Intentionalism about pain

Post on 19-May-2015

770 views 2 download

Tags:

Transcript of Intentionalism about pain

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Intentionalism about Pain

Angela Mendelovici

Philosophy 4991F/9407The University of Western Ontario

November 18, 2010

1 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Outline

1 Intentionalism

2 The problem with pain

3 Bodily damage

4 Modes of presentation

5 Imperatives

6 General worries

7 Primitivism

8 Reductionism

2 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Outline

1 Intentionalism

2 The problem with pain

3 Bodily damage

4 Modes of presentation

5 Imperatives

6 General worries

7 Primitivism

8 Reductionism

3 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Two mental phenomena

Phenomenal consciousness

It’s “like something” to be in certain states (Nagel, 1974).

What it’s like is a state’s phenomenal character.

Mental representation

Some mental states display aboutness, ofness, or intentionality(Brentano, 1874).

Some mental states represent, or have content.

4 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Two mental phenomena

Phenomenal consciousness

It’s “like something” to be in certain states (Nagel, 1974).

What it’s like is a state’s phenomenal character.

Mental representation

Some mental states display aboutness, ofness, or intentionality(Brentano, 1874).

Some mental states represent, or have content.

4 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Two mental phenomena

Phenomenal consciousness

It’s “like something” to be in certain states (Nagel, 1974).

What it’s like is a state’s phenomenal character.

Mental representation

Some mental states display aboutness, ofness, or intentionality(Brentano, 1874).

Some mental states represent, or have content.

4 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Two mental phenomena

Are these two mental features related?

5 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Two mental phenomena

Intentionalism

Phenomenal character is in some way determined byrepresentational content.

6 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Pure versus impure intentionalism

Pure intentionalism

Phenomenal character is determined by representationalcontent alone.

Impure intentionalism

Phenomenal character is determined by representationalcontent and certain non-representational features(e.g. functional role).

On impure intentionalism, but not on pure intentionalism, it ispossible to have two states alike in representational contentbut differing in phenomenal character.

7 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Pure versus impure intentionalism

Pure intentionalism

Phenomenal character is determined by representationalcontent alone.

Impure intentionalism

Phenomenal character is determined by representationalcontent and certain non-representational features(e.g. functional role).

On impure intentionalism, but not on pure intentionalism, it ispossible to have two states alike in representational contentbut differing in phenomenal character.

7 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Pure versus impure intentionalism

Pure intentionalism

Phenomenal character is determined by representationalcontent alone.

Impure intentionalism

Phenomenal character is determined by representationalcontent and certain non-representational features(e.g. functional role).

On impure intentionalism, but not on pure intentionalism, it ispossible to have two states alike in representational contentbut differing in phenomenal character.

7 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Pure intentionalism is preferable

Transparency intuitions only properly motivate the relevanceof representational content to phenomenal character, not therelevance of other features.

If we want to include extra ingredients, they will have to beindependently motivated.

8 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Pure intentionalism is preferable

Transparency intuitions only properly motivate the relevanceof representational content to phenomenal character, not therelevance of other features.

If we want to include extra ingredients, they will have to beindependently motivated.

8 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Pure intentionalism is preferable

Transparency intuitions only properly motivate the relevanceof representational content to phenomenal character, not therelevance of other features.

If we want to include extra ingredients, they will have to beindependently motivated.

8 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Outline

1 Intentionalism

2 The problem with pain

3 Bodily damage

4 Modes of presentation

5 Imperatives

6 General worries

7 Primitivism

8 Reductionism

9 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Unavailable contents

Sometimes it is easy to findrepresentational contents that “match” agiven phenomenal character.

But other times, there’s no goodcandidate content.

. . . as in the case of pain.

10 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Unavailable contents

Sometimes it is easy to findrepresentational contents that “match” agiven phenomenal character.

But other times, there’s no goodcandidate content.

. . . as in the case of pain.

10 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Unavailable contents

Sometimes it is easy to findrepresentational contents that “match” agiven phenomenal character.

But other times, there’s no goodcandidate content.

. . . as in the case of pain.

10 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Pain

The challenge with pain is to find therepresentational contents that account for thephenomenal character of pain-experience.

12 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Outline

1 Intentionalism

2 The problem with pain

3 Bodily damage

4 Modes of presentation

5 Imperatives

6 General worries

7 Primitivism

8 Reductionism

13 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Tye’s view

Pain-experiences represent bodily damage ata certain bodily location and of a certaintype. (Tye, 1995, 2000)

14 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Types of pain

Twinge of pain mild, brief bodily disturbance

Throbbing pain rapidly pulsing disturbance

Ache disorder inside the body withindeterminate boundaries

Stabbing pain sudden damage overwell-defined bodily region

Pricking pain damage with sudden beginningand ending, covering tiny area

Racking pain damage involving stretching ofinternal body parts

15 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Tye’s view

It does seem that when I’m in pain, I’mrepresenting a bodily location.

