I.
Part one:
Ryle's initial argument against Cartesian dualism is based on an epistemological viewpoint, meaning that this view has to do with the existence and understanding of knowledge. He claims that if we were to believe the Cartesian explanation of dualism, which claims that the mind and the body are completely separate things, we would have no way of understanding what others are feeling or thinking. Seeing as, with this explanation, it would be impossible to understand another human’s behaviors, behaviors in this case being the result of mental concepts that are not within our reach. Cartesian dualism implies that it would not be possible for us to be able to bear witness to another’s mental concepts because they are privet and unviewable things, and we are limited simply to the viewing of their actions. He argues that this belief renders understanding others impossible, and that reality proves that this is simply not the case. He claims we are all capable of understanding and connecting other’s behaviors into their mental concepts, knowing instinctually when someone is in plain, or if someone is being bold or clever. With this knowledge,…show more content… For example, dog is a type, and any kind of dog is a token of the type dog, another example is the chemical composition of NaCl which is the same thing as salt, meaning that it has a one to one correlation. On the other hand, token identity theory states that every individual mental state or process is numerically identical to a brain state/process token, meaning that it is possible for brain states to be tokens of mental states, meaning that while brain states can fall into the type of mental states, they do not have to all be the same. This resolves the issue with multiple realizability that type identity theory suffers
