نوع مقاله : پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 استادیار گروه فلسفه، دانشکده حقوق، الهیات و علوم سیاسی، واحد علوم و تحقیقات دانشگاه ازاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران
2 دانشجوی دکترای فلسفه علم، دانشکده حقوق، الهیات و علوم سیاسی، واحد علوم و تحقیقات دانشگاه ازاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران
چکیده
در فلسفه ذهن ویژگیهای پدیداری سابجکتیو از حالات ذهنی آگاهانه را کوالیا مینامند. بدین معنا که یک حالت ذهنی واجد کوالیا است اگر و تنها اگر چیزی وجود دارد که کیفیت بودنِ آن حالت ذهنی درآن فرد است. برخی استدلالاتی را طراحی کردهاند که ارزش معرفتی و تبیینی کوالیا را به چالش میکشد. هدف این نوع استدلالات این است نشان دهند که در یک نظریه روانشناسی علمی بالغ و بهخوبی سامانیافته جایگاهی برای مفهوم کوالیا وجود ندارد. وقتی جایگاهی برای مفهوم کوالیا وجود نداشته باشد، فرض وجود چنین مفهومی ارزش معرفتی نخواهد داشت. در این مقاله استدلالاتی که علیه ارزش معرفتی و تبیینی کوالیا هست نقد و بررسی میشود و نشان داده میشود که این استدلالات کارامدی لازم را ندارند و از این استدلالات نتیجه نمیشود که کوالیا جایگاهی در نظریههای علمی ندارد و در نهایت نشان داده میشود با تمایز میان سابجکتیویتی متافیزیکال و ابجکتیویتی معرفتشناسی، میتوان به نحو شایستهای جایگاه علمی کوالیا را بازسازی کرد.
کلیدواژهها
عنوان مقاله [English]
Qualia and Scientific Acceptance
نویسندگان [English]
- ahmadreza Hemmati Moghaddam 1
- Shima hadinia 2
1 2. Assistant Professor of Philosophy, Faculty of Law, Theologu and Political Science, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University Tehran, Iran
2 1. PhD Student of Philosophy of Science, Faculty of Law, Theologu and Political Science, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University Tehran, Iran
چکیده [English]
Phenomenal qualities of conscious mental states are commonly known as “qualia”. We say that a particular mental state has qualia if and only if There is something that it is like to be the mental state. Some philosophers have challenged the epistemic and explanatory values of qualia. They argue that the concept of qualia has no role to play in a mature and well-organized psychological theory. Consequently, this concept has no epistemic value. This paper aims at explaining and criticizing these arguments. It will be argued that these arguments are ineffective and cannot establish that the concept of qualia can not have functions in a scientific theories. The distinction between metaphysical subjectivity and epistemic objectivity, as it will be shown, can establish a scientific place for the concept of qualia.
کلیدواژهها [English]
- Qualia
- Scientific Acceptance
- Pain
- Denett’s Argument
- Allport, A. (1988). What Concept of Consciousness, In Consciousness and Contemporary Science. edited by Marcal, A and Bisiach, E. New York: Oxford University Press
- Bisiach, E. (1988). The (Haunted) Brain and Consciousness, In Consciousness and Contemporary Science. edited by Marcel, A and Bisiach E, 101-20. New York: Oxford University Press
- Bouckoms, A. J. (1994). Limbic Surgery for Pain. In Textbook of Pain. edited by Wall, P.D & Melzack, R, 1171-1187. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingston.
- Conee, E. (1984). A Defense of Pain. Philosophical Studies, 46, 239-248.
- Churchland, P. (1985). Reduction, Qualia and the Direct Introspection of Brain States, In A Neurocomputational Perspective: The Nature of Mind and the Structure of Science. Cambridge: MIT Press.
- Churchland, P. (1981). Eliminative Materialism and the Propositional Attitudes. Journal
of Philosophy, 78, 67-90.