And it does seem that pain-experiences causebeliefs about bodily damage.

16 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Tye’s view

It does seem that when I’m in pain, I’mrepresenting a bodily location.

And it does seem that pain-experiences causebeliefs about bodily damage.

16 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Problem

Does this capture the phenomenology ofpain?

It leaves the painfulness of pain out.

And it lets in other contents that don’t doany work in determining thephenomenology.

17 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Problem

Does this capture the phenomenology ofpain?

It leaves the painfulness of pain out.

And it lets in other contents that don’t doany work in determining thephenomenology.

17 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Problem

Does this capture the phenomenology ofpain?

It leaves the painfulness of pain out.

And it lets in other contents that don’t doany work in determining thephenomenology.

17 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Possible response

Response: Pain-experiences represent bodilydamange non-conceptually.

First pass at non-conceptual content: Arepresentation R has non-conceptual contentC iff R’s content can be entertained even if asubject lacks a concept of C

A subject S has a concept of C iff S canrecognize instances of C on separateoccasions

18 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Possible response

Response: Pain-experiences represent bodilydamange non-conceptually.

First pass at non-conceptual content: Arepresentation R has non-conceptual contentC iff R’s content can be entertained even if asubject lacks a concept of C

A subject S has a concept of C iff S canrecognize instances of C on separateoccasions

18 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Possible response

Response: Pain-experiences represent bodilydamange non-conceptually.

First pass at non-conceptual content: Arepresentation R has non-conceptual contentC iff R’s content can be entertained even if asubject lacks a concept of C

A subject S has a concept of C iff S canrecognize instances of C on separateoccasions

18 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Problems with Tye’s response

1 This constrains what Tye can say in otherpossible cases where concepts do seem tomake a difference to phenomenal character

2 It seems arbitrary that whether or not I canrecognize a type of pain on separateoccasions has anything to do withphenomenal character

3 This is impure intentionalism

19 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Problems with Tye’s response

1 This constrains what Tye can say in otherpossible cases where concepts do seem tomake a difference to phenomenal character

2 It seems arbitrary that whether or not I canrecognize a type of pain on separateoccasions has anything to do withphenomenal character

3 This is impure intentionalism

19 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Problems with Tye’s response

1 This constrains what Tye can say in otherpossible cases where concepts do seem tomake a difference to phenomenal character

2 It seems arbitrary that whether or not I canrecognize a type of pain on separateoccasions has anything to do withphenomenal character

3 This is impure intentionalism

19 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Outline

1 Intentionalism

2 The problem with pain

3 Bodily damage

4 Modes of presentation

5 Imperatives

6 General worries

7 Primitivism

8 Reductionism

20 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Modes of presentation

Bain’s proposal

Pain-experiences represent bodily damage undera particular MoP (Bain, 2003).

To illustrate, compare:1 Feeling your damaged limb2 Seeing your damaged limb

What accounts for the phenomenal difference?

In (1), you experience your limb as manifestlyyour own, whereas in (2) you merely experienceit as your own

Manifestly representing your foot is representingit in a way that grounds first-person immunejudgments.

21 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Modes of presentation

Bain’s proposal

Pain-experiences represent bodily damage undera particular MoP (Bain, 2003).

To illustrate, compare:1 Feeling your damaged limb2 Seeing your damaged limb

What accounts for the phenomenal difference?

In (1), you experience your limb as manifestlyyour own, whereas in (2) you merely experienceit as your own

Manifestly representing your foot is representingit in a way that grounds first-person immunejudgments.

21 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Modes of presentation

Bain’s proposal

Pain-experiences represent bodily damage undera particular MoP (Bain, 2003).

To illustrate, compare:1 Feeling your damaged limb2 Seeing your damaged limb

What accounts for the phenomenal difference?

In (1), you experience your limb as manifestlyyour own, whereas in (2) you merely experienceit as your own

Manifestly representing your foot is representingit in a way that grounds first-person immunejudgments.

21 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Modes of presentation

Bain’s proposal

Pain-experiences represent bodily damage undera particular MoP (Bain, 2003).

To illustrate, compare:1 Feeling your damaged limb2 Seeing your damaged limb

What accounts for the phenomenal difference?

In (1), you experience your limb as manifestlyyour own, whereas in (2) you merely experienceit as your own

Manifestly representing your foot is representingit in a way that grounds first-person immunejudgments.

