Richard OyelakinCorresponding authorORCID id

Can Scientists Help Philosophers Regarding the Nature of Phenomenal Experience?

Article
25/2 – Autumn 2020, pages 293-310
Date of online publication: 04 December 2020
Date of publication: 04 December 2020

Abstract

In response to Putnam’s computational hypothesis on the question of the nature of the mind, Searle and Churchland argue that the nature of mental states essentially consists of neurophysiological processes in an organic brain. However, this seems to imply that mental states are products of the brain and thus, contra Putnam, that an adequate account of mental states which excludes an implementing organic structure is impossible. To this extent, an attempt is made in the paper to structure a biological-organic program. By this structure, it is identified that mental state is a process of the whole organism which necessarily produces phenomenal experience. However, if phenomenal experience is a product of mental states, which consists in neural firings in the brain, then it appears the problem is reducible to a question of how; i.e. how does the brain do it? In turn, this may direct our attention to neuroscientists. However, the paper argues that even per- ceptual internalism, which is the theoretical basis of contemporary neuroscience, may not really be of help in this case. It is argued that the experimentation and observation which foreground scientific enquiry may not be able to sufficiently account for the how question without leaving some other questions unanswered. As a result, a seemingly implied otherworldly reality or principle is explored. It is submitted that our natural tendency and apparatus (what else do we have) do not appear to lead us forward. Again, withdrawing back to our natural system, our deficient human nature requires us to tread with caution but hopefully, perhaps, we may eventually make progress in this regard.

Keywords

Cite this article

Oyelakin, Richard Taye. “Can Scientists Help Philosophers Regarding the Nature of Phenomenal Experience?” Forum Philosophicum 25, no. 2 (2020): 293–310. doi:10.35765/forphil.2020.2502.19.

Bibliography

Berkeley, George. 1996. Principles of Human Knowledge and Three Dialogues, edited by

Howard Robinson. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Block, Ned. 1993. “The Computer Model of the Mind.” In Readings in Philosophy and Cogni-

tive Science, edited by Alvin Goldman, 819–31. Cambridge: MIT Press.
— . 1997. “On the Confusion about a Function of Consciousness.” In The Nature of Con- sciousness, edited by Ned Block, Owen J. Flanagan and Guven Guzeldere, 375–415. Cam-

bridge: MIT Press.
Buechner, Jeff. 2008. Godel, Putnam, and Functionalism: A New Reading of Representation

and Reality. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Buzsaki, Gyorgy. 2019. The Brain from Inside out. New York: Oxford University Press. Chalmers, David John. 1996. The Conscious Mind: In Search of a Fundamental Theory. New

York: Oxford University Press.
Churchland, Patricia. 1993. “The Co-evolutionary Research Ideology.” In Readings in Phi-

losophy and Cognitive Science, edited by Alvin Goldman, 745–67. Cambridge: MIT Press. Collier, John. 2011. “Explaining Biological Functionality: Is Control Theory Enough?” South African Journal of Philosophy 30 (1): 53–62. https://doi.org/10.4314/sajpem.v30i1.64411. Copeland, Jack B. 2010. “Computable Numbers: A Guide.” In The Essential Turing, edited by

Jack B. Copeland, 58–67. New York: Oxford University Press.
Hardcastle, Valerie Gray. 1995. “Computationalism.” Synthese 105: 303–17. https://doi.

org/10.1007/BF01063561.
Hilbert, David, and Colin Klein. 2014. “No Problem.” In Consciousness Inside and Out: Phenom-

enology, Neuroscience, and the Nature of Experience, edited by Richard Brown, 299–306.

New York: Springer.
Jackson, Frank. 1995. “Postscript on ‘What Mary Didn’t Know’.” In Contemporary Material-

ism, edited by Paul K. Moser and J. D. Trout, 187–97. New York: Routledge.
— . 2004. “What Mary Didn’t Know.” In There is Something About Mary: Essays on Phe- nomena Experience and Frank Jackson’s Knowledge Argument, edited by Peter Ludlow,

Yujin Nagasawa and Daniel Stoljar, 51–6. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Jolley, Kelly Dean, and Michael Watkins. 2004. “What is it Like to be a Phenomenologist?”

The Philosophical Quarterly 48 (191): 204–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9213.00094. Kim, Jaegwon. 1996. Philosophy of Mind. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Levine, Joseph. 2002. “Materialism and Qualia: The Explanatory Gap.” In Philosophy of

Mind: Classical and Contemporary Readings, edited by David Chalmers, 354–61. New

York: Oxford University Press.
McGinn, Colin. 1997. “Can We Solve the Mind-Body Problem?” In The Nature of Conscious-

ness, edited by Ned Block, Owen J. Flanagan and Guven Guzeldere, 529–42. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Morris, Richard, and Marianne Fillenz. 2003. Neuroscience: Science of the Brain: An Introduc- tion for Young Student. Liverpool: The British Neuroscience Association.

Nagel, Ernest. 1966. “Russell’s Philosophy of Science.” In The Philosophy of Bertrand Russell, edited by Paul Arthur Schilpp, 317–51. New York: Monarch Press.

Nagel, Thomas. 1979. Mortal Questions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Oguejiofor, J Obi. 1994. Has Bertrand Russell Solved the Problem of Perception? Berlin: Peter

Lang.
Papineau, David. 2002. Thinking about Consciousness. New York: Clarendon Press.
Pautz, Adam. 2014. “The Real Trouble with Phenomenal Externalism: New Empirical Evi-

dence from a Brain-Based Theory of Consciousness.” In Consciousness Inside and Out: Phenomenology, Neuroscience, and the Nature of Experience, edited by Richard Brown, 237–98. New York: Springer.

Piccinini, Gualtiero. 2010. “The Mind as Neural Software? Understanding Functionalism, Computationalism, and Computational Functionalism.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 81 (2): 269–311. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1933-1592.2010.00356.x.

Platchias, Dimitris. 2011. Phenomenal Consciousness: Understanding the Relation between Experience and Neural Processes in the Brain. Durham: Acumen Publishing Limited. Priest, George Graham. 1993. Philosophy of Mind: An Introduction. Oxford: Blackwell Pub-

lishing Company.
Putnam, Hilary. 1975a. “The Meaning of Meaning.” In Mind, Language and Reality: Philo-

sophical Papers, 215–72. London: Cambridge University Press.
— . 1975b. “Minds and Machines.” In Mind, Language and Reality: Philosophical Papers,

362–85. London: Cambridge University Press.
— . 1975c. “The Nature of Mental States.” In Mind, Language and Reality: Philosophical

Papers, 429–40. London: Cambridge University Press.
— . 1991. Representation and Reality. Cambridge: MIT Press. —. 2002.“TheNatureofMentalStates.”InPhilosophyofMind:ClassicalandContemporary

Readings, edited by David Chalmers, 73–9. New York: Oxford University Press.
Quine, Willard Van Orman. 1960. Word and Object. Cambridge: MIT Press.
— . 1961. “Two Dogmas of Empiricism.” In From a Logical Point of View, 20–46. Harvard:

Harvard University Press.
Russell, Bertrand. 1973. “Physics and Perception.” In A Modern Introduction to Philosophy,

edited by Paul Edwards and Arthur Pap, 622–28. New York: Free Press.
Searle, John R. 1993. “The Critique of Cognitive Reason.” In Readings in Philosophy and

Cognitive Science, edited by Alvin Goldman, 833-47. Cambridge: MIT Press.
— . 2008. Philosophy in a New Century: Selected Essays. New York: Cambridge University

Press.
Stenger, Victor J. 2006. God: The Failed Hypothesis. How Science Shows that God does not

Exist. New York: Prometheus Books.
Turing, A. M. 1950. “Computing Machinery and Intelligence.” Mind 59 (236): 433–60. https://doi.org/10.1093/mind/LIX.236.433.
Wang, Wenfeng, Xiangyang Deng, Liang Ding, and Limin Zhang. 2020. Brain-Inspired Intelligence and Visual Perception: The Brain and Machine Eyes. Wuhan: Huazhong University of Science and Technology Press Singapore.

Copyright