A Study of Russell's Theory of Desire in Connection with His Doctrine of Neutral Monism in "the Analysis of Mind"

Dissertation, University of Toronto (Canada) (1986)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In The Analysis of Mind , Russell criticizes a theory that considers desire a conscious mental phenomenon directed towards an imagined object and offers instead an account of desire in terms of behaviour-cycles. ;This theory has been criticized on various grounds: that it is circular and incoherent, that it applies only to needs, and that it is too behaviouristic. I argue that these criticisms are incorrect and that Russell's critics have ignored his doctrine of neutral monism. I study Russell's modified version of neutral monism to reveal the philosophical underpinnings of his theory of desire. Brentano's and Meinong's views of mind are studied partly to show Russell's reasons for rejecting them in favour of neutral monism and partly to discuss Meinong's analysis of mental phenomena after which Russell models his analysis of belief. ;Russell attributes the theory of desire that he criticizes to common sense. I deal with the way common sense refers to desire both to evaluate Russell's criticisms and to assess the adequacy of his own theory. Russell maintains that his method for studying desire is behaviouristic. However, his theory of desire is not entirely behaviouristic because he allows introspection to play an important role in identifying feelings and sensations in human beings. Although Russell's account of desire in animals is mainly behaviouristic, his account of desire in human beings is not so because it requires beliefs which cannot be accounted for adequately on behaviouristic grounds. Russell's views of behaviourism and introspection are examined in detail and the effects of introducing beliefs to human desire are discussed at length with respect to both his theory of desire and his doctrine of neutral monism. ;Russell offers a model of desire that is simplistic and incomplete. It is neither behaviouristic nor empiricistic, but it is offered to accord with his doctrine of neutral monism. I argue that this model is adequate for explaining animal and simple human desires, but needs considerable elaboration to successfully account for complicated human conscious desires

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 96,515

External links

  • This entry has no external links. Add one.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Russell’s Neutral Monist Theory of Desire.Nicholas Griffin - 2015 - Russell: The Journal of Bertrand Russell Studies 35 (1).
Russell on Russellian Monism.Donovan Wishon - 2015 - In Torin Andrew Alter & Yujin Nagasawa (eds.), Consciousness in the Physical World: Perspectives on Russellian Monism. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 91-118.
John Dewey and the Mind-Body Problem in the Context: The Case of «Neutral Monism».Andrii Leonov - 2018 - Actual Problems of Mind. Philosophy Journal 19 (19):72-96.
Russell's Two Theories of Memory.Iva Apostolova - 2017 - Russell: The Journal of Bertrand Russell Studies 37 (2).
Russell on Experience and Egocentricity.Donovan Wishon - 2024 - Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 98 (1):185-208.
Russell on Introspection and Self-Knowledge.Donovan Wishon - 2018 - In Russell Wahl (ed.), The Bloomsbury Companion to Bertrand Russell. London, UK: BloomsburyAcademic. pp. 256-285.

Analytics

Added to PP
2015-02-04

Downloads
0

6 months
0

Historical graph of downloads

Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references