Confident-Broccoli-5 t1_j8vprmo wrote on February 17, 2023 at 7:48 AM

Reply to comment by astralrig96 in Free Will Is Only an Illusion if You Are, Too by greghickey5

No, philosophers who argue for the mereological fallacy (basically just a few Wittgenstein scholars, not many) aren't denying mental states/ consciousness, they're just saying it makes no sense to treat the brain as the organism/human being as a whole. Take the example of a clock — someone might be inclined to claim that it’s the hands that tell the time, others might claim it’s another part. But we know that it’s the entire clock that tells the time and that it only tells the time when it’s functionally integrated and correctly set.

It's the same for humans and their minds, etc. Psychological attributes are properties of people, it’s a person who thinks, not their brain. They might need a brain to think, but that doesn’t mean it’s the brain that thinks (and so on). This video by Peter Hacker nicely summarises the view - https://youtu.be/EMcmQPdi0Fs

astralrig96 t1_j8w3fac wrote on February 17, 2023 at 10:54 AM

Thanks for the clarification! And so, concerning these other terms I mentioned what’s the exact relation of mereology to them?

Emergence would be the opposite right? Because it in fact indeed treats the brain as a whole and goes as far to say that it’s something even bigger than its singular parts.

Eliminative materialism sounds synonymous but not completely identical with mereology to me because it implies that parts give a whole just only the parts and not something else like in emergence.

I’m asking because I’ve seen these exact terms used on an older discussion on this sub concerning the same topic