First, the contents of the mind that appears to be a "follow" as we know, or in other words, it is. To explore the consciousness of our own.Will not give us the false belief that these claims relate to the subject. It is not. (Infallibility), or it is impossible to understand or have the false belief (false belief) the results of our mental condition. "Existing" at that time if we believe we see a bird now. We can not be misunderstood or cast themselves that we do not believe that the birds have now been on the force. "To do" mental conditions such as thinking, if we think we see a bird. We can not deny the act is to think that we can not deny that we are thinking or the experience we have, as we now see a beautiful bird.Experience this happiness to us. We can not say that. We're happy to have been lying there. The examples quoted above it. The wrong means.We can be certain. I think the conditions that occur inside of us.
Second. Contents of the mind, it appears that the content is, or is able to explore the internal sense, it is not always aware of the contents of the mind. It also ensures that we can have knowledge about that content with what we called over the content of the mental (omniscience or all-knowingness) we have the result of a mental condition. The following are a few things. Or making a mental condition. We are done. Or are affected by these actions is to "know" about the state of their own, thorough and clear, and the two features is to know and have not been around. Become the property of the privileged access as well.
Brie Gertier also discussed. Distinctiveness of a feature like this privileged access to them by a special three factors together, the first is about the state of mind of the individual to ensure the epistemology that (epistemic security) are the two people. Each has a unique way to judge or to reach a mental state of their own. Finally. Speaking to a mental condition of each of the characteristics of the privilege. The basic assumption of fact to support [2] in the first place, it is indicative of privileged access as a source of belief, of course trustworthy. The second. The only indication of how to build these beliefs. And Third, the extra effort. Aims to build faith by itself, can not be evaluated by others.
We can cite many examples in this privileged access, such as the famous philosopher Rene Descartes with his cogito ergo sum theories circulate as a good example to describe the image of the privileged access he had to start from the basis that Even now, he may stand in front of the fireplace is in pajamas and holding a roll of paper in hand. All this may not be true even if they are exposed to heat from the fire. And saw the flames. May all the camouflage of the devil. He may not even exist. But one thing he can not deceive myself this time, he was thinking what it means here. To think that can not be understood. "I do not think" and thinking this can not happen without a "what to think."
The idea is to confirm the existence of his identity in the end. Became such that "I think therefore I am" from this statement of your desktop to Stuttgart's show that his ideas (which may be regarded as one of privileged access) obviously clear enough that he did not suspect. Nothing more. And his idea of a reliable way of having some underlying truth. And when that happens, and it is determined that the product is compatible with the truth as well. Furthermore. Relationship between what I think it is going to be straightforward. And understand it by yourself. No need to rely on any external thing. The idea is to be "recognized" by itself (per se) without the use of any method or idea to express the idea that
Compared with a sample of his emotional one. The emotional pain.Such as a needlestick. Occur immediately (immediate) on needlestick finger. (In the sensory perception of our usual) and it is good and clear enough that we never suspected. We were hurt me. We also can not fool yourself that it does not hurt as long as we still feel pain in this sense, the pain does not need anything else to confirm. Watch the overt (omniscience) and it shows itself to us. Without the other way. And we can not have the false belief (false belief) to the sore was. In other words, we assume that it is not wrong. (Infallibility).
However, the pain. Were used to argue about "privilege" of this particular individual with Greenstein wig. (Wittgenstein), who considered.Using the described conditions can not be personalized. When the language is invented for use in communication between individuals. Or for the purpose of understanding the same basis. We feel in what is known."Pain," which is one form. Cause pain. Or emotions that can be personalized. Or is that just as we understand it. The others are used together. Was able to share ideas about this pain as well, so the "exclusive right" was not a real possibility.
I will not let up for another example. This language will be used to resolve cases of a wig, and Greenstein, one of the visually impaired children. Ears, and it is not inborn. Recognition of this child could not go through what we call a language is to communicate it. He had no idea about anything, including her face. He just knew it as "a mood" or has happened to him. When I do a minimum of one inch. He just can not describe the feeling I was hurt. Because he never learned to think of the pain or may not know that. Others when you show me how this situation.This is what is known. Because they are not. And did not hear any sound.That he used the language does not. Does not mean that this child will be."There is no" feeling. Whatever feelings or emotions as we understand it or do not. Emotions or feelings that he still belongs to him. Without a shared language. In this sense, we may not know this child will feel. The mood, however, due to the low dose of an inch. If we think that this child was hurt. In spite of this child so he could come out like the pain. I happen to be emotionally satisfying. And to think we were just thinking to myself.
