In this essay, I will offer a summary of Smart’s epistemological and logical objections to his identity theory of the mind. Further, I will argue that one of his objections is successful while the other is not.
Firstly, I will consider Smart’s epistemological objection from ignorance to the identity theory of mind. The argument goes as follows: Smart argues that sensations which are the mental states are not equivalent to brain processes. A lot can be known about sensations while being ignorant about the brain processes involved. He says ‘… the publicly observable physical object lightning is in fact the electrical discharge, not just a correlate of it.’ Regarding the sense-datum, he says ‘it is a brain state caused by the lightning.’ Smart
…show more content…
The argument goes as follows: Smart argues that the after-image is not a brain process. Rather, he identifies the state, experiencing an after-image which is orangish with some brain process. He says, ‘the after-image is yellowy-orange but that surgeon looking into your brain would see nothing yellow-orange’. In this quotation, Smart asserts that after-image and brain process are not the same. This is important because it indicates that his argument on the mental state being not equivalent to the brain state relies on the fact that the brain process cannot be yellowy-orange like how the after-image appears. Thus, Smart argues that, ‘the after-image is not a brain process’.
Now I will analyze Smart’s logical objection. I believe that it is certainly possible to conceive of the after-image is actually a brain process, whereby the brain cells are working on a part of the brain, generating signals. For example, there is, I think, the eyes capture the image, which is translated into signals that are sent to the brain, causing the brain cells to work and generate the signals which are transformed into the after-image that is yellowish