Ordinary language arguments and the philosophy of mind

[Extract] To engage your interest in this dissertation I offer to you a curious question to ponder. How often does a psychiatrist or a psychologist get the chance to ask themselves whether the words that they use to describe the mental life of their patient mean the same thing to the patient as they do to the doctor or analyst using them? Does the patient understand what the doctor or analyst is telling them? Equally importantly there is a question whether the patient’s verbal reports mean the same thing to the doctor or analyst as the patient thinks they mean. At first this may seem trivial given the doctor or analyst’s extensive training and education. Surely this is a one sided question one might say. Surely the doctor or analyst can understand the patient but the patient may not have the educational background and training to understand the doctor’s or analyst’s terms, which the doctor or analyst is using to describe the patient’s own mental life. One might persist in reasoning in this way, claiming that knowledge is all on the medical practitioner’s side, until the point is raised that the patient may have experiences the analyst or doctor does not have. For instance, one might ask whether a psychological analyst can ever truly understand what it is like to have bipolar and experience a manic high? What about schizophrenia or Attention Deficit (Hyperactive) Disorder or Post-Traumatic Stress Syndrome? On what foudnations are the communications between a patient and a doctor built? What underlies their ability to talk about deeply personal experiences given that one person has them while another has not? This is the central philosophical issue wrestled with by this paper. On what rests our ability to talk about personal and private experiences which do not have publicly observable parts, components or properties? Communication seems to take place, but what allows such communication to take place? How does one cross the gulf of private unobservable experience with words? Ordinary Language Arguments are one attempt at solving this otherwise seemingly unsolvable mystery. This introduction is aimed at acquainting the theorist of mind, common practitioner, researcher, cognitive therapist or curious layman with the problems that surround Ordinary Language Arguments. This paper will begin with the problems arising from referential indeterminacy in theories of mind. The ‘Problem of the Indeterminacy of Reference’ is a significant issue for research theorists and arises from the language they use to describe the mind. How do the terms they use relate to the mind? Do they propositionally ‘picture’ entities ‘in’ the mind in true ways? Are terms like ego, anger, jealousy and inner-child merely conveinant fictions and metaphors to talk about the mind? Do these terms refer to and label ‘parts’ of the mind? What is the relationship between these terms and the mind? One possible solution emerges from an Analytic Philosopher who wrote in the immediate post-war era called Gilbert Ryle. Gilbert Ryle developed Ordinary Language Arguments as one possible solution to a number of intersecting philosophical and psychological problems. However, I argue that the Ordinary Language Argument Solution, though on first glance seems promising, is fundamentally flawed. Instead, I argue that sources for the study of the mind are better understood by a Heterophenomenological and Autophenomenological distinction. This raises the question as to which of the two is stronger and/or prior to the other when these sources produce claims that clash or contradict each other

Apprehending paintings: an interpretative phenomenological analysis of the experience of viewing art

The experience of viewing art is typically considered to reflect a complex relationship between numerous interdependent factors. Psychological investigations are predominantly experimental. Aspects of the art-object and the perceptual, cognitive and emotional processing of it, are variously explored. Visual-stimuli and personal responses are quantified and measured whilst trying to accommodate the many contextual and individual factors potentially involved. Difficulties presented by quantification within art-viewing research are often acknowledged. Influential variables resist clear definition and constructs may lack standardisation. This thesis presents an exploration of art-viewing from an alternative perspective. The work here is concerned specifically with paintings. Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis has been used to explore a collection of single encounters between one viewer and one image. Two studies are presented. In the first, five participants were each asked to select an unfamiliar painting from a collection provided. In the second, twelve participants looked at the painting Las Meninas by Diego Velazquez. Semi-structured interviews were conducted whilst participant and researcher viewed the image together. Both studies revealed a similar thematic arc. Initial themes regarding the inceptive moments of viewing emerged. Here the first grasps of attention and notable penetrating aspects of early engagement were described. Subsequently, themes involving deeper, extended interpretive activities were suggested. Paintings were descending into and explored and imaginative work flourished. Finally, in both studies, self-reflective experiences were recounted. Viewers considered and appraised their viewing activities and abilities. Self-evaluations and judgements collided with expectations and emotional responses. Overall it was revealed that notions of space, layerings and dynamic interaction pervaded the experiences described. Movements between positions both psychical and physical were suggested throughout. As a means to think about such momentums, the research concludes by considering accounts of seeing and being seen provided by phenomenological philosophy

Astrology : an experimental investigation

An analysis and experimental investigation of astrology is presented. An overview of personality theory is first given, followed by a quasi-historical study and discussion of the evidence of parapsychology. The evidence from celestial-terrestrial investigations is studied in detail, and the results of this experiment presented. Both a positive and a negative finding were observed. Finally, astrology as a theory of personality and of man is briefly discussed