21 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Modes of presentation

Bain’s proposal

Pain-experiences represent bodily damage undera particular MoP (Bain, 2003).

To illustrate, compare:1 Feeling your damaged limb2 Seeing your damaged limb

What accounts for the phenomenal difference?

In (1), you experience your limb as manifestlyyour own, whereas in (2) you merely experienceit as your own

Manifestly representing your foot is representingit in a way that grounds first-person immunejudgments.

21 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Modes of presentation

Bain’s proposal

Pain-experiences represent bodily damage undera particular MoP (Bain, 2003).

To illustrate, compare:1 Feeling your damaged limb2 Seeing your damaged limb

What accounts for the phenomenal difference?

In (1), you experience your limb as manifestlyyour own, whereas in (2) you merely experienceit as your own

Manifestly representing your foot is representingit in a way that grounds first-person immunejudgments.

21 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Modes of presentation

Bain’s proposal

Pain-experiences represent bodily damage undera particular MoP (Bain, 2003).

To illustrate, compare:1 Feeling your damaged limb2 Seeing your damaged limb

What accounts for the phenomenal difference?

In (1), you experience your limb as manifestlyyour own, whereas in (2) you merely experienceit as your own

Manifestly representing your foot is representingit in a way that grounds first-person immunejudgments.

21 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

First-person immunity

To illustrate, compare:1 Feeling your damaged limb2 Seeing your damaged limb

FP immunity is immunity to error throughmisidentification of oneself

On the basis of (1), I know it’s my foot andcan’t be mistaken about that

Given (2), I might still ask, “That foot issomeone’s foot, but is it my foot?”

22 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

First-person immunity

To illustrate, compare:1 Feeling your damaged limb2 Seeing your damaged limb

FP immunity is immunity to error throughmisidentification of oneself

On the basis of (1), I know it’s my foot andcan’t be mistaken about that

Given (2), I might still ask, “That foot issomeone’s foot, but is it my foot?”

22 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

First-person immunity

To illustrate, compare:1 Feeling your damaged limb2 Seeing your damaged limb

FP immunity is immunity to error throughmisidentification of oneself

On the basis of (1), I know it’s my foot andcan’t be mistaken about that

Given (2), I might still ask, “That foot issomeone’s foot, but is it my foot?”

22 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

First-person immunity

To illustrate, compare:1 Feeling your damaged limb2 Seeing your damaged limb

FP immunity is immunity to error throughmisidentification of oneself

On the basis of (1), I know it’s my foot andcan’t be mistaken about that

Given (2), I might still ask, “That foot issomeone’s foot, but is it my foot?”

22 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Rubber hand illusion

In the rubber hand illusion, you mistakenlyexperience stimuli applied to rubber hand asapplied to your hand.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=

TCQbygjG0RU&NR=1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=

PsT-KZpkgrw

23 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Rubber hand illusion

In the rubber hand illusion, you mistakenlyexperience stimuli applied to rubber hand asapplied to your hand.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=

TCQbygjG0RU&NR=1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=

PsT-KZpkgrw

23 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Rubber hand illusion

Mistaken attribution of proprioceptiveexperiences

But also possibly mistaken attribution ofpain-experiences too:

In one study, Armel and Ramachandran(2003) bent the finger of the rubber handand only slightly lifted the finger of the realhand. Subjects anticipated pain. 2/120claimed they actually felt pain.

So, our pain-experiences are not FP immune.You can be mistaken that the object of thedamage is your hand.

24 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Rubber hand illusion

Mistaken attribution of proprioceptiveexperiences

But also possibly mistaken attribution ofpain-experiences too:

In one study, Armel and Ramachandran(2003) bent the finger of the rubber handand only slightly lifted the finger of the realhand. Subjects anticipated pain. 2/120claimed they actually felt pain.

So, our pain-experiences are not FP immune.You can be mistaken that the object of thedamage is your hand.

24 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Rubber hand illusion

Mistaken attribution of proprioceptiveexperiences

But also possibly mistaken attribution ofpain-experiences too:

In one study, Armel and Ramachandran(2003) bent the finger of the rubber handand only slightly lifted the finger of the realhand. Subjects anticipated pain. 2/120claimed they actually felt pain.

So, our pain-experiences are not FP immune.You can be mistaken that the object of thedamage is your hand.

24 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Rubber hand illusion

Mistaken attribution of proprioceptiveexperiences

But also possibly mistaken attribution ofpain-experiences too:

In one study, Armel and Ramachandran(2003) bent the finger of the rubber handand only slightly lifted the finger of the realhand. Subjects anticipated pain. 2/120claimed they actually felt pain.

