Philosophy of Mind: A Contemporary Introduction
- Downloads：6464
- Type：Epub+TxT+PDF+Mobi
- Create Date：2021-08-26 07:53:12
- Update Date：2025-09-06
- Status：finish
- Author：John Heil
- ISBN：1138581011
- Environment：PC/Android/iPhone/iPad/Kindle
- Download
Summary
The book is intended as a reader-friendly introduction to issues in the philosophy of mind， including mental-physical causal interaction， computational models of thought， the relation minds bear to brains， and assorted -isms: behaviorism， dualism， eliminativism， emergentism， functionalism， materialism， neutral monism， and panpsychism。 The Fourth Edition reintroduces a chapter on Donald Davidson and a discussion of 'Non-Cartesian Dualism'， along with a wholly new chapter on emergence and panpsychism。 A concluding chapter draws together material in earlier chapters and offers what the author regards as a plausible account of the mind's place in nature。 Suggested readings at the conclusion of each chapter have been updated， with a focus on accessible， non-technical material。
Key Features of the Fourth Edition
Includes a new chapter， 'Emergence and Panpsychism' （Chapter 13）， reflecting growing interest in these areas
Reintroduces and updates a chapter on Donald Davidson， 'Radical Interpretation' （Chapter 8）， which was excised from the previous edition
Updates 'Descartes' Legacy' （Chapter 3） to include a discussion of E。 J。 Lowe's arresting 'Non-Cartesian Dualism'， also removed from the previous edition
Includes a highly revised final chapter， which draws together much of the previous material and sketches a plausible account of the mind's place in nature
Updated 'Suggested Reading' lists at the end of each chapter
Key Features of the Fourth Edition
Includes a new chapter， 'Emergence and Panpsychism' （Chapter 13）， reflecting growing interest in these areas
Reintroduces and updates a chapter on Donald Davidson， 'Radical Interpretation' （Chapter 8）， which was excised from the previous edition
Updates 'Descartes' Legacy' （Chapter 3） to include a discussion of E。 J。 Lowe's arresting 'Non-Cartesian Dualism'， also removed from the previous edition
Includes a highly revised final chapter， which draws together much of the previous material and sketches a plausible account of the mind's place in nature
Updated 'Suggested Reading' lists at the end of each chapter
Reviews
Faisal Shabbir
，
Reading books as part of a course can make them seem more tedious， imagine reading an introduction to philosophy of mind with that framework。 I am glad I read the book it gives me some grounding on how the mind is perceived and problems philosophy has to deal with while discussing the mind。
Penny
，
single-handedly redeemed me （not really） for phil 80， every symsys student's favourite class single-handedly redeemed me （not really） for phil 80， every symsys student's favourite class 。。。more
Nisus
，
Guess there must be people interested in this kind of approach。 But the author’s style seemed to me unnecessarily dry and drawn out。 Won’t be reading other books from him in the future。
Emma
，
did NOT read this whole thing。 some articles are far better than others。
Mostafa
，
قرأت تقريبا 60% منه، ولم أستطع إكماله。 في أسلوب الكتاب شيء لم أستطع الإشارة إليه، يجعله صعب الإكمال عليّ。 ليس الصعب المادة، وليس المزعج أن الكتاب ممل أو جاف، فهذه نوعية الكتب التي أقرأها أصلا، لكن مع ذلك ثمّ شيء أزعجني لا أعرفه。 في مرحلة صرت أعتقد أن السبب هو كثرة الثرثرة، كثرة الجمل الاعتراضية، لكنّي لا أظنه السبب。 قد يكون السبب وصفيّة الكتاب، يعني الكتاب أغلبه وصف لنظريات، وشرح للمصطلحات المستخدمة، لكن في الحقيقة هذا هدف الكتاب 。。 هذا معنى كونه مقدمة。ممكن السبب يكون عدم ظهور نقاش حقيقي للِم قد قرأت تقريبا 60% منه، ولم أستطع إكماله。 في أسلوب الكتاب شيء لم أستطع الإشارة إليه، يجعله صعب الإكمال عليّ。 ليس الصعب المادة، وليس المزعج أن الكتاب ممل أو جاف، فهذه نوعية الكتب التي أقرأها أصلا، لكن مع ذلك ثمّ شيء أزعجني لا أعرفه。 في مرحلة صرت أعتقد أن السبب هو كثرة الثرثرة، كثرة الجمل الاعتراضية، لكنّي لا أظنه السبب。 قد يكون السبب وصفيّة الكتاب، يعني الكتاب أغلبه وصف لنظريات، وشرح للمصطلحات المستخدمة، لكن في الحقيقة هذا هدف الكتاب 。。 هذا معنى كونه مقدمة。ممكن السبب يكون عدم ظهور نقاش حقيقي للِم قد تكون هذه النظرية صحيحة أو لا؟ النقاش موجود فعلا، يعني يذكر بعض الصعوبات التي تواجه نظرية ديكارت في النفس مثلا، لكن هذه الصعوبات لا 。。 تبدو صعوبات （؟）。 يعني مثلا، "إشكالية التأثير بين ما هو مجرّد وما هو متحيّز"، ما هي صعوبتها بالضبط؟ كيف ترد على من يقول به؟ أنه لا يستطيع تفسير ماهية هذه السببية؟ طيب؟ كيف يزيّف هذا النظرية؟ يُقال أنها تعارض مسلّمة وهي أن كوننا نظام مغلق، وهي مقبولة علميا، وهذا يعني أن النظرية مستبعدة، لكن لا يبدو أن هذا نقاش حقيقي للنظرية، الذي يقول بهذه النظرية بكل بساطة سيقول: إذن لنطلب مفهوما جديدا للقوانين الطبيعية ومعناها。 لكن الرجل يحكي هذه الإشكالات، من حيث أنها وردت على النظرية، وعلى القارئ إذا أراد تبنّي النظرية، أن يتفكر في هذه الأسئلة ويقدّم جوابا عليها。 فلا يبدو أن هذا سلبيّة فيه。بالتالي، أنا فعلا لا أعرف ما الذي لم يعجبني بالضبط، لكنني أعلم أن شيئا لم يعجبني، لعله تراكم ما سبق وأن مجموعها هو الذي ثبطني عن إنهائه 。。 ممكن برضو。 عموما، حصّلت بعض الأسماء والنظريات التي أريد بعض التوسّع في الاطلاع عليها، كالـ Cartesian Dualism و Functionalism。و لعلي أبدأ بمراجعتها من مصدر رهيب وهو Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy。 ومنها قد أنتقل إلى بعض الأعمال الأصلية إذا أردت。 。。。more
