CZ:Featured article/Current: Difference between revisions

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Ro Thorpe
(fix problem)
imported>Chunbum Park
Line 1: Line 1:
== '''[[Moral responsibility]]''' ==
== '''[[Mind-body problem]]''' ==
----
----
'''Moral responsibility''' is an assignment of a duty or obligation to behave in a 'good' manner and refrain from behaving in a 'bad' manner. From a philosophical standpoint, the rationale behind 'good' and 'bad' is a subject for [[ethics]]<ref name=Shoemaker>
The '''mind-body problem''' is the philosophical and scientific consideration of the relation between conscious mental activity such as [[judgment]], [[volition]], and [[emotion]] and the underlying physical plant that supports this activity, consisting primarily of the brain (seen as a complex of [[neuron]]s, [[synapse]]s and their dynamic interactions), but also involving various sensors throughout the body, most notably the [[eye]], [[ear]], [[mouth]], and [[nose]].
{{cite web |author=David Shoemaker |title=Personal Identity and Ethics |work=The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2014 Edition) |editor=Edward N. Zalta, ed |date=Feb 13, 2012 |url=http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/identity-ethics/ }}
</ref> and [[metaethics]].<ref name=SayreMcCord>
{{cite web |author= Geoff Sayre-McCord |title=Metaethics |work=The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2012 Edition) |editor=Edward N. Zalta, ed |url= http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2012/entries/metaethics/ |date=Jan 26, 2012}}
</ref>
Stent provides four conditions for assigning moral responsibility, among them the "duties and obligations devolving from moral, legal, or ritual imperatives".<ref name=Stent>
{{cite book |title=Paradoxes of free will |author=Gunther Siegmund Stent |url=http://books.google.com/books?id=PS0LAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA97 |pages=p. 97 |isbn=0871699265 |year=2002 |publisher=American Philosophical Society}}
</ref> In everyday life, obligation in this context is distinguished in part from milder demands for conformity like etiquette by the intense and insistent social pressure brought to bear upon those who deviate or threaten to deviate.<ref name=Hart0>
{{cite book |author=HLA Hart |title=The Concept of Law |url=http://books.google.com/books?id=53u8K7jNGioC&pg=PA86&lpg=PA86 |page=86 |isbn=0199644705  |year=2012 |publisher= Oxford University Press |edition=3rd }} Reprint of 1961 edition with introduction by Leslie Greene.
</ref> From an anthropological or sociological standpoint, the specifics of what is 'good' or 'bad', and the ways of enforcing acceptable behavior, vary considerably from one group to another.<ref name=Kleinman>
{{cite book |title=Normal and Abnormal Behavior in Chinese Culture |chapter=Moral rules |author=Richard W. Wilson |editor=A. Kleinman, T.Y. Lin, eds  |pages=pp. 119-120 |url=http://books.google.com/books?id=JFnqr74bCxAC&pg=PA119 |isbn=9027711046 |year=1981 |publisher=Springer}}
The reference is to {{cite book |author=BF Skinner |title=Beyond Freedom and Dignity  |url=http://books.google.com/books?id=CtF6FDfUcQoC&pg=PA128 |year=2002  |pages=p. 128 |isbn=1603844163 |publisher=Hackett Publishing |edition= Reprint of Knopf 1971 ed}}
</ref>
:"Social learning theorists...feel that the learning of moral rules is not culturally invariant, but is, rather, critically related to particular learning environments and to the distinctive normative code of the society in question. The major influences on moral development are what B.F. Skinner calls "contingencies of reinforcement"...culturally variable factors that explain why different peoples acquire different types of moral orientations."


'Moral responsibility' is part of the interplay between the individual and their society, and study of this relationship is both a scientific and a philosophical investigation.<ref name=Kendler>
A distinction is often made in the [[philosophy of mind]] between the [[mind]] and the brain, and there is some controversy as to their exact relationship. Narrowly defined, the brain is defined as the physical and biological [[matter]] contained within the [[skull]], responsible for all electrochemical neuronal processes. More broadly defined, the brain includes the dynamical activity of the brain, as studied in [[neuroscience]]. The mind, however, is seen in terms of mental attributes, such as consciousness, will, beliefs or desires. Some imagine that the mind exists ''independently'' of the brain, and some believe in a [[soul]], or other [[epiphenomenalism|epiphenomena]]. In the field of [[artificial intelligence]], or ''AI'', so called ''strong AI'' theorists, say that the mind is separate from the brain in the same way that a computer algorithm exists independent of its many possible realizations in coding and physical implementation, and the brain and its 'wiring' is analogous to a [[computer]] and its [[software]].<ref name=AI/>  
{{cite book |author=Howard H. Kendler |title=Amoral thoughts about morality |chapter=Nature's search for human values |url=http://books.google.com/books?id=b2XgltlsIAcC&pg=PA27 |pages=pp. 27 ''ff'' |isbn= 0398077924 |year=2008 |edition=2nd ed |publisher=Charles C Thomas}}
</ref><ref name=Morgan>
{{cite book |title=Naturally Good: A Behavioral History of Moral Development from Charles Darwin to E.O. Wilson |author= John Henry Morgan |url=http://books.google.com/books?id=vTEH01s9BJIC&pg=PA1 |isbn=1929569130 |year=2005 |publisher=Cloverdale Press}} 
</ref>
:"The study of ethics is concerned not only with identification of societal values but with thinking logically about ethical challenges and developing practical approaches to moral problem solving. Other disciplines also are concerned with discovering society's moral precepts. For example, sociology and anthropology each study cultural norms."<ref name=Carper>
{{cite book |title=Understanding the law |chapter=The nature of ethical inquiry |url=http://books.google.com/books?id=fdgFAAAAQBAJ&pg=PA28 |pages=p. 28 |isbn=111179801X |publisher=Cengage Learning |year=2007 |edition=5th ed |author=Donald Carper, John McKinsey, Bill West}}
</ref>


A large part of the philosophical discussion of 'moral responsibility' is focused upon the logical implications (as distinct from the ascertainable facts, such as they may be) of whether or not humans actually are able to control their actions to some or another extent.<ref name=Vargas>
''[[Mind-body problem|.... (read more)]]''
{{cite book |title=Building Better Beings: A Theory of Moral Responsibility |author=Manuel Vargas |quote=[There are] other legitimate worries one can have about responsibility. For example, one could be worried about the consequences of reductionism of the mental (including whether our minds do anything, or whether they are epiphenomenal byproducts of more basic causal processes). Alternately, one might be worried that specific results in some or another science (usually, neurology but sometimes psychology) show that we lack some crucial power necessary for moral responsibility....|isbn=0191655775 |year=2013 |publisher=Oxford University Press |url=http://books.google.com/books?id=S21oAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA10&lpg=PA10 |pages=p. 10}}
</ref><ref name=Cane0>
{{cite book |author=Peter Cane |title=Responsibility in Law and Morality |url=http://books.google.com/books?id=S8bO6bsMOc4C&pg=PA4 |pages=p. 4 |quote=A common argument in the philosophical literature is that the essence of responsibility is to be found in what it means to be a human agent and to have free will...There is disagreement amongst philosophers about what freedom means, about whether human beings are free in the relevant sense, and about the relevance of freedom to responsibility...Nevertheless, both in law and "morality" we regularly hold people responsible, and treat people in certain ways on the basis of our judgments of responsibility."  |isbn=1841133213 |year=2002 |publisher=Hart Publishing}}
</ref> Resolution of that issue is the philosophical subject of [[free will]], a continuing debate that began millennia ago and seems destined to continue indefinitely. It is known that humans' control over their actions is limited in some circumstances, and there is debate over the role of moral responsibility where there is only curtailed agency.
 
''[[Moral responsibility|.... (read more)]]''


{| class="wikitable collapsible collapsed" style="width: 90%; float: center; margin: 0.5em 1em 0.8em 0px;"
{| class="wikitable collapsible collapsed" style="width: 90%; float: center; margin: 0.5em 1em 0.8em 0px;"
|-
|-
! style="text-align: center;" | &nbsp;[[Moral responsibility#References|notes]]
! style="text-align: center;" | &nbsp;[[Mind-body problem#References|notes]]
|-
|-
|
|
{{reflist|2}}
{{reflist|2}}
|}
|}

Revision as of 22:03, 19 March 2014

Mind-body problem


The mind-body problem is the philosophical and scientific consideration of the relation between conscious mental activity such as judgment, volition, and emotion and the underlying physical plant that supports this activity, consisting primarily of the brain (seen as a complex of neurons, synapses and their dynamic interactions), but also involving various sensors throughout the body, most notably the eye, ear, mouth, and nose.

A distinction is often made in the philosophy of mind between the mind and the brain, and there is some controversy as to their exact relationship. Narrowly defined, the brain is defined as the physical and biological matter contained within the skull, responsible for all electrochemical neuronal processes. More broadly defined, the brain includes the dynamical activity of the brain, as studied in neuroscience. The mind, however, is seen in terms of mental attributes, such as consciousness, will, beliefs or desires. Some imagine that the mind exists independently of the brain, and some believe in a soul, or other epiphenomena. In the field of artificial intelligence, or AI, so called strong AI theorists, say that the mind is separate from the brain in the same way that a computer algorithm exists independent of its many possible realizations in coding and physical implementation, and the brain and its 'wiring' is analogous to a computer and its software.[1]

.... (read more)