So, our pain-experiences are not FP immune.You can be mistaken that the object of thedamage is your hand.

24 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

What the idea has got to be

Forget FP immunity

Pain-experiences automatically represent you oryour body parts in every experience (veridicallyor not).

Visual experiences don’t automatically representyou or your body parts.

25 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

What the idea has got to be

Forget FP immunity

Pain-experiences automatically represent you oryour body parts in every experience (veridicallyor not).

Visual experiences don’t automatically representyou or your body parts.

25 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

What the idea has got to be

Forget FP immunity

Pain-experiences automatically represent you oryour body parts in every experience (veridicallyor not).

Visual experiences don’t automatically representyou or your body parts.

25 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Another option

In the pain-experience but not the visualexperience of a damaged foot, “I experiencedisorder as located within a boundary of whoseexterior I can have no similar awareness” (p. 523)

Inspired by Michael Martin

Basic idea: somatosensory experiences onlyrepresent what’s on or beneath the skin, butvision can represent things outside of the skintoo

26 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Another option

In the pain-experience but not the visualexperience of a damaged foot, “I experiencedisorder as located within a boundary of whoseexterior I can have no similar awareness” (p. 523)

Inspired by Michael Martin

Basic idea: somatosensory experiences onlyrepresent what’s on or beneath the skin, butvision can represent things outside of the skintoo

26 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Another option

In the pain-experience but not the visualexperience of a damaged foot, “I experiencedisorder as located within a boundary of whoseexterior I can have no similar awareness” (p. 523)

Inspired by Michael Martin

Basic idea: somatosensory experiences onlyrepresent what’s on or beneath the skin, butvision can represent things outside of the skintoo

26 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Problems

1 How does FP immunity, or manifest orautomatic representation of oneself or one’sbody, or being of a type of experience that canonly represent from the skin-in turn arepresentation of bodily damage into anexperience with the phenomenal character ofpain?

Story seems incomplete. How do the twofactors interact?And implausible.

2 Is this really a representational difference?

27 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Problems

1 How does FP immunity, or manifest orautomatic representation of oneself or one’sbody, or being of a type of experience that canonly represent from the skin-in turn arepresentation of bodily damage into anexperience with the phenomenal character ofpain?

Story seems incomplete. How do the twofactors interact?And implausible.

2 Is this really a representational difference?

27 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Problems

1 How does FP immunity, or manifest orautomatic representation of oneself or one’sbody, or being of a type of experience that canonly represent from the skin-in turn arepresentation of bodily damage into anexperience with the phenomenal character ofpain?

Story seems incomplete. How do the twofactors interact?And implausible.

2 Is this really a representational difference?

27 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Problems

1 How does FP immunity, or manifest orautomatic representation of oneself or one’sbody, or being of a type of experience that canonly represent from the skin-in turn arepresentation of bodily damage into anexperience with the phenomenal character ofpain?

Story seems incomplete. How do the twofactors interact?And implausible.

2 Is this really a representational difference?

27 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Modes of presentation

Problems1 The MoP is doing almost all the work (save the

part of phenomenology deriving fromrepresentation of bodily location).

2 MoPs are themselves representational. But whatdo they represent that accounts for the feltpainfulness of pain? We’re back where westarted.

28 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Modes of presentation

Problems1 The MoP is doing almost all the work (save the

part of phenomenology deriving fromrepresentation of bodily location).

2 MoPs are themselves representational. But whatdo they represent that accounts for the feltpainfulness of pain? We’re back where westarted.

28 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Outline

1 Intentionalism

2 The problem with pain

3 Bodily damage

4 Modes of presentation

5 Imperatives

6 General worries

7 Primitivism

8 Reductionism

29 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Imperative content

Possible solution

Pain-experiences represent imperativecontents (Klein, 2007).

They don’t represent bodily damage at all.

They represent something like don’t step onthat foot!

Compare: Itches plausibly represent scratchhere!

30 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Imperative content

Possible solution

Pain-experiences represent imperativecontents (Klein, 2007).

They don’t represent bodily damage at all.

They represent something like don’t step onthat foot!

Compare: Itches plausibly represent scratchhere!

30 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Imperative content

Possible solution

Pain-experiences represent imperativecontents (Klein, 2007).

They don’t represent bodily damage at all.

They represent something like don’t step onthat foot!

Compare: Itches plausibly represent scratchhere!

30 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Imperative content

Possible solution

Pain-experiences represent imperativecontents (Klein, 2007).

They don’t represent bodily damage at all.

They represent something like don’t step onthat foot!

