Philosophy of the human person
The mind body problem refers to the relationship that exists between the mind and the body and is usually treated as the central focus of the mind philosophy. Searle is one of the philosophers who has discussed several classical problems ,that include problems such as freedom and the free will ,right and wrong ,the mind –body problem among others . In my case the focus of interest shall be on the Mind –Body problem. According to Searle there is no real mind body problem. This is because the mind does depend on the brain and its neurology .
It for this reason that consciousness cannot be separated from the brain. The mind is actually dependent on the brains‘s neurons. This means that all our behavioral characteristics depend on the neurons. From Searle’s stand above I am faced with one question to tackle: Whether Searle has succeeded in giving an adequate explanation on how mental phenomenon is caused by neural activity and not neural phenomenon? I tend to disagree with his stand . This is a problem many philosophers not only John Searle but also Rene Descartes, Socrates and many others including me have put into analytical considerations.
What’s the link between the mental and physical phenomena? How does the soul relate with the human body? Attempts have been made to explain everything on the basis of mental and physical aspects. All these failed . Searle has played his part by trying to come up with some good alternatives. Searle sees the mind as feature that is realized and caused by the micro –components of the brain i. e. neurons. (Searle. 1984) Searle gives an analogy of the brain or mind with the solidity of a table. By solididity he explains the physical properties of the table .
According to this, the table is cannot be penetrated and is solid. If in depth analysis of the table‘s physical structure is done, the results show that its solidity is dependent on the element and molecular networks of the table. From this analogy it’s apparent that Searle has a belief that the brain neurons are like table molecules and similarly the mind resemble solidity. If one in his own case knows that he is experiencing mental phenomenon, does it mean that you too do? It can be easily understood that one has a brain and that the activity or inactivity of particular neurons enables you to think.
This should not make you arrive at a conclusion that a person thinks simply by observing that he has brain neurons. Searle gives description of two levels of event s and phenomenon. These levels are micro and macro levels. Turning back to the relationship between mind and soul, it’s evident that mind is the macro level of the brain while micro level is composed of neurons. It’s not possible by any chance for a person to have mind without a brain. Mental reality is represented by the mind while physical reality is represented by the brain and hence enables the interaction between physical and mental things.
Both of them are in possession of the physical nature. Searle agues that if the brain prompts the mind to act in some way is as a result of the movement of the neurons to the mind of an individual; With respect to the probe of the mind, Searle does not propose a good theory. The mind body problem as tackled by Searle has led to controversies leaving camps in division. Searle’s arguments are against the notions of the dualists on body and soul. He gives a proposition known as “biological naturalism”. It explains that manifestation of mental events is at high level than processes of neuron biology.
Refruting the established notions partainig the above problems result in cycles of arguments. All that philosophy can do in such cases is to bring to light some of the complex problems. CONCLUSION Searle makes complex issues simple by relating science and the common sense . According to Searle the mind forms . part of nature, a biological evolution product, thus a component of the physical world. He argues that the mind is simply an operation of the brain from some organizational levels high, well above the neurological system.
The deductions made are therefore that the mind consciousness is biological evolution products. The philosophical questions are replaced by scientific questions . Should the mind be part of existing physical phenomena, and there is possibility of free will, then it’s a must that there is something missing from chemistry and physics that cannot be used to explain the human mind . The fact that physics cannot be used to explain consciousness reaffirms the fact that the mind, actually, not by any means part of nature. REFERENCE Searle, J. (1984). Mind Brain and Science. Cambridge, Harvard University Press.Sample Essay of PapersOwl.com