Thesis For Mary's Room
The epistemic physicalist thesis ‘Mary’s Room’ is a theory based on knowledge that argues against physicalism that was developed by Frank Jackson. Physicalism is the view that the universe, including all that is mental, is entirely physical. The main goal of Mary’s Room theory is to try to establish that there are non-physical properties and attainable knowledge that can be discovered only though conscious experience. In this thought experiment, Mary is described as a very intelligent scientist who is forced to experience the world in a room, from a black and white television monitor. She has never directly experienced color in her entire life although she is capable of such. Through books and a variety of other mediums, Mary learns all she
needs to know about the perception of color in the brain, as well as all of the physical facts about how light works in order to create the different color wavelengths. After all of Mary’s studies on color perception in the brain are complete, she finally leaves this black and white filled room and for the very first time and experiences direct color perception. She, then, sees the color red for the first time, and learns something new about it which is what red actually looks like.
Jackson now concludes that if physicalism were true, then Mary should have gained total knowledge about color perception by examining the physical world. However, since there is something that she learns after she leaves the room, physicalism is false. Jackson stated that since it is basically obvious that Mary will learn something about the world and our visual experience, it is then inevitable that her knowledge prior to leaving the room was incomplete. However, she had all of the physical information. Therefore there is more that she must have than simply that which led him to believe that physicalism is false.
After further review, Frank Jackson reversed him stance on this argument because the knowledge argument and the Mary’s Room experiment are thought to be deeply rooted in our intuitions about the matter, but science can give us other explanations for the apparent conflict. Because of this, I do believe that in some aspects the dualist does not succeed in undermining physicalism because if we were to deny the knowledge intuition, based on the Mary case, doing so requires rejecting the complete-knowledge claim, the learning claim, or the non-deducibility claim. The complete