Compare: Itches plausibly represent scratchhere!

30 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Negative imperatives

Pain-experiences represent negativeimperatives, not positive imperatives.

They tell you what not to do, not what to do.

Don’t step on that foot!

What about withdrawing from a flame?

Don’t stay there or get closer!

31 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Negative imperatives

Pain-experiences represent negativeimperatives, not positive imperatives.

They tell you what not to do, not what to do.

Don’t step on that foot!

What about withdrawing from a flame?

Don’t stay there or get closer!

31 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Negative imperatives

Pain-experiences represent negativeimperatives, not positive imperatives.

They tell you what not to do, not what to do.

Don’t step on that foot!

What about withdrawing from a flame?

Don’t stay there or get closer!

31 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Negative imperatives

Pain-experiences represent negativeimperatives, not positive imperatives.

They tell you what not to do, not what to do.

Don’t step on that foot!

What about withdrawing from a flame?

Don’t stay there or get closer!

31 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Negative imperatives

Pain-experiences represent negativeimperatives, not positive imperatives.

They tell you what not to do, not what to do.

Don’t step on that foot!

What about withdrawing from a flame?

Don’t stay there or get closer!

31 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

The biological function of pain

The biological function of pain is not to tellus about bodily damage, but rather to keepour bodies healthy and intact.

Klein’s proposal accommodates this nicely.

Pain-experiences tell us what to do to keepus safe, rather than reporting on bodilydamage and letting us choose what to dowith the reports.

32 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

The biological function of pain

The biological function of pain is not to tellus about bodily damage, but rather to keepour bodies healthy and intact.

Klein’s proposal accommodates this nicely.

Pain-experiences tell us what to do to keepus safe, rather than reporting on bodilydamage and letting us choose what to dowith the reports.

32 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

The biological function of pain

The biological function of pain is not to tellus about bodily damage, but rather to keepour bodies healthy and intact.

Klein’s proposal accommodates this nicely.

Pain-experiences tell us what to do to keepus safe, rather than reporting on bodilydamage and letting us choose what to dowith the reports.

32 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Morphine pain

On morphine, patients report that they stillfeel pain, but that it doesn’t bother themanymore.

Problem: Looks like such patients lack anyimperative content relating to their damagedlimbs, so should not feel pain, on Klein’stheory.

Klein: They still have the relevant negativeimperative contents, but they’re not trying todo anything, so there’s nothing forpain-experiences to stop them from doing.

Like a stop sign in a ghost town

33 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Morphine pain

On morphine, patients report that they stillfeel pain, but that it doesn’t bother themanymore.

Problem: Looks like such patients lack anyimperative content relating to their damagedlimbs, so should not feel pain, on Klein’stheory.

Klein: They still have the relevant negativeimperative contents, but they’re not trying todo anything, so there’s nothing forpain-experiences to stop them from doing.

Like a stop sign in a ghost town

33 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Morphine pain

On morphine, patients report that they stillfeel pain, but that it doesn’t bother themanymore.

Problem: Looks like such patients lack anyimperative content relating to their damagedlimbs, so should not feel pain, on Klein’stheory.

Klein: They still have the relevant negativeimperative contents, but they’re not trying todo anything, so there’s nothing forpain-experiences to stop them from doing.

Like a stop sign in a ghost town

33 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Morphine pain

On morphine, patients report that they stillfeel pain, but that it doesn’t bother themanymore.

Problem: Looks like such patients lack anyimperative content relating to their damagedlimbs, so should not feel pain, on Klein’stheory.

Klein: They still have the relevant negativeimperative contents, but they’re not trying todo anything, so there’s nothing forpain-experiences to stop them from doing.

Like a stop sign in a ghost town

33 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Problems

1 Is it plausible that pain-experiences representimperative content?

2 In all cases of pain? Headaches?

3 Is representing an imperative versusstatement a representational difference?

4 Does imperative content capture thephenomenal character of pain-experiences?Do pains feel like prohibitions againstactions?

5 Relatedly, how do we distinguish pain fromnausea? Does nausea represent Don’t moveor eat anything! ?

34 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Problems

1 Is it plausible that pain-experiences representimperative content?

2 In all cases of pain? Headaches?

3 Is representing an imperative versusstatement a representational difference?

4 Does imperative content capture thephenomenal character of pain-experiences?Do pains feel like prohibitions againstactions?

5 Relatedly, how do we distinguish pain fromnausea? Does nausea represent Don’t moveor eat anything! ?

34 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Problems

1 Is it plausible that pain-experiences representimperative content?

2 In all cases of pain? Headaches?

3 Is representing an imperative versusstatement a representational difference?

4 Does imperative content capture thephenomenal character of pain-experiences?Do pains feel like prohibitions againstactions?

