Modern Theories of the Mind and Spinoza's Legacy

• Název práce v češtině: Moderní teorie vědomí a Spinozův odkaz
• Název v anglickém jazyce: Modern Theories of the Mind and Spinoza's Legacy
• Klíčová slova: Materialismus|Panpsychismus|Nevědomí|Vědomí|Mysl|Tělo|Evoluce|Mozek
• Klíčová slova anglicky: Materialism|Panpsychism|Unconscious|Consciousness|Mind|Body|Evolution|Brain
• Akademický rok vypsání: 2023/2024
• Typ práce: diplomová práce
• Jazyk práce: angličtina
• Ústav: Ústav filosofie a religionistiky (21-UFAR)
• Vedoucí / školitel: prof. James Hill, Ph.D.
• Řešitel: skrytý - zadáno a potvrzeno stud. odd.
• Datum přihlášení: 29.11.2023
• Datum zadání: 29.11.2023
• Schválení administrátorem: bylo schváleno
• Datum potvrzení stud. oddělením: 29.11.2023
• Datum a čas obhajoby: 04.09.2024 09:00
• Datum odevzdání elektronické podoby: 05.08.2024
• Datum proběhlé obhajoby: 04.09.2024
• Odevzdaná/finalizovaná: odevzdaná studentem a finalizovaná
• Oponenti: doc. Mgr. Jan Palkoska, Ph.D.

Zásady pro vypracování

The overarching aim of this thesis is to explore the concept of the mind in modern philosophical theories. In order to do so in sufficient depth and, therefore, properly, I will limit the scope of the exploration to two, nowadays heavily popularized by physicists, cognitive scientists, and philosophers alike, doctrines. Namely, to panpsychism and materialism. The reason why I chose these two doctrines, however, is not founded only on their fame or, perhaps, infamy. There is also a methodological aspect to my decision. First, I view these doctrines to be decisively rooted in traditional ontological conceptions. I say “decisively” because their connection to traditionally conceived fundamental phenomena of ontology, i.e., the phenomena of mind and body, is decisively apparent. Second, due to their decisive connection, I believe their subsequent comparison with one another to be not only insightful but fair and ept.
The comparison in question will be done on the philosophical grounds of two modern thinkers. Namely, on the grounds of Daniel Dennett’s latest addition to modern theories of consciousness proposed in his book From Bacteria to Bach and Back, and on the grounds of Galen Strawson’s conception of panpsychism represented chiefly in his book Mental Reality. The comparison, however, will only lay foundation to the thesis and comprise only the first two chapters.
The remainder of the thesis will be composed of a rigorous exploration of Spinoza’s Ethics and a subsequent exposition of the importance of the notions and issues raised in Ethics for modern theories of the mind. Firstly, I will argue that the foundational approach to Ethics, summarized well under the notion of “the Principle of Sufficient Reason”, is the pivotal attitude to doing modern science and must, therefore, be ubiquitously followed. Secondly, I will claim the theories of the mind discussed in the first two chapters to have followed, or at least to have tried to follow, the Principle of Sufficient Reason. Thirdly, I will ask the question of whether the proposed modern theories of the mind have made sufficient progress from the days of Baruch de Spinoza to have differed from his own views as another one of pivotal attitudes towards science dictates – the Identity of Indiscernibles.

Seznam odborné literatury

Primární literatura
Dennett, Daniel C. From Bacteria to Bach and Back. Wiley, 2018.
Spinoza, Benedictus De. Ethics. Translated by E. M. Curley, Penguin Books, 2005.
Strawson, Galen. Mental Reality. MIT, 2010.
Strawson, Galen. “Mind and Being: The Primacy of Panpsychism.” Panpsychism: Philosophical Essays, Ed. G. Brüntrup and L. Jaskolla, 2016, pp. 75–112, https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199359943.003.0004.
Strawson, Galen. “Panpsychism? Replies to commentators and a celebration of Descartes.” Journal of Consciousness Studies, pp. 184–208.

Sekundární literatura
Bergmann, Gustav. “Strawson’s Ontology.” The Journal of Philosophy, vol. 57, no. 19, 1960, pp. 601–22. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/2022943.
Block, Ned. “What Is Dennett’s Theory a Theory Of?” Philosophical Topics, vol. 22, no. 1/2, 1994, pp. 23–40. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/43154652.
Chomsky, Noam. “Comments: Galen Strawson, mental reality.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, vol. 58, no. 2, 1998, pp. 437–441, https://doi.org/10.2307/2653523.
Crane, Tim. “Galen Strawson on Mental Reality.” Ratio 10.1 (1997): 82–90.
Friedman, Joel I. “An Overview of Spinoza’s ‘Ethics.’” Synthese, vol. 37, no. 1, 1978, pp. 67–106. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/20115251.
Glombíček, Petr, and James Hill, editors. Essays on the Concept of Mind in Early-Modern Philosophy. Cambridge Scholars, 2010.
Goff, Philip. Galileo’s Error: Foundations for a New Science of Consciousness. Vintage Books, 2020.
Hart, David Bentley. “The Illusionist.” The New Atlantis, no. 53, 2017, pp. 109–21. JSTOR,http://www.jstor.org/stable/44392705.
Nadler, Steven. “Spinoza and Consciousness.” Mind, vol. 117, no. 467, 2008, pp. 575–601. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/30166314.
Rocca, Michael Della. Spinoza. Routledge, 2008.
Strawson, Galen. “Précis of Mental Reality.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, vol. 58, no. 2, 1998, pp. 433–35. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/2653522.
Tye, Michael. “Reflections on Dennett and Consciousness.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, vol. 53, no. 4, 1993, pp. 893–98. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/2108260.
Vicente, Agustín, and Marta Jorba. “How Far Does the User-Illusion Go? Dennett on Knowing What We Think.” Teorema: Revista Internacional de Filosofía, vol. 37, no. 3, 2018, pp. 205–22. JSTOR, https://www.jstor.org/stable/26510253.