Obtain Immediately Philosophy Of Mind: A Guide And Anthology Originated By John Heil Made Available In EText

emphasis on ontology makes for tough going at times, but it seems to me, at least, that Heil is right to insist on its importance for doing philosophy of mind.
A very lucid guide to a very interesting subject, This book is a very good introduction to philosophy of mind, in parts, As a general introduction it is very good, There are parts which explain things more clearly than any other similar textbook I have read e, g. Kim's philosophy of mind. But it is not a deep as Kim's book and the coverage is not as thorough for example I found nothing on anomalous monism, which I would have thought was a fairly central part of contemporary philosophy of mind.
Additionally, the last two chapters, which whilst being interesting, seemed out of place, Whilst chaptersare a general unbiased introduction, chaptersare Heil's own views on philosophy of mind, I suspect this is just a personal view, but I prefer philosophy books to either contain a specific argument from the writer or to be a reference source of both sides of the main arguments in any specific area combining the two in one book does not work for me.
But you could do far worse than this book if you want a reasonably deep, yet relatively easy to get into introduction to philosophy of mind.
read chThis book provided me with exactly what I was looking for a detailed introduction to the various theories of mind which are circulating among contemporary philosophers.
Heil provides his opinion of the strengths and weaknesses of each theory and more importantly provides an extensive suggested reading list at the end of each chapter.
The book is not light reading but I would have been disappointed if it was, This is not "fast food" philosophy the content requires thought and some familiarity with philosophical writing, The last two chapters are the authors own theory of mind but one could skip this entirely without losing anything unless of course you are interested in the author's theory.
The book is a good starting point for continued study of the philosophy of mind, This is a decent collection of essays for teaching an intro, to phil. mind course, but it is marred by an extraordinary number of typos, Also, it neglects to include the illustrations that accompanied the articles in their original places of publication, even when these illustrations are essential for understanding the article e.
g. , in Fodor's article on functionalism he talks about the difference between a behaviorist Coke machine and a functionalist Coke machine, but what this difference amounts to is only explained in a missing illustration.
Reading books as part of a course can make them seem more tedious, imagine reading an introduction to philosophy of mind with that framework.
I am glad I read the book it gives me some grounding on how the mind is perceived and problems philosophy has to deal with while discussing the mind.
A good introduction that sets out the different philosophical schools of thought about the nature of Mind Can be easily read by a nonspecialist.
قرأت تقريبامنه ولم أستطع إكماله. في أسلوب الكتاب شيء لم أستطع الإشارة إليه يجعله صعب الإكمال علي. ليس الصعب المادة وليس المزعج أن الكتاب ممل أو جاف فهذه نوعية الكتب التي أقرأها أصلا لكن مع ذلك ثم شيء أزعجني لا أعرفه. في مرحلة صرت أعتقد أن السبب هو كثرة الثرثرة كثرة الجمل الاعتراضية لكني لا أظنه السبب. قد يكون السبب وصفية الكتاب يعني الكتاب أغلبه وصف لنظريات وشرح للمصطلحات المستخدمة لكن في الحقيقة هذا هدف الكتاب. . هذا معنى كونه مقدمة.

ممكن السبب يكون عدم ظهور نقاش حقيقي للم قد تكون هذه النظرية صحيحة أو لا النقاش موجود فعلا يعني يذكر بعض الصعوبات التي تواجه نظرية ديكارت في النفس مثلا لكن هذه الصعوبات لا. . تبدو صعوبات. يعني مثلا "إشكالية التأثير بين ما هو مجرد وما هو متحيز" ما هي صعوبتها بالضبط كيف ترد على من يقول به أنه لا يستطيع تفسير ماهية هذه السببية طيب كيف يزيف هذا النظرية يقال أنها تعارض مسلمة وهي أن كوننا نظام مغلق وهي مقبولة علميا وهذا يعني أن النظرية مستبعدة لكن لا يبدو أن هذا نقاش حقيقي للنظرية الذي يقول بهذه النظرية بكل بساطة سيقول: إذن لنطلب مفهوما جديدا للقوانين الطبيعية ومعناها. لكن الرجل يحكي هذه الإشكالات من حيث أنها وردت على النظرية وعلى القارئ إذا أراد تبني النظرية أن يتفكر في هذه الأسئلة ويقدم

جوابا عليها. فلا يبدو أن هذا سلبية فيه.

بالتالي أنا فعلا لا أعرف ما الذي لم يعجبني بالضبط لكنني أعلم أن شيئا لم يعجبني لعله تراكم ما سبق وأن مجموعها هو الذي ثبطني عن إنهائه. . ممكن برضو. عموما حصلت بعض الأسماء والنظريات التي أريد بعض التوسع في الاطلاع عليها كالـ Cartesian Dualism و Functionalism.
و لعلي أبدأ بمراجعتها من مصدر رهيب وهو Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy,
ومنها قد أنتقل إلى بعض الأعمال الأصلية إذا أردت. did NOT read this whole thing, some articles are far better than others, Guess there must be people interested in this kind of approach, But the authors style seemed to me unnecessarily dry and drawn out, Wont be reading other books from him in the future, This one was a textbook, Nevertheless, its the best introduction to philosophy of mind out there, Edited by a renowned scholar in the field, this anthology provides a comprehensive and selfcontained introduction to the philosophy of mind.
Featuring an extensive and varied collection of fifty classical and contemporary readings, it also offers substantial section introductionswhich set the extracts in context and guide readers through themdiscussion questions, and guides to further reading.
Ideal for undergraduate courses, the book is organized into twelve sections, providing instructors with flexibility in designing and teaching a variety of courses.

.