XYX
，
This is a great introduction to philosophy of mind。 Heil covers a lot of ground， outlining several historically prominent perspectives， but does not sacrifice thoroughness。 Explanations are clear， and the book is well organized。 My only complaint is that the book goes off the rails a bit in the last two chapters， which are spent explicating his own views。 Although his theory incorporates some points of established theories， these final chapters are muddled and out of place。 The book would have b This is a great introduction to philosophy of mind。 Heil covers a lot of ground， outlining several historically prominent perspectives， but does not sacrifice thoroughness。 Explanations are clear， and the book is well organized。 My only complaint is that the book goes off the rails a bit in the last two chapters， which are spent explicating his own views。 Although his theory incorporates some points of established theories， these final chapters are muddled and out of place。 The book would have benefited if they had been omitted and replaced by a more objective synthesis and outlook for the future of philosophy of mind。 Don't let this small gripe deter you。 I recommend this book to anyone seeking a brief introduction to the subject。 。。。more
Tony
，
A good introduction that sets out the different philosophical schools of thought about the nature of Mind - Can be easily read by a non-specialist。
Richard Newton
，
This book is a very good introduction to philosophy of mind， in parts。 As a general introduction it is very good。 There are parts which explain things more clearly than any other similar textbook I have read （e。g。 Kim's philosophy of mind）。 But it is not a deep as Kim's book and the coverage is not as thorough - for example I found nothing on anomalous monism， which I would have thought was a fairly central part of contemporary philosophy of mind。 Additionally， the last two chapters， which whils This book is a very good introduction to philosophy of mind， in parts。 As a general introduction it is very good。 There are parts which explain things more clearly than any other similar textbook I have read （e。g。 Kim's philosophy of mind）。 But it is not a deep as Kim's book and the coverage is not as thorough - for example I found nothing on anomalous monism， which I would have thought was a fairly central part of contemporary philosophy of mind。 Additionally， the last two chapters， which whilst being interesting， seemed out of place。 Whilst chapters 1-11 are a general unbiased introduction， chapters 12-13 are Heil's own views on philosophy of mind。 I suspect this is just a personal view， but I prefer philosophy books to either contain a specific argument from the writer or to be a reference source of both sides of the main arguments in any specific area - combining the two in one book does not work for me。 But you could do far worse than this book if you want a reasonably deep， yet relatively easy to get into introduction to philosophy of mind。 。。。more
Lankyman
，
Great collection with everything you could want。 I would never have made it through my Philosophy of Mind Course without it。
Rachael
，
Heil does an admirable job of presenting in a fairly clear fashion the major schools of thought in the philosophy of mind。 Beware that he does have his own views and presents them unapologetically in the last two chapters （a view I disagree with， actually） but he gives fair warning at the beginning of the book。 He takes a lot of time to discuss why neuroscience alone cannot be the final arbiter of the important questions， particularly when it comes to understanding the basic nature of consciousn Heil does an admirable job of presenting in a fairly clear fashion the major schools of thought in the philosophy of mind。 Beware that he does have his own views and presents them unapologetically in the last two chapters （a view I disagree with， actually） but he gives fair warning at the beginning of the book。 He takes a lot of time to discuss why neuroscience alone cannot be the final arbiter of the important questions， particularly when it comes to understanding the basic nature of consciousness and I appreciated that discussion in the book。 