5 Relatedly, how do we distinguish pain fromnausea? Does nausea represent Don’t moveor eat anything! ?

34 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Problems

1 Is it plausible that pain-experiences representimperative content?

2 In all cases of pain? Headaches?

3 Is representing an imperative versusstatement a representational difference?

4 Does imperative content capture thephenomenal character of pain-experiences?Do pains feel like prohibitions againstactions?

5 Relatedly, how do we distinguish pain fromnausea? Does nausea represent Don’t moveor eat anything! ?

34 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Problems

1 Is it plausible that pain-experiences representimperative content?

2 In all cases of pain? Headaches?

3 Is representing an imperative versusstatement a representational difference?

4 Does imperative content capture thephenomenal character of pain-experiences?Do pains feel like prohibitions againstactions?

5 Relatedly, how do we distinguish pain fromnausea? Does nausea represent Don’t moveor eat anything! ?

34 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Outline

1 Intentionalism

2 The problem with pain

3 Bodily damage

4 Modes of presentation

5 Imperatives

6 General worries

7 Primitivism

8 Reductionism

35 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

General worries

In the case of experiences of triangularity,we could find an actually-instantiatedproperty that we plausibly represent thataccounts for their phenomenal character.

The challenge with the case of pain is tofind some represented contents thatcapture its phenomenal character.

36 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

General worries

In the case of experiences of triangularity,we could find an actually-instantiatedproperty that we plausibly represent thataccounts for their phenomenal character.

The challenge with the case of pain is tofind some represented contents thatcapture its phenomenal character.

36 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

General worries

We pick a content C that we plausiblythink pain-experiences might represent,but it doesn’t capture the feel.

So we cloak it with something else(non-conceptual/conceptual content,modes of presentation, a differentillocutionary force).

It’s unclear how this new ingredient willtransform C into pain-phenomenology.

And if it does, it looks like the newingredient does all the work, and therepresentational content falls out of thepicture or plays a diminished role.

37 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

General worries

We pick a content C that we plausiblythink pain-experiences might represent,but it doesn’t capture the feel.

So we cloak it with something else(non-conceptual/conceptual content,modes of presentation, a differentillocutionary force).

It’s unclear how this new ingredient willtransform C into pain-phenomenology.

And if it does, it looks like the newingredient does all the work, and therepresentational content falls out of thepicture or plays a diminished role.

37 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

General worries

We pick a content C that we plausiblythink pain-experiences might represent,but it doesn’t capture the feel.

So we cloak it with something else(non-conceptual/conceptual content,modes of presentation, a differentillocutionary force).

It’s unclear how this new ingredient willtransform C into pain-phenomenology.

And if it does, it looks like the newingredient does all the work, and therepresentational content falls out of thepicture or plays a diminished role.

37 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

General worries

We pick a content C that we plausiblythink pain-experiences might represent,but it doesn’t capture the feel.

So we cloak it with something else(non-conceptual/conceptual content,modes of presentation, a differentillocutionary force).

It’s unclear how this new ingredient willtransform C into pain-phenomenology.

And if it does, it looks like the newingredient does all the work, and therepresentational content falls out of thepicture or plays a diminished role.

37 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

General worries

We pick a content C that we plausiblythink pain-experiences might represent,but it doesn’t capture the feel.

So we cloak it with something else(non-conceptual/conceptual content,modes of presentation, a differentillocutionary force).

It’s unclear how this new ingredient willtransform C into pain-phenomenology.

And if it does, it looks like the newingredient does all the work, and therepresentational content falls out of thepicture or plays a diminished role.

37 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

General worries

We pick a content C that we plausiblythink pain-experiences might represent,but it doesn’t capture the feel.

So we cloak it with something else(non-conceptual/conceptual content,modes of presentation, a differentillocutionary force).

It’s unclear how this new ingredient willtransform C into pain-phenomenology.

And if it does, it looks like the newingredient does all the work, and therepresentational content falls out of thepicture or plays a diminished role.

37 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Suggestion

Take pain-experiences at face value.

38 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Outline

1 Intentionalism

2 The problem with pain

3 Bodily damage

4 Modes of presentation

5 Imperatives

6 General worries

7 Primitivism

8 Reductionism

39 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Primitivism

Proposed solution

Pain-experiences represent bodilyparts/locations as having sui generis painproperties.

There are different kinds of painproperties: stingy-painful,throbbing-painful, etc.

Pain properties are exactly what theyappear to be (as opposed to somethingelse).

This is a version of pure intentionalism.

