists, and musicians come about. Some have come across new findings by accident and others have worked their entire lives to figure out something to be remembered by. What makes human beings so distinguishable from other species is we have the ability to think and feel and with this we can act in a way that makes us a superior species. With this kind of view on the world we as humans are subjective to our surroundings and build a system of belief through our experiences. While human beings are all destined to be great at birth, the desire to know who we are, why we behave the way we do, what our nature is, and explaining the
Bertrand Russell expressed his belief on knowing other minds, in an article based primarily around the notion of ‘analogy’, meaning similar to or likeness of. His belief is that, "We are convinced that other people have thoughts and feelings that are qualitatively fairly similar to our own. We are not content to think that we know only the space-time structure of our friends’ minds, or their capacity for initiating causal chains that end in sensations of our own" (Russell 89). Russell speaks of the inner awareness, such as being able to observe the occurrences of such things as remembering, feeling pleasure and feeling pain from within our own minds’. This would then allow us to presume that other beings that have these abilities would then be that of having minds.
The skills typically required to development a theory of mind are minimal. It is important that a child first acquires the ability to view oneself and others as intentional agents, or individuals who cause things to happen to reach a desired goal, so that they can then be able to take the perspective of others and understand what their intentions are (Bjorklund, p.200). Now, although infants are not born with these abilities, they do develop them over time. How children come to appreciate that other people have beliefs and desires, often different from their own, that motivate their behavior, is assessed through what is known as the false-b...
“A survey of African- American history reveals that like the children of Israel, we have had a four- hundred-year collective trauma from which we have yet to fully recover”( p.14). A question was presented to Martin Luther King Jr. the night before he died. The question was has “God been guiding us toward a promised land?”(p.14). I remember listening to that speech in school and even watching it on YouTube. I did not understand that speech when I first heard it, but now that speech has a different meaning to me. I believe that Harriet Tubman has seen the Promise land just like Dr. King and David in the bible. God used Harriet Tubman to lead African Americans to freedom just like he used David to bring Israelis to freedom from slavery.
Consciousness is a concept that is socially constructed to define a real, yet abstract phenomenon. The point of defining consciousness, in Combs words, is to take an metaphysical idea, something that can not be understood directly in itself, and turn it into an object for humans to understand from a concrete perspective. For the purpose of this paper, the type of consciousness that will mostly be discussed can be described as having consciousness, an adverb that is understood as an experience, not solely the state of being alive (Walden. Lecture. 8/24/16). To define consciousness in words does not do it justice, as it is comprised of the intangible and feelings. Yet, consciousness directly effects the physical world. According to *** , the meaning of consciousness arises in
We validate our existence based off of others; “Man can find a justification of his own existence only in the existence of other men,” (72). We are constantly viewing, judging and comparing ourselves to others to feel some sort of validity that what we are doing is the right thing and that there is a purpose to our existence. Man needs some sort of justification, to ease an internal anxiety and answer the question, “what’s the use?” It’s as if man is free to make his own choices, and he needs to do so in order to be free, but wants confirmation that what he’s doing is important. There is comfort in knowing that others have made similar decisions and that those decisions had positive outcomes that shaped a desirable
The concept of ‘theory of mind’ is a complex one with various considerations. It can basically be defined as, ‘The ability to understand or ‘read’ the mind of another individual; the ability to ‘put oneself in the place of another’,’ (Smith and Stevens 2002). Essentially, ‘theory of mind’ is concerned with the ideal that a person can comprehend what another person in the same situation may be thinking, or the way in which they may be feeling, without the necessity for direct contact and communication to establish that information. The paramount dilemma for psychologists researching this area of evolutionary psychology, is the difficulty in ensuring that it genuinely is the mind of another individual that a person is responding to, rather than their overt behaviour, bearing in mind the impossibility of looking directly into another’s mind.
Self-knowledge serves as a base for understanding the other, therefore, the prime agent to figure out the process of anthropomorphism is, according to Waytz and et al, the elicitation of agent knowledge itself. This is because humans have acquired the knowledge about their own self in the early stages of their development and it is so well discussed in detail that they are confident about it. They egocentrically, under the influence of self centred knowledge, always judge and reason the other lesser known agents and give them human characteristics according to their own beliefs and desires. So they generally anthropomorphize or use their own mental states and characteristics while reasoning about other non-human entities. However, children below the age of 4 years are unable to distinguish between self and the other, their internal self and the external world or the psychic world from the physical world. They always confuse the self with the other. As Piaget says: “at the starting point in the life of thought, we find a protoplasmic consciousness unable to make any distinction between the self and things” (235). While illustrating it with children it is seen that children consider their toys as like themselves and always feed and dress them in the similar way as
Study of the state of consciousness of mind has been the center of philosophical questions.
To the vast majority of people, the problem of other minds may seem inconsequential or non-existent; to some; however, the problem of other minds is a tantalizing dilemma. The problem of other minds asks how one can support the commonsense belief in the existence of other minded individuals against the general denial of other minds. A general denial of other minds requires an individual to wholeheartedly believe they are the only minded individual that exists and all others are simple automatons. The problem of other minds arises because any belief we have about another’s minds is drawn solely from observation and inference; and the information supplied by the senses cannot be proven accurate. Furthermore no amount of observation can reveal the conscious thought processes and experiences of another individual (and more importantly their mind) with the same clarity and understanding which we have toward our own minds. Consequently we must question what warrants our inferences and beliefs about the mindedness of other individuals? How can we truly know the individual sitting next to us in class, or on a plane, is a conscious, thinking person with their own beliefs and experiences? According to George Graham there are three main proposed explanations for the problem of other minds which fail to withstand critique (Logical Behaviorism, Humbling Disclosure, Arguments from Analogy), and one acceptable solution to the problem (The Inference to the Best Explanation).