Affordable Access

A relação mente-corpo em John Searle

Authors
  • Uzai Junior, Paulo
Publication Date
Jun 29, 2016
Source
Repositório Institucional UNESP
Keywords
Language
Portuguese
License
Unknown
External links

Abstract

There is more than thirty years, the American philosopher John Rogers Searle turned around to the questions of philosophy of mind, whence presents his solution to varied problems about the nature of mental. His first incursion occurred with the book Intentionality, where your main objective was not to solve, at first, problems relating to this issue, but rather to offer a theoretical grounding more solid to his theory of speech acts. However, from this book Searle turns to questions specifically of philosophy of mind. One of his main focus is the relationship between mind-body, where he believes that the solution theoretical-conceptual for that question is not so difficult as we thought. Nevertheless he is not leave of to broach a number of other related topics that he considers of utmost importance in the consolidation of his theoretical scope, such as the causation mental problem and the human subjectivity. Thereby, the present dissertation have for main objective to show, to discuss and critically evaluate the solution that Searle proposes these four central problems of the philosophy of mind: mind-body relationship, mental causation, subjectivity and intentionality. The first three chapters aims to show as Searle see these questions, in other words, what he believes to be wrong in philosophy of mind and what would be the most appropriate solution. In chapter four, we will go to show the main critics to John Searle's solution, focusing in a thematic approach. Thus we will present critics of these four subjects that Searle believes to be essentials in philosophy of mind, about which built your biological naturalism. Lastly, we will make a critically evaluate of what was presented. Therewith we will go to analyze the what weight of criticisms to Searle's philosophy, what qe believe to be right and what we disagree.

Report this publication

Statistics

Seen <100 times