Mind Brain Type Identity Theory

Mind Brain Type Identity Theory

Overview of Mind-Brain Type Identity Theory

  • Mind-Brain Type Identity Theory (MBTIT) is a reductive materialist theory that posits mental states are fundamentally identical to brain states.
  • Developed throughout the 20th Century, with key proponents including J.J.C. Smart and U.T. Place.
  • It is sometimes referred to as Central-state Materialism or Type Physicalism.

Key Features of MBTIT

  • Emphasises the categoric equivalence of mental states and physical brain states.
  • Argues that for each type of mental state, there exists a corresponding and identifiable physical brain state.
  • Maintains that mental states are ‘nothing over and above’ their corresponding brain states, emphasizing a one-to-one relationship.

Arguments for MBTIT

  • The Argument from Simplicity: Emphasises the elegance and fewer ontological commitments of MBTIT compared to dualist theories.
  • The Causal Closure Argument: Asserts that every physical event has a sufficient physical cause, hence mental processes, influencing behaviours, must be physical.
  • Empirical evidence linking specific mental phenomena with specific areas of the brain, e.g., through neuroscience and cognitive psychology frameworks.

Criticisms of MBTIT

  • Multiple Realisability: Hilary Putnam’s critique that mental states can be realised in multiple physical systems, suggesting a many-to-one relationship, contrary to the type identity’s one-to-one claim.
  • Incompleteness and early stage of neuroscience: Critics note that the inability of current neuroscience to elucidate all mental phenomena limits the scope and validity of MBTIT.
  • The Qualia Argument: Qualitative subjective experiences cannot be captured purely through physical description of brain states. This is illustrated by thought experiments such as Frank Jackson’s ‘Mary’s Room’.

Conclusion and Evaluation

  • Unresolved issues, like those presented by the ‘qualia argument’ and ‘multiple realizability’, continue to challenge MBTIT.
  • Nonetheless, it provides a parsimonious and empirically grounded framework to understand the nature of mental phenomena.
  • Its scientific aligning and the increasing evidence base from neuroscience make it an ongoing influential theory in the field of philosophy of mind.