Philosophy of Mind (Dimensions of Philosophy)

Rating:
Summary: The mass objectification of humanity!!
Review: I get the overall feeling that Kim has some personal beef with Descarte. His whole goal seems to be that of destroying the Cartesian view of a body and mind unison. He does have many good things to say in Philosophy of Mind though. The only problem is that he trys so hard to turn man, a thinking thing, in to a rock. An object. In Kim's defense, he does show both sides of the coin and trys not to preach to much. Still preaches, but I guess thats what I bought the book for in the first place.

Rating:
Summary: A very lucid introduction to contrmporary philosophy of mind
Review: Kim's work is the clearest introduction to major issues in the philosophy of mind in print. Much written in the field is convluted and Delphic in every aspect except length. This work is an excellent place to begin an examination. The chapters on functionialism are especially excellent.

Rating:
Summary: A very lucid introduction to contrmporary philosophy of mind
Review: Kim's work is the clearest introduction to major issues in the philosophy of mind in print. Much written in the field is convluted and Delphic in every aspect except length. This work is an excellent place to begin an examination. The chapters on functionialism are especially excellent.

Rating:
Summary: Excellent introduction
Review: Kim, who's one the leading philosophers in the anglo-saxon philosophy world, has one the clearest, if not the clearest, intro to philosophy of mind. His explanations are sometimes too brief but very valuable to any philosophy student. The chapters cover the most important mind-body issues, some of which are still alive today. As opposed to what an unexperienced phiosophy reader wrote, Kim is not trying to turn man into a rock. If you want an excellent intro to phil. of mind, get this book. You might also want to check Rosenthal's collection of articles. These two should keep you very busy, at least for a good while.

Rating:
Summary: auditor
Review: This book is the required text for the phil 325 course I am curently auditing at UIUC. It's professor is Jim Hardy at [e-mail]

Rating:
Summary: Too broad but otherwise good
Review: With regard to an earlier reviewer, Kim does not attack dualism more so than any other modern philosopher since almost all of them with the exception of a few crackpots have abandoned dualism -- or at least Descartes' conception of it. There is good reason for this since his conception of a non-material thinking "substance" seems to me to be completely incompatible with our notions of modern science and the laws of physics. Indeed, it is an utter absurdity to argue that a non-material substance that does not occupy space nor possesses any other physical properties can somehow influence or cause effects in the physical world. How can a simple desire to get a drink -- if it is no more than the product of a non-material substance as Descartes urged -- cause my neurons to start firing so that I get out of my chair and get a drink? Thus, modern philosophers have for the most part abandoned cartesian dualism.

That being said, Kim's book is interesting and does a good job of surveying the different issues concerning the mind-body problem. My main objection is that it is so broad that it fails to delve into some of the more interesting aspects of the problem in sufficient detail. And, in some respects it is quite boring. His overuse of variables when ordinary sentences and syntax would suffice makes the reading unduly burdensome and detracts from the ideas presented in the book.

In my opinion a much more readable work that deals with the mind-body problem is David Papineau's "Thinking about Consciousness."