Objection with the mission of special interest in my theory. Be tied to the nature of a personal language. If the sample is raised. Mood or feeling is the language created for the participants. Not only for understanding of one person. And as long as the understanding of things through language. We can not have it in other words, I think that Victor and Greenstein have overlooked the possibility of feeling. Or emotions, not through any language or concept. The case quoted above. It also ignores the case of newborn infants who have not been used. And animals that can not be used. "As" a man is.
However, in some cases, we can understand. Watch for animals as well.As little girls, one a beloved pet dog, from tiny one. Normally it will sound a bark when a malfunction. For example, people throwing things into the house. Or have someone stand in front of our house. But today, the cries of strange. Her to explore. And found that sound strange to those caused by stepping on a thorn tree was planted out. Events like these make her understand that. Our dog is suffering from spine at the Wildcats are equal.But it's not like we use human language. She understands the pain of dogs. "Comparable" if it is equal, then some pin prick. But painful as well.Correlation is not the language of her dog. However, through our experience of removing a head start to make sense of her to assume the dog. That are comparable or similar. The incident was similar enough to understand that language is not the same thing. Or establish communication with. The only claim of Victor and John Steinbeck's language to subvert. "Personal knowledge" that May still not be enough.The language is not all the monopoly of our personal understanding here.And the fact that no language is a medium that does not mean that We will be free of pain. Or other emotions, simply because the language is missing.
Another argument against. This is a personal privilege. Found in the general debate of the philosophy of mind. The theory is that there are some theories that try to reduce Speaking about the mental state. (Of course, as well as emotions and feelings), the rest is just physical phenomena. Also known as Reductive Materialism example of this idea, I like the concept of Central State Mechanism (Ssarniim of the state central), or the theory of identity, and (Identity theory) as a mood or feeling of pain (to the value. a A) is equal to the physical process. Brain and central nervous system (the value of B) and the physical conditions that cause physical expression, and observed behavior. This concept can be compared with the C-fiber claims of Richard Rorschach hit (Richard Rorty) example of the Rorschach hit. Is a star that everyone on the planet does not have subtitles, the pain, but to say that "the perception of the sensory C-fiber stimulation," so even if tens or hundreds of people, there is no description of pain. But when the needle prick on the finger on them. It appears that everyone has the same nerve was stimulated. I hit it in action.Pain or mental condition not characterized. "Special" that depends on the person in any way. Because we know that one person pain. The pain is not recognized as one of the poorest people anymore.
The argument of the Rorschach hit. Avoid problems with the language of Victor Greenstein was quite good, because if we go to the above mentioned three children with disabilities. I would go stabbing needles. (If this child have a normal nervous system, like many others), nervous system, the recognition of the C would have been my motivation. The newborn infants who have not used it. However. I still have some problems in attack as well.
In this example, the Rorschach has a similar beat. The condition is quite common Ssarniim the nature of identity between mental and physical condition. It is unique in that "only" part of the state too much mental as it is equal to one category or the physical condition of the nervous system, such as C, we can see that. It is unique among the sample (Token-Token Identity), which may be of a specific problem that a lot too. This case differs from that specified for one person may have a physical structure within the different boys, and no nervous system, the recognition of the central C, but they can have the experience or feeling no different from us.Part C is a central nervous system is stimulated in such cases, we hold that a boy of no pain. If we focus on the uniqueness among the stressed state of the sample Ssarniim a central action. (And possibly wait for the arguments of his arguments strike if pushed to the end), a boy, I can not be that painful. Not be deemed to have been "hurt" by the problem. Mental conditions of all Including beliefs, emotions, desires and ideas.Experiences. The area is located within the nervous system, or physical or. I only use the identity between the sample. To create a mental state of a lot further. .
.
.
.Life Insurance Knowledge:Life Insurance , private, death, employee pensions and annuities,life insurance, educational, life insurance companies
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment