The Alleged Hard Problem: A Pseudo Problem

Philosophy Study 7 (3) (2017)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

One of the most intriguing problems of philosophy is the question whether the human mind and human consciousness can be completely reduced to matter, namely to the brain. A special problem in this context is what has been called the “hard problem.” The hard problem denies that it is possible to reduce phenomenal experiences to brain states. The hard problem claims that it is impossible for materialists to explain what it is like to feel something. Here, we will prove that the hard problem is a pseudo problem that is based on errors in logic and language. One of the key arguments for the hard problem, the conceivability of zombies, is logically wrong within naturalism, which most philosophers acknowledge. Nevertheless, generally all questions of the type “What is it like to feel something?” are either trivial or linguistically impermissible. The core of the “hard problem” is the mix-up between non-reducibility and non-describability.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 100,865

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2018-02-07

Downloads
39 (#575,001)

6 months
7 (#699,353)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

What is it like to be a bat?Thomas Nagel - 1974 - Philosophical Review 83 (4):435-50.
Materialism and qualia: The explanatory gap.Joseph Levine - 1983 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 64 (October):354-61.

Add more references