1. Is Consciousness a brain process?

2. What does it take even to entertain the possibility that minds are nothing more than brains? i. e. Maybe this sentence is true: “The sentence ‘Your mind is exactly your brain and nothing else.’ refers to one and only one thing discribed two ways.” The logical independence issue

3. Maybe this sentence is true: “The sentence ‘Your mind is exactly your brain and nothing else.’ refers to one and only one thing discribed two ways.” Maybe this sentence is true: “The sentence ‘bla bla bla is exactly da la la.’ refers to one and only one thing discribed two ways.” T or F : b = d is like a = a ? Logical independence tries to give a criteria for an answer. Exercise: abstract out the content.

4. Place maintains that: Logical independence does not hold for mind-brain type identity. Therefore sentences asserting mind-brain identity are POSSIBLY true. (pg 46)

5. The form of the argument: Certain RULES OF LANGUAGE dictate acceptance or rejection of competing ontologies. (R) = a relation b = a set of characteristics. c = alternative set of characteristics. a = a single object. (f)a ) is a definition. If (((R) bc )a designates the expression (f)a ) and ( set b is unique to a ) then the expression “ (f)a “ implies the existence of the set c by definition. What is logical independence and how is the implication arrived at?

6. Whenever a person has two characteristics, b and c, expressed by ‘b’ and ‘c’ and b is true of all and only persons using the defining word ‘b’ entails the independent existence of everything c about the person expressed by the word ‘c’. Put another way independence asserts and Place Denies that:

7. Place maintains that logical independence is a valid indicator of 0ntological distinctions, But that it does not apply to the case of persons., i.e., it does not show that minds and bodies are different ontological entities.

8. What is the argument that logical indepencence doesn’t hold. Independence doesn’t hold when it cannot be verified via simultaneous scientific operations! Crucial test for sameness: If Theory + observation fails to yield explanation of ordinary man observation then reject identity hypothesis, i.e. gives rise to Rylian dispositions (pg. 58).