Please wait a minute...
Frontiers of Philosophy in China

ISSN 1673-3436

ISSN 1673-355X(Online)

CN 11-5743/B

Postal Subscription Code 80-983

Front. Philos. China    2018, Vol. 13 Issue (3) : 377-393    https://doi.org/10.3868/s030-007-018-0029-2
Orginal Article
Mind, Consciousness, and Free Will
Paul Thagard()
Department of Philosophy, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON N2L 3G1, Canada
 Download: PDF(266 KB)  
 Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks
Abstract

This commentary discusses how philosophy and science can collaborate to understand the human mind, considering dialogues involving three philosophers and three cognitive scientists. Their topics include the relation of philosophy and science, the nature of mind, the problem of consciousness, and the existence of free will. I argue that philosophy is more general and normative than science, but they are interdependent. Philosophy can build on the cognitive sciences to develop a theory of mind I call “multilevel materialism,” which integrates molecular, neural, mental, and social mechanisms. Consciousness is increasingly being understood as resulting from neural mechanisms. Scientific advances make the traditional concept of free will implausible, but “freeish” will is consistent with new theories of decision making and action resulting from brain processes. Philosophers should work closely with scientists to address profound problems about knowledge, reality, and values.

Keywords cognitive science      consciousness      free will      intuition      materialism      mind      philosophy      science     
Issue Date: 25 September 2018
 Cite this article:   
Paul Thagard. Mind, Consciousness, and Free Will[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2018, 13(3): 377-393.
 URL:  
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fpc/EN/10.3868/s030-007-018-0029-2
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fpc/EN/Y2018/V13/I3/377
[1] FEI Duoyi. Comparative Perspectives on Solutions for the Problem of Other Minds[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2020, 15(4): 636-652.
[2] Dmytro Mykhailov. The Phenomenological Roots of Technological Intentionality: A Postphenomenological Perspective[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2020, 15(4): 612-635.
[3] Genki Uemura. Articulating Consciousness: Brentano and Husserl on Descriptive Analysis[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2020, 15(3): 352-379.
[4] Sarah Craddock, John Preston. Roles and Representations of Women in Early Chinese Philosophy: A Survey[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2020, 15(2): 198-222.
[5] FEI Duoyi. The Conceptual Fetters of the Mind-Body Problem[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2019, 14(4): 612-629.
[6] Jacklyn A. Cleofas. An Understanding of Character from Holistic Thinking: What Asian Psychology Teaches Us about the Debate on Situationism[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2019, 14(3): 384-405.
[7] Henrique Schneider. Tricking or Benefitting the People? Guanzi on Objective Government and Subjective Preferences[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2019, 14(3): 363-383.
[8] Rina Marie Camus. “Athl-Ethics”: Virtue Training in Mencius and Aristotle[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2019, 14(1): 152-170.
[9] Karyn Lai. Emotional Attachment and Its Limits: Mengzi, Gaozi and the Guodian Discussions[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2019, 14(1): 132-151.
[10] WU Xiangdong. Chinese Philosophy of Value over the Past Four Decades[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2018, 13(4): 651-661.
[11] LI Cunshan. Forty Years’ Study of Chinese Philosophy[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2018, 13(4): 634-650.
[12] Tung Tin Wong. He Lin and German Philosophy in the Zhanguoce School: An Idealist Philosopher on History and Cultural Reform[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2018, 13(4): 616-633.
[13] Marcel Brass, Derk Pereboom. Philosophy and Science Dialogue: Free Will[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2018, 13(3): 361-376.
[14] Thalia Wheatley, Terence Horgan. Philosophy and Science Dialogue: Mental Causation[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2018, 13(3): 349-360.
[15] SUN Zhengyu. Chinese Marxist Philosophy Since Reform and Opening-Up[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2018, 13(3): 430-448.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed