A monistic perspective applied to the mind-body problem must correlate every 'mental events' to a determined 'corporeal event' [state of the body at the micro and macroscopic levels]. The latter is to be described in anatomical and physiological terms, as being the basis underlying to our mind as well as all mental stuff.'Mental events' are defined here as all the contents and activities whose matrix is the human mind.
From our first assumption here, every 'mental event', surely including the symbolic function, must have a bi-univocally correspondent 'corporeal event'. Notwithstanding the possibility that describing this correlation perhaps proves to be an even more complex task than we are now able to imagine.
Accordingly, there is no reason to persist talking about a mind-body split subsisting in itself independently of an observer. The perceived and conceived split emerges necessarily as an a priori condition to any attempt to catch human phenomena as objects of study.
It is the double gateway available to any attempt to know our specie's individuals which imposes the unavoidable emergence of dual scientific fields about an essentially mono-substantial object.
The a priori imposition of such double gateway may be seen clearly if we take into account that all empirical data about human beings must have originated ultimately from one of these two sources:
1) the body as one concrete object, or
2) the mind as an objectified construct emerging from verbal (words) and nonverbal (gestures, grimaces) communication.
I must warn eventual readers that one should not rush up and misunderstand that I defend here the 'organicism' as the best approach to the human sciences! Nor the psychologism, neither sociologism. These methodological considerations of mine are intended to draw your attention to the undeniable fact that the huge complexity of the mind-body problem lies far beyond from all sorts of reductionism.
Attention must be paid to the danger inherent to all reductionisms, which falsely claim valid knowledge about our brains and our minds, both of which constitute the matrix of our deepest essence.
TO READ ANOTHER INTRODUCTORY POST ON THIS SAME SUBJECT, CLICK BELOW:
http://reality-to-who.blogspot.com.br/2013/01/methodological-note-bio-psycho-social.html
From our first assumption here, every 'mental event', surely including the symbolic function, must have a bi-univocally correspondent 'corporeal event'. Notwithstanding the possibility that describing this correlation perhaps proves to be an even more complex task than we are now able to imagine.
Accordingly, there is no reason to persist talking about a mind-body split subsisting in itself independently of an observer. The perceived and conceived split emerges necessarily as an a priori condition to any attempt to catch human phenomena as objects of study.
It is the double gateway available to any attempt to know our specie's individuals which imposes the unavoidable emergence of dual scientific fields about an essentially mono-substantial object.
The a priori imposition of such double gateway may be seen clearly if we take into account that all empirical data about human beings must have originated ultimately from one of these two sources:
1) the body as one concrete object, or
2) the mind as an objectified construct emerging from verbal (words) and nonverbal (gestures, grimaces) communication.
I must warn eventual readers that one should not rush up and misunderstand that I defend here the 'organicism' as the best approach to the human sciences! Nor the psychologism, neither sociologism. These methodological considerations of mine are intended to draw your attention to the undeniable fact that the huge complexity of the mind-body problem lies far beyond from all sorts of reductionism.
Attention must be paid to the danger inherent to all reductionisms, which falsely claim valid knowledge about our brains and our minds, both of which constitute the matrix of our deepest essence.
TO READ ANOTHER INTRODUCTORY POST ON THIS SAME SUBJECT, CLICK BELOW:
http://reality-to-who.blogspot.com.br/2013/01/methodological-note-bio-psycho-social.html
No comments:
Post a Comment
The author looks forward to reading your comments!
O autor aguarda seus valiosos comentários, leitor.