Pssst… we can write an original essay just for you.
Any subject. Any type of essay.
We’ll even meet a 3-hour deadline.
121 writers online
John Searle’s book ‘Mind’ makes an important influence on the idea of rational action and provides suggestions regarding the issue of free will. The the book also symbolizes an amendment in John’s imagination since he published the book with the title The Rediscovery of the Mind, in the year 1992. He illustrates how consciousness causes certain think s to happen in a way that is unexplainable considering the reactions of neurons present in humans (Searle, 1992). In his book, he suggests the possibility of non-human concept and how the system may Couse humans to act in a certain way or Couse certain things to occur (Searle, 2004). The main agenda of the book is focused on what Searle terms as a conventional model of human viewpoint and the rationality of human ways of constructing alternative models.
According to Searle, the center of focus in the classical model is linked to the thought that various actions of humans are caused by desires and beliefs of different people. Searle suggests that the ultimate longings or desires of humans are not exposed to rational limitations and that the fact is that the desires are subjected to rationality in concrete reasoning which a matter is leading to human desire satisfaction. Other segments of classical model are; first, rationality is influenced by following rules, second, is that desires should be consistent and third is that the willpower can only emerge where psychological occurrences of actions are not correct (Searle, 2004). In seals book, he discusses these classical models in chapter one by arguing against them in a usual direct and rough way. Searle introduces the way the major concern of the book illustrates how assumptions and variances in decision-making is a matter of decision-making pre-assumption subjected to different reasons (Searle, 1992). He illustrates his viewpoint on the matter of decision making and how alternative theories are crucial to justify theories regarding decision-making and ideologies behind the matter.
The basic arrangement of intentions, actions, and ideas is discussed in chapter two of the book which lay some foundation for this originality. The chapter actually points out that the gaps in various endeavors pertaining satisfactions and direction of acceptance revolve around three major gaps. The first expiation is prior intentions to act and reasons behind the acts, second prior motives to act and intentions of the actions and third motivation behind the intentions to act and means of carrying out the intended action to the very end (Searle, 2004). Chapter three of Searle’s book is a continuation of chapter two discussing the stipulated gaps. The chapter illustrates that the intelligence behind what happens within the gaps encompasses a complex non-human impression of self-being. This impression requires consciousness, frequent persistence over time, operating under certain constraints of discretion, human idea of deciding upon starting and implementing certain actions under the presumption of free will as well as taking responsibility for some actions already undertaken (Searle, 2004). According to Searle, there is no justification upon actions undertaken by various people in different circumstances and the gaps explained does not provide a ground for determination of the actions neither does it provide enough clarification of it.
Chapter four of Searle’s book illustrates the rational structures of reasons. He argues that inter alia possess propositional arrangements and must be linked to the reasons they are for. Lastly, if the inter alia have to operate in a go-between deliberation and justify the action, they must participate in the entire justification process. However, if the reflection is to be rational, the interline should not differ with reasons emanating from external agents but rather believe and recognize the essential reasons. The chapter continues to explain that actions must involve at least few elements which act as motivators towards the action and the motivation may be internal, such desires or external as want, need or obligations to carry out the action (Searle, 1992). Therefore, rationality in decision-making entails acknowledgment of key motivators and assessment of their comparative weights, appreciation, and judgment of significant non-motivational details, as well as the justification of such grounds to explain certain reasons for actions.
Chapter five and six of Searle’s book illustrates the reasons behind certain actions. The author develops an argument that there are reasons that the majority may not desires. Certain motivators do not determine or fulfill obligations. He argues that language use entails a commitment to its wide applications and that it is applicable to oneself and the other. For instance, when it comes to a personal desire to gain or attain something, the need should extend to what others want or desire in a similar situation (Szasz, 2002). Accordingly, if my desires are determined by other people’s efforts to achieve them, then it is obvious that one should be motivated to help others to achieve their need and Searle in this chapter supports this fact. Searle goes ahead to mention that desires are personal and that everyone develops them and make commitments towards achieving them hence justifying that actions are personal driven since desires do not emanate from external sources but deep within humans (Searle, 2004).
Chapter seven of the book explains Searle’s position regarding various models. For instance, he emphasizes that the classical model does not consider ones will and how the weakness of the will affects one’s action. Chapter eight illustrates a clear message that there is no reasonable logic for real reasoning. In his book, he reveals his stand by the contrast he makes between rational relation between properties as well as the relationship between rational constrictions on belief. In chapter 9 of Searle’s book, he illustrates his viewpoint on the issue of free will. He implies that the reality of life gaps and certain actions entails psychological issues. He explains that the entire specification of psychological concerns is not enough to determine the outcome. He argues that real life gap as much as free will is concerned does not relate to neurobiological facts. In fact, the question about the relationship of neurobiological facts and how this Couse efficiency in humans remains unanswered since the whole issue is complex (Szasz, 2002).
In a nutshell, Searle’s book is straightforward and characteristically clear considering his arguments regarding specific issues such as free will and cause of actions which are major themes that run throughout the entire book. His argumentum is persuasive and justifiable in the manner in which he explains his viewpoint regarding the matter. However, his arguments may not be in harmony with various viewpoints due to the fact that there has to be varied opinions and reasons regarding the issue. The fact that he makes assumptions or presents his ideas regarding commitments as inner inclined motives, his sentiments do not respond fully to the question of how commitments and recognition determine motives for actions. It is not clear that the concept of the generality of language and how it affects actions is related.
In any event, it is reasonable to assume that situations that we can relate rationality to some of our needs do not fall or stand to opinions of Searle. Conversely, Searle ends up making a strong case for the notion that there exists no algorithm for any kind of practical rationality. Despite that, he sheds light on what makes satisfactory rational reasoning. What the author tries to insinuate is that in case there are no algorithms, the manner in which individuals executes their duties is what has the potential of explaining relevant motivators and other non-motivating facts of the current system. Also, it is crucial to distinguish superiors from inferior performances regarding the kind of work each person does. Some forms of guiding principles need not only in plausible hypothetical reasoning but also to be incorporated in practical reasoning. These are the main reasons that compel me to recommend this book for its entire contributions to the philosophy of concrete or practical reasoning.
We provide you with original essay samples, perfect formatting and styling
To export a reference to this article please select a referencing style below:
Sorry, copying is not allowed on our website. If you’d like this or any other sample, we’ll happily email it to you.
Attention! this essay is not unique. You can get 100% plagiarism FREE essay in 30sec
Sorry, we cannot unicalize this essay. You can order Unique paper and our professionals Rewrite it for you
Your essay sample has been sent.
Want us to write one just for you? We can custom edit this essay into an original, 100% plagiarism free essay.Order now
Are you interested in getting a customized paper?Check it out!