This Paper Will Address The General Form Of The Argument For The Ident

This paper will address the general form of the argument for the identity of the person (mind) with the body (brain). This argument will be found unsound because it is both invalid and because the premises on which the argument is based are, in fact, false. This analysis will include a critical examination of Logical Behaviorism, a theory that supports this argument. The argument is based on two premises (P): P1: The mind is subject to understanding and control by science. P2: Only what is quantifiable and sense-perceptible is subject to control by science. Therefore, based on these two premises, the following two conclusions (C) can be reached: C1: The mind is quantifiable and sense-perceptible. C2: The mind is the same thing as the body (brain). The validity of an argument is found when, if the premises are true, then the conclusions would follow logically from those premises. According to the premises established in the argument, the first conclusion would naturally follow. The argument seems to be logical and the conclusions do indeed follow from the premises. In addition, the second conclusion can also be reached from the premises, but only with the assumption that the body is the part of the person which is quantifiable and sense-perceptible. Because this assumption is taken as truth, the second conclusion follows in the argument. Therefore, it would seem that the overall form of the argument is valid. That, however, is not the case because the argument is begging the question. Begging the question is a logical fallacy in which the conclusion is assumed before it has been proved. In this case, the first premise, by claiming that the mind is subject to control by science, is pre-supposing that the mind is only physical - it is the body, the brain, the neurons. That, however, is the first conclusion of the argument. Therefore, in order to achieve the first premise, one needs to have already established the first conclusion and vice-versa. This argument, therefore, is faulted by circular reasoning because one aspect cannot be discussed without the other. Neither the premise nor the conclusion can stand alone without the other. Therefore, the overall argument is shown to be invalid. Soundness, however, also requires that the premises of the argument be true. While the second premise is generally taken as truth since science is self-described as controlling and understanding its subjects, the first premise is untrue because it does not take into consideration aspects of the person and the mind which cannot be explained. These aspects, which are used to describe the mental, include qualia, content, and self-knowledge. Qualia, or raw feelings refers to sensations and feelings experienced by the person. For example, when a person says I feel sick to my stomach they are referring to the sensation of nausea that overtakes their body, a sensation of which they are mentally aware. Science can explain the chemicals released in the stomach and the traveling of neurons from the stomach to the brain signaling the upset stomach, but it can't fully account for or explain the feeling the individual is experiencing. That feeling causes doubt that makes it difficult to believe that the mind is subject to understanding and control by science. Content, or intentional direction, refers to the about-ness or of-ness of our thoughts and our mental states. This would imply that certain semantic properties, such as carrying beliefs, understanding symbols, and reflecting personal predicates such as honesty, are involved in thought processes (Fodor 37). For example, when an individual says, That shirt is a nice shade of red, he or she is not referring to the wavelengths of light being emitted from the fabric but rather to the final color that they see. Perhaps, that person associates the color with certain feelings or memories. Red may remind him or her of a recent trip to Japan, a favorite shirt, or a raggedy, old stuffed animal. The thought is of the color and about the memory, not the physical quality of being red. The third aspect, self-knowledge, refers to the self-awareness an individual has regarding the existence of his or her mind, the existence of something non-physical. This involves the concept of privileged access. Privileged access refers to an individual's ability to directly access his or