- Denneth, D. (1978). Why You Can’t Make a Computer that Feels Pain, In Brainstorms. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1978. First Published in Syenthese. 1978, 38: 415-49
- Flanagan, O. (1992). Consiousness Reconsidered. Cambridge: MIT Press
- Foltz, E. L., & White, L. E. (1962). Pain „Relief" by Frontal Cingulotomy. Journal of
Neurosurgery, 19, 89-100.
- Foss, J. (1993). Subjectivity, Objectivity and Nagel on Consciousness, Dialogue 32: 725-736
- Freeman, W. J., Watts, W., & Hunt, T. (1942). Psychosurgery; intelligence, emotion and
social behavior following prefrontal lobotomy for mental disorders. Springfield: C. C. Thomas.
- Gendler T, & Hawthorne, J. (2002). Conceivability and Possibility. Oxford University Press
- Gregory, R. (1970). The Intelligent Eye. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson.
- Hardy, J. D., Wolff, H. J., & Goodell, H. (1952). Pain Sensations and Reactions. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins.
- Horgan, T and Woodward, J. (1985). Folk Psychology is Here to Stay, The Philosophical Review, 94: 197-226
- IASP-Task-Force-On-Taxonomy (1994). IASP Pain Terminology. In H. Merskey & N.
Bogduk (Eds.), Classification of Chronic Pain: Descriptions of Chronic Pain Syndromes and Definitions of Pain Terms (pp. 209-214). Seattle: IASP Press.
- Kaufman, R. (1985). Is the Concept of Pain Incoherent? Southern Journal of Philosophy, 23, 279-284.
- Kim, J. (2010). Philosophy of Mind. Routledge
- Kripke, S. (1980). Naming and Necessity. Harvard University Press
- Levin, J. (1994). Out of the closet: A Qualophil Confronts Qualophobia, Philosophical Topics, 22: 107-26
- Levin, M. (1981). Phenomenal Properties, Philosophy and Phenomenal Research, 42: 42-58
- Luper, S. (2004). Epistemic Relativism, Philosophical Issues, 14, Epistemology: 271-295
- Marcel, A. (1988).Phenomenal Experience and Functionalism, In Consciousness and Contemporary Science. edited by Marcel, A and Bisiach, E, 121-58. New York: Oxford University Press
- Natsoulus, T. (1978). Consciousness, American Psycologist, 33, pp. 906-14
- Nagel, T. (1974). What is it like to be a Bat? Philosophical Review, 83: 435–456.
- Nikolinakos, D. (1994). General Anesthesia, Consciousness and the Skeptical Challenge, Journal of Philosophy 91: 88-104
- Ploner, M., Freund, H. J., & A. Schnitzler, A. (1999). Pain Affect without Pain Sensation in a
- Patient with a Postcentral Lesion. Pain, 81(1/2), 211-214.
- Searl, J. (1992). The Rediscovery of the Mind. Cambridge: MIT Press
- Soames, S. (2002). Beyond Rigidity. Oxford University Press
- Stich, S. (1983). From Folk Psychology to Cognitive Science. Cambridge Mass.: MIT Press.
- Weiskrantz, L. (1988). Some Contributions of Neuropsychology of Vision and Memory to Problem of Consciousness” In Consciousness and Contemporary Science. edited by Marcal, A and Bisiach, E, 183-99. New York: Oxford University Press
- White, J. C., & Sweet, W. H. (1969). Pain and the Neurosurgeon: A Forty-Year of Experience. Springfield: Charles C. Thomas.
- Wilkes, K. (1984). Is Consciousness Important, British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 35:223-43
- Wilkinson, H. A., Davidson, K. M., & Davidson, R. I. (1999). Bilateral anterior cingulotomy for chronic noncancer pain. Neurosurgery, 45(5), 1129.
- Woodruff-Smith, D. (1986). Rey Cogitans: The Unquestionability of consciousness, In Perspectives on Mind. edited by H. Otto and J. Tuedio, 25-31. Dordrecht: Kluwer
- Yen, C. P., Kung, S. S., Su, Y. F., Lin, W. C., Huang, S. L., & Kwan, A. L. (2005).
Stereotactic bilateral anterior cingulotomy for intractable pain. Journal of Clinical Neuroscience, 12(8), 886-890.