Wittgenstein on the Experience and Content Model of the Mind.

Dissertation, Boston University (1992)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In his later philosophy, Ludwig Wittgenstein advances a broad critique of a certain picture of the human mind; the "experience and content model." It is rooted in both Cartesianism and empiricism and treats the mind as a succession of experiences where a belief, for example, is construed as a manner of experiencing a mental content which represents what the mind believes. I argue that this model hinders more than it helps our efforts to understand the human mind and our psychological concepts; that Wittgenstein's critique of it is insightful and highly consequential; and that the views he replaces it with afford a superior understanding. Against this model, Wittgenstein contends that mental contents are not articulated into sensations and images by how they might differ phenomenologically and that a consciousness cannot identify the kind a sensation belongs to by focussing its attention upon the sensation. While they are contents of experience with genuine duration and intensity, sensations and images differ from each other by how they connect to a range of human practices. Sensations individuate into kinds by their causes, by the way they are expressed, and by the language-games which are connected with them and which also involve things in the world. Wittgenstein also questions the experience and content model by arguing that beliefs and desires do not differ from each other because they are distinct experiences or distinct mental "processes" and "diseases" individuated apart from the external, behavioral "symptoms" they cause. Rather, belief, imagining, fear, and perception are best understood respectively as instances of disposition, activity, emotion, and state. Wittgenstein contends that mental contents, as representations, do not better determine what it is that someone believes than do one's overt expressions of belief; that beliefs need not consist in having mental representations; and that one does not learn what one believes through the introspection of such a content. Intentional states do not consist in "mental processes" but in a variety of thoughts and behaviors. For instance, it is the description or expression of a desire which represents what someone desires

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,867

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

Perceptual Content.Michael George Idinopulos - 1998 - Dissertation, University of California, Berkeley
Concepts, Content, and Consciousness: A Kantian View of Mind.Deborah K. Heikes - 1998 - Dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
How Narrow is Narrow Content?François Recanati - 1994 - Dialectica 48 (3-4):209-229.
How to know one’s experiences transparently.Frank Hofmann - 2019 - Philosophical Studies 176 (5):1305-1324.
A Pure Representationalist Account of Belief and Desire.Steve Pearce - 2016 - Dissertation, University of Western Ontario
The Unity of Unconsciousness.Tim Crane - 2017 - Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 117 (1):1-21.
How narrow is narrow content?François Recanati - 1994 - Dialectica 48 (3-4):209-29.

Analytics

Added to PP
2015-02-06

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