40 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Primitivism

Proposed solution

Pain-experiences represent bodilyparts/locations as having sui generis painproperties.

There are different kinds of painproperties: stingy-painful,throbbing-painful, etc.

Pain properties are exactly what theyappear to be (as opposed to somethingelse).

This is a version of pure intentionalism.

40 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Primitivism

Proposed solution

Pain-experiences represent bodilyparts/locations as having sui generis painproperties.

There are different kinds of painproperties: stingy-painful,throbbing-painful, etc.

Pain properties are exactly what theyappear to be (as opposed to somethingelse).

This is a version of pure intentionalism.

40 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Primitivism

Proposed solution

Pain-experiences represent bodilyparts/locations as having sui generis painproperties.

There are different kinds of painproperties: stingy-painful,throbbing-painful, etc.

Pain properties are exactly what theyappear to be (as opposed to somethingelse).

This is a version of pure intentionalism.

40 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Primitivism

Proposed solution

Pain-experiences represent bodilyparts/locations as having sui generis painproperties.

There are different kinds of painproperties: stingy-painful,throbbing-painful, etc.

Pain properties are exactly what theyappear to be (as opposed to somethingelse).

This is a version of pure intentionalism.

40 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Uninstantiated pain properties

These properties are probably neverinstantiated.

We reliably misrepresent our body partsas being painful.

41 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Uninstantiated pain properties

These properties are probably neverinstantiated.

We reliably misrepresent our body partsas being painful.

41 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Reliable misrepresentation

A state reliably misrepresents when all ormost of its activations (or tokens) arenonveridical and occur in similarcircumstances.

Reliable misrepresentation arises when arepresentation represents one thing buttracks something else.

42 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Reliable misrepresentation

A state reliably misrepresents when all ormost of its activations (or tokens) arenonveridical and occur in similarcircumstances.

Reliable misrepresentation arises when arepresentation represents one thing buttracks something else.

42 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Reliable misrepresentation

A state reliably misrepresents when all ormost of its activations (or tokens) arenonveridical and occur in similarcircumstances.

Reliable misrepresentation arises when arepresentation represents one thing buttracks something else.

42 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Reliable misrepresentation

Objection

How can pain-experiences systematicallymisrepresent when they are so useful inhelping us survive?

Response

Reliable misrepresentation can be just asuseful as veridical perception.

Reliable misrepresentation allows us torespond differently to different situations.

43 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Reliable misrepresentation

Objection

How can pain-experiences systematicallymisrepresent when they are so useful inhelping us survive?

Response

Reliable misrepresentation can be just asuseful as veridical perception.

Reliable misrepresentation allows us torespond differently to different situations.

43 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Reliable misrepresentation

Objection

How can pain-experiences systematicallymisrepresent when they are so useful inhelping us survive?

Response

Reliable misrepresentation can be just asuseful as veridical perception.

Reliable misrepresentation allows us torespond differently to different situations.

43 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Reliable misrepresentation

Objection

How can pain-experiences systematicallymisrepresent when they are so useful inhelping us survive?

Response

Reliable misrepresentation can be just asuseful as veridical perception.

Reliable misrepresentation allows us torespond differently to different situations.

43 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Reliable misrepresentation

We might need to say the same thingabout color experiences.

44 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Reliable misrepresentation

We might need to say the same thingabout color experiences.

44 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Tracking theories of mental representation

This view is not open to the tracking theorist.

According to tracking theories, mentalrepresentation is a species of causal orcausally-mediated co-variation relation, atracking relation (Tye, 2000; Dretske, 1995).

We are just sophisticated thermometers.

This is related to a general problem of trackingviews in allowing for adaptive and reliablemisrepresentation.

45 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Tracking theories of mental representation

This view is not open to the tracking theorist.

According to tracking theories, mentalrepresentation is a species of causal orcausally-mediated co-variation relation, atracking relation (Tye, 2000; Dretske, 1995).

We are just sophisticated thermometers.

This is related to a general problem of trackingviews in allowing for adaptive and reliablemisrepresentation.

45 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Tracking theories of mental representation

This view is not open to the tracking theorist.

According to tracking theories, mentalrepresentation is a species of causal orcausally-mediated co-variation relation, atracking relation (Tye, 2000; Dretske, 1995).

We are just sophisticated thermometers.

This is related to a general problem of trackingviews in allowing for adaptive and reliablemisrepresentation.

45 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Tracking theories of mental representation

This view is not open to the tracking theorist.

According to tracking theories, mentalrepresentation is a species of causal orcausally-mediated co-variation relation, atracking relation (Tye, 2000; Dretske, 1995).

We are just sophisticated thermometers.

