The article was kept 14:01, 28 February 2007.
One and two-sentence paras have been added throughout. Reads like a comic book. Needs professional review for 2a and organization. Some content has also been added which I can't verify (given the circusmtamces I can't do much of anything) and much has been removed that IS verifiable, indeed obvious to anyone who actually knows the field. In addition, I never really cared for it in the first place. --
Francesco Franco aka Lacatosias
11:19, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
reply
The article feels unbalanced to me. Compared to other areas, the Mind-Body problem is given far too much weight. The epistemology of Other Minds isn't even mentioned, it seems. Other issues that deserve more attention (or at least a mention) include mental causation, action, self-deception, weakness of will, perception, memory, first-person authority and self-knowledge, imagery, emotion, perceptual/conceptual content, and the internalism/externalism debate. There's a lot of decent writing here, but it lacks diversity for such a broad topic. (I'm glad you haven't totally given up on Wikipedia, Mr. Franco. It's nice seeing you here.) KSchutte 05:54, 26 January 2007 (UTC) reply
"The answer of the behaviorist is that mental states do not actually exist - they are just descriptions of behavior, and/or dispositions thereto, made by external third parties in order to explain and predict others' behavior."
I also see some questions asked; shouldn't they be rephrased to statements? A few other issues, such as a problem with listing technique, and a few redundnaices (though these may be needed for precision). — Deckill er 04:41, 18 February 2007 (UTC) reply
The article was kept 14:01, 28 February 2007.
One and two-sentence paras have been added throughout. Reads like a comic book. Needs professional review for 2a and organization. Some content has also been added which I can't verify (given the circusmtamces I can't do much of anything) and much has been removed that IS verifiable, indeed obvious to anyone who actually knows the field. In addition, I never really cared for it in the first place. --
Francesco Franco aka Lacatosias
11:19, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
reply
The article feels unbalanced to me. Compared to other areas, the Mind-Body problem is given far too much weight. The epistemology of Other Minds isn't even mentioned, it seems. Other issues that deserve more attention (or at least a mention) include mental causation, action, self-deception, weakness of will, perception, memory, first-person authority and self-knowledge, imagery, emotion, perceptual/conceptual content, and the internalism/externalism debate. There's a lot of decent writing here, but it lacks diversity for such a broad topic. (I'm glad you haven't totally given up on Wikipedia, Mr. Franco. It's nice seeing you here.) KSchutte 05:54, 26 January 2007 (UTC) reply
"The answer of the behaviorist is that mental states do not actually exist - they are just descriptions of behavior, and/or dispositions thereto, made by external third parties in order to explain and predict others' behavior."
I also see some questions asked; shouldn't they be rephrased to statements? A few other issues, such as a problem with listing technique, and a few redundnaices (though these may be needed for precision). — Deckill er 04:41, 18 February 2007 (UTC) reply