Knowledge Tree
Relations (1)
related 3.81 — strongly supporting 13 facts
Mental states and material states are central to the mind-matter problem, with their relationship explored through various frameworks including identity theories [1], dual-aspect theories [2], and emergence [3]. Their connection is frequently debated in the context of reductionism {fact:9, fact:13}, empirical correlation [4], and the challenge of explaining how one relates to the other {fact:1, fact:2}.
Facts (13)
Sources
Quantum Approaches to Consciousness plato.stanford.edu 6 facts
perspectiveThe majority of presentations of the quantum approach to consciousness do not consistently distinguish between mental states and material states, suggesting an underlying assumption of the reducibility of mental activity to brain activity.
claimMany contemporary approaches to consciousness research prefer to distinguish between first-person and third-person perspectives rather than mental and material states to highlight the discrepancy between immediate conscious experiences (qualia) and their behavioral, neural, or biophysical descriptions.
referenceIdentity theories, as advocated by Herbert Feigl (1967) and J.J.C. Smart (1963), conceive mental and material states as essentially identical 'central states' viewed from different perspectives.
claimThe 'dual aspect' theory posits that mental and material states are distinguished aspects of a psychophysically neutral 'background reality'.
claimThe quantum field theory approach to brain modeling contains conceptual ambiguities regarding the distinction between mental and material states.
claimThe existing body of knowledge regarding the mind-matter problem consists essentially of empirical correlations between material and mental states, which are descriptive rather than explanatory or causally conditioned.
Quantum Approaches to Consciousness plato.stanford.edu 3 facts
claimA dualistic picture of mind-matter relations arises when attempts to reduce mental states to material states leave residua, suggesting that the mental cannot be fully reduced to the material.
claimRelations between mental and material states can be conceived in a non-reductive fashion, such as through emergence relations.
claimFreeman and Vitiello (2008) clarified that the quantum field theory model of the brain describes the brain itself, not mental states, correcting previous confusion between mental and material states.
Good Old-Fashioned Artificial Consciousness and the Intermediate ... frontiersin.org 2 facts
claimThe enactivist paradigm shifts the burden of explaining how material states become mental states onto the notion of the living organism, which the author argues is not a convincing conceptual fulcrum since vitalism has been dismissed.
quoteJohn Stewart stated: “How can a material state be a mental state? Hoary it may be, yet the problem is anything but solved. […] The paradigm of enaction solves this problem by grounding all cognition as an essential feature of living organism” (Stewart, 2010, p. 1).
Quantum Approaches to Consciousness plato.stanford.edu 2 facts
claimAn alternative model for mind-matter relations involves a third category, denoted as [mame], which is regarded as psychophysically neutral, meaning it is neutral regarding the distinction between material [ma] and mental [me] states.
claimThe relationship between mental and material states is discussed under the concept of 'downward causation,' as noted by Velmans (2002) and Ellis et al. (2011).