This is related to a general problem of trackingviews in allowing for adaptive and reliablemisrepresentation.

45 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Tracking theories of mental representation

This view is not open to the tracking theorist.

According to tracking theories, mentalrepresentation is a species of causal orcausally-mediated co-variation relation, atracking relation (Tye, 2000; Dretske, 1995).

We are just sophisticated thermometers.

This is related to a general problem of trackingviews in allowing for adaptive and reliablemisrepresentation.

45 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Summary

Cases like pain pose a challenge for intentionalism.

Other examples:

Itches and other bodily sensationsSweetnessColorHotness and coldness

The pure intentionalist can account for them in terms ofreliable misrepresentation of body parts or locations as havingsui generis pain properties.

This strategy is not open to the tracking theorist.

46 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Summary

Cases like pain pose a challenge for intentionalism.

Other examples:

Itches and other bodily sensationsSweetnessColorHotness and coldness

The pure intentionalist can account for them in terms ofreliable misrepresentation of body parts or locations as havingsui generis pain properties.

This strategy is not open to the tracking theorist.

46 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Summary

Cases like pain pose a challenge for intentionalism.

Other examples:

Itches and other bodily sensationsSweetnessColorHotness and coldness

The pure intentionalist can account for them in terms ofreliable misrepresentation of body parts or locations as havingsui generis pain properties.

This strategy is not open to the tracking theorist.

46 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Summary

Cases like pain pose a challenge for intentionalism.

Other examples:

Itches and other bodily sensationsSweetnessColorHotness and coldness

The pure intentionalist can account for them in terms ofreliable misrepresentation of body parts or locations as havingsui generis pain properties.

This strategy is not open to the tracking theorist.

46 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Outline

1 Intentionalism

2 The problem with pain

3 Bodily damage

4 Modes of presentation

5 Imperatives

6 General worries

7 Primitivism

8 Reductionism

47 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

The reductive intentionalist program

Reductive intentionalists will complain that pureintentionalism, as I have described it, requires abandoning thisproject.

48 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

The reductive intentionalist program

Reductive intentionalists will complain that pureintentionalism, as I have described it, requires abandoning thisproject.

48 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Reductionism

But their project fails anyway: If representation is justtracking, we can’t adequately deal with pain.

A failed reduction is not a reduction.

There may be reason to think we can’t account forrepresentation in terms of tracking either.

49 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Reductionism

But their project fails anyway: If representation is justtracking, we can’t adequately deal with pain.

A failed reduction is not a reduction.

There may be reason to think we can’t account forrepresentation in terms of tracking either.

49 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Reductionism

But their project fails anyway: If representation is justtracking, we can’t adequately deal with pain.

A failed reduction is not a reduction.

There may be reason to think we can’t account forrepresentation in terms of tracking either.

49 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

The state of the debate so far

No one has a reductive theory.

You don’t get points just for trying.

50 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

The state of the debate so far

No one has a reductive theory.

You don’t get points just for trying.

50 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Reductionism

But intentionalism is still well-motivated.1 Transparency intuitions2 A unified theory of mind

So it’s worth pursuing intentionalism independent of acommitment to reductionism.

51 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Reductionism

But intentionalism is still well-motivated.1 Transparency intuitions2 A unified theory of mind

So it’s worth pursuing intentionalism independent of acommitment to reductionism.

51 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

Reductionism

But intentionalism is still well-motivated.1 Transparency intuitions2 A unified theory of mind

So it’s worth pursuing intentionalism independent of acommitment to reductionism.

51 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

The End

52 / 53

40 60 80 100 120

40

60

80

mm

Intentionalism The problem Bodily damage MoPs Imperatives General worries Primitivism Reductionism References

References

Armel, K. C. and Ramachandran, V. S. (2003). Projecting sensations toexternal objects: evidence from skin conductance response. Proc. R. Soc.Lond., 270:1499–1506.

Bain, D. (2003). Intentionalism and pain. Philosophical Quarterly, 53:502–552.Brentano, F. (1973/1874). Psychology from an Empirical Standpoint.

Routledge and Kegan Paul, London.Dretske, F. (1995). Naturalizing the Mind. MIT Press, Cambridge.Klein, C. (2007). An imperative theory of pain. The Journal of Philosophy,

104(10):517–532.Nagel, T. (1974). What is it like to be a bat? The Philosophical Review,

83(4):435–450.Tye, M. (1995). Ten Problems of Consciousness: A Representational Theory of

the Phenomenal Mind. MIT Press, Cambridge.Tye, M. (2000). Consciousness, Color, and Content. MIT Press, Cambridge.

53 / 53