Related Publications – Ullin T. Place (1924-2000)

5 publications that cite Graham & Valentine (2004). Identifying the mind: Selected papers of U. T. Place

Nath, S. (2013). U. T. Place as a Behaviourist. International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications, 3(9), 183-185. www.ijsrp.org/research-paper-0913/ijsrp-p2125.pdf
[Abstract]U. T. Place is rightly called the forerunners of Physicalism or Identity Theory of Mind. But he also claims himself to be a behaviourist. Like the behaviourist he believed that mental events can be elucidated purely in terms of hypothetical propositions about behaviour. These can also be elucidated by the reports of the first person’s experiences. He has many arguments in favour of behaviourism for which he is called a behaviourist. In this article I shall give a glimpse of behaviourism, particularly of logical behaviourism and then explain the circumstances under which Place is called a behaviourist.
[Citing Graham & Valentine (2004)] [Citing Place (1954)] [Citing Place (1956)] [Citing Place (1960)] [Citing Place (1967)] [Citing Place (1988a)] [Citing Place (1989a)] [Citing Place (1990a)] [Citing Place (1999d)]
Download: Nath (2013) UT Place as a Behaviourist.pdf

Nath, S. (2013). Resolution of some problems in the identity theory of mind. IOSR Journal Of Humanities And Social Science, 10(5), 51-57.
[Abstract]The identity theory of mind came into existence as a reaction to the theory of Behaviourism. This theory is advocated and developed by different philosophers beginning with Place, Feigl and Smart. According to this theory, certain physical states of brain are identical to mental states. In others words, this theory holds that the so-called mental phenomena like thoughts, feelings, wishes and the rest are identical with the bodily states and processes. Thus to have some specific kind of thought is to have some kind of specific states and processes of bodily cells, typically brain cells. When we say that someone is in a certain mental state, it implies that in the cerebral cortex of the brain of that person, certain physical event is going on. The person concerned may not be aware of the happenings of the brain but these two states are not merely correlated with each other rather these two are one and the same event in the literal sense. Thus this theory asserts that everything mental is physical. But though it speaks of mental states it does not assert that these are not physical. Although this theory is better than dualism and Behaviourism, still it has its own problems. These problems are the problem of identity, the problem of co-existence and the problem of consciousness. But in this paper I will discuss the problem of identity and the problem of co-existence and subsequently efforts will be made to solve these problems from materialist point of view.
[Citing Graham & Valentine (2004)]
Download: Nath (2013) Resolution of Some Problems in the Identity Theory of Mind.pdf

Nath, S. (2014). J. J. C. Smart in defence of Place's identity theory of mind. IOSR Journal Of Humanities And Social Science, 19(2), 26-29.
[Abstract]In the history of philosophy different philosophers have extended their efforts to give a solution of mind body problem. In modern period Rene Descartes explained the mind –body problem from the dualistic point of view. Behaviourism, on the other hand, does not believe [in] the existence of [the] mind. This theory emphasises only on behaviour. But none could give a satisfactory solution of the problem. Identity theory of mind also attempted to give a solution from the materialistic point of view. This theory is developed by U.T.Place, J.J.C. Smart,H. Feigl and some other thinkers. This theory came into existence as a reaction to the behaviourism. The main thesis of the theory is - the mental states and processes and the brain states and processes are identical. Before the establishment of his own theory Smart tries to answer some of the possible objections that might be raised by the critics against Place‟s theory. But this does not mean that Smart accepts Place‟s theory to the full extent. Rather he claims that his arguments for identity theory is very much different from that of Place and this he very sharply stated in his article “Sensations and Brain Processes” (1959). In this paper I shall try to explore some possible objections that might be raised by the critics against Place‟s theory as well as answers given by Smart and subsequently tries to show the issues on which Smart agrees with Place. Finally, efforts will be made to highlight Smart‟s difference from that of Place and his own view on the Identity Theory.
[Citing Place (1954)] [Citing Place (1956)] [Citing Place (1960)] [Citing Place (1967)] [Citing Place (1988a)] [Citing Place (1989a)] [Citing Place (1990a)] [Citing Place (1999d)] [Citing Graham & Valentine (2004)]
Download: Nath (2014) JJC Smart in Defence of Place's Identity Theory of Mind.pdf

Nath, S. (2014). Type-token dichotomy in the identity theory of mind. Journal of Business Management & Social Sciences Research, 3(4), 1-5
[Abstract]Identity theory of mind occupies an important place in the history of philosophy of mind. According to his theory mental events are nothing but physical events in the brain. This theory came into existence as a reaction of behaviourism and developed by U. T. Place, J. J. C. Smart, H. Feigl and others. But there is a debate among the profounder of the theory and this is- whether it is said about concrete particulars, (e.g., individual instances of occurring in particular subject at particular times), or about a kind to which such concrete particulars belong. With this question two answers are found and they are called Type identity and Token identity. According to token identity theory, every concrete particular that falls under a mental kind can be identified with some physical happenings. Type identity theory, on the other hand, holds that mental kinds themselves are physical kinds. Thus in this article I shall try to delineate the different arguments given by the profounder of this theory in favour of both the theories and finally show that which one is stronger than the others.
[Citing Graham & Valentine (2004)] [Citing Place (1956)] [Citing Place (1999e)]
Download: Nath (2014) Type-Token Dichotomy in the Identity Theory of Mind.pdf