After the the usual presentation of substance dualism， representationalism， functionalism， eliminitivism， interpretation theroy and property dualism he takes through an ontological detour to present an interesting case study about how theories of mind are formed。 He argues for a nominalist view which incorporates a theory of properties treating them as both having dispositions and qualities simultaneously。 From there he argues how it is possible to reduce mental events to relevant physical ones without emptying contents （qualities） as he sees functionalism do （he argues they have an ontology of properties which sees them in terms of their dispositions only） and without arguing that there are special irreducible mental properties。 The latter he argues becomes unnecessary with his move to nominalism and a 'similar enough' （not identical to） view of complex properties such as pain。 Multiple realizability， taking seriously the qualitative features of mental happenings and a preservation of physicalism are all preserved。The nice thing about these last couple of chapters as taking htem as a case study is that they make use of all of the concepts touched in earlier in the book。 I also think it's incredibly useful to get a sketch about how these ideas are developed and which issues are seen as especially problematic。 The motivation to avoid 'spooky' or 'kooky' elements， along with a desire for parsimony informs a strong drive to preserve physicalism。 So whether or not the reader agrees with Heil at the end it is a useful illustration about how philosophy of mind is done in contemporary circles。 。。。more
Ron
，
This book provided me with exactly what I was looking for- a detailed introduction to the various theories of mind which are circulating among contemporary philosophers。 Heil provides his opinion of the strengths and weaknesses of each theory and more importantly provides an extensive suggested reading list at the end of each chapter。 The book is not light reading but I would have been disappointed if it was。 This is not "fast food" philosophy the content requires thought and some familiarity wi This book provided me with exactly what I was looking for- a detailed introduction to the various theories of mind which are circulating among contemporary philosophers。 Heil provides his opinion of the strengths and weaknesses of each theory and more importantly provides an extensive suggested reading list at the end of each chapter。 The book is not light reading but I would have been disappointed if it was。 This is not "fast food" philosophy the content requires thought and some familiarity with philosophical writing。The last two chapters are the authors own theory of mind but one could skip this entirely without losing anything; unless of course you are interested in the author's theory。 The book is a good starting point for continued study of the philosophy of mind。 。。。more
Adam
，
Can't say I was too much of a fan of Heil's approach or his own theory he presents in the final two chapters。 He's just not a very good writer， and much of this book seems sort of dry。 It's a somewhat useful book for those looking for a very short introductory text， but I think that Phil of Mind unlike， say， Ethics， works best with a historical introduction。 The problem here is that Heil essentially works by telling us about theories and their proponents， and then briefly the major pros and cons Can't say I was too much of a fan of Heil's approach or his own theory he presents in the final two chapters。 He's just not a very good writer， and much of this book seems sort of dry。 It's a somewhat useful book for those looking for a very short introductory text， but I think that Phil of Mind unlike， say， Ethics， works best with a historical introduction。 The problem here is that Heil essentially works by telling us about theories and their proponents， and then briefly the major pros and cons [according to him]。 To me， this is somewhat pointless without the presence of the actual texts。 Heil also slyly puts spins on things in ways that don't seem entirely intellectually honest to me。 Of course， this is not a bad book， nor is Heil a poor philosopher [I do not mean to imply that at all]。 I just don't find his approach here very useful。 。。。more
Alexander
，
The emphasis on ontology makes for tough going at times， but it seems to me， at least， that Heil is right to insist on its importance for doing philosophy of mind。 A very lucid guide to a very interesting subject。
Matt
，
It was fine。 Definitely useful， but maybe trying too hard to push metaphysics on the situation。 However， I know many appreciate that about Heil。
Dave
，
This one was a textbook。 Nevertheless， its the best introduction to philosophy of mind out there。
Zedder
，