As regards the nature of mind, are you a dualist (either epiphenomenalist or interactionist) or a functionalist? Defend your chosen viewpoint by responding directly to the relevant objections cited by Jacobsen, going beyond both Jacobsen’s own responses and the responses provided in the class notes to these objections.
Due: March 4
Length: 4 pages maximum
NB: do not use any sources other than the course text and the lecture notes.
Please use 12-point font and double space your lines
I will include the necessary pages of the text book to which the question is referring (Jacobsen’s objections)
Areas of focus:
Jacobsens objections:
The properties cited in Leibniz’ Law need to be properties of the things themselves, not properties of us, who are applying Leibniz’ Law (p. 118)
And: ‘knowable with certainty’ is not a (genuine) property of things themselves.
Jacobsens analogy used to further obejct:
We assume that the identity of Obadiah’s murderer is as yet unknown.
1. Obadiah’s murderer has the property of ‘being known with certainty to be the person who murdered Obadiah’.
2. Professor Moriarty does not have the property of ‘being known with
certainty to be the person who murdered Obadiah’
3. So, by Leibniz’ Law, Professor Moriarty can’t be Obadiah’s murderer
Decartes objections – mind and body are different things