To adequately expound on the question what is philosophy of the mind? One must be cautious not to rush to identifying it as the study of philosophical questions of the mind. Ideally, the above answer is deemed inconclusive because it implicitly assumes that minds are something or objects. Further, this definition is rejected as it presents an already contentious issue in the discipline of philosophy. This is because when it is indicated that people have minds it then means the properties of people rather than the mind as some sought of object that people own. In view of this, a more prudent way of describing that people have minds is by stating it in a different form such as people are minded or mindful (Lowe, p.1).
The decoded meaning of such kind of a statement establishes that people think, reason, feel, see, and argue and so on. Drawing from this line of thought it is therefore sufficient to define philosophy of the mind as the rational study of minded things as long as they are characteristic of being mindful. This definition further goes beyond the human aspect of the mind and integrates the non human animal, intangible spirits and beings such as God and angels and also caters for the contemporary robots in modern day. Philosophy of the mind is distinctive from other philosophical disciplines as it focuses its attention on concepts such as perception, intentional agency, and thought.
Adequate analysis of philosophy of the mind reveals that it is profoundly involved with metaphysical issues. According to Bergson an analysis on the definition of metaphysics reveals that even though philosophers have varied divergences on the issue they agree on existence of two different ways of knowing a thing which include moving around the object or second inflowing into the object.
[...] Adequate analysis of philosophy of the mind reveals that it is profoundly involved with metaphysical issues. According to Bergson an analysis on the definition of metaphysics reveals that even though philosophers have varied divergences on the issue they agree on existence of two different ways of knowing a thing which include moving around the object or second inflowing into the object. The first conception is dependent on the point of view that we are placed and on the emblems by which we articulate by ourselves whilst the second is neither dependent on the point of view nor on any symbol of identification. [...]
[...] Rene Descartes was identified as the medieval philosopher who deepened this issue hence the Cartesian dualism. Further, the essay focused on the perception problem that was integrative of hallucinations and illusions as well as arguments postulated by philosophers such as Aristotle and St Augustine. Finally, there was the Consciousness problem that was linked to philosophers such as Descartes, Hobbes and John Locke who agreed that the analysis of the problem was critical in the study of the philosophy of the mind. [...]
[...] (2000). Mandik Pete. Key Terms in Philosophy of Mind. Continuum International Publishing Group, (2010). McDowell, John. Content of Perceptual Experience” Philosophical Quarterly 44, 190–205; reprinted in Noë & Thompson eds 10) Morton Peter. A Historical Introduction to the Philosophy of Mind: Readings with commentary. Broadview Press, (2010). 11) OlivI John. [...]
[...] The Mind Body Problem. [...]
[...] Do thoughts, feelings and experiences even exist as they are perceived by human beings.” Are left rather un-answered (p.11). Uzgalis traced the mind body problem to Descartes Philosophy of the Mind. Descartes argued that the body was an extension of a thing that occupied space and further established that there were two ways of causal interaction between the dissimilar kinds of substances hence the Cartesian Dualism. Crane discussed that the Cartesian dualism was representative of the mental and physical materials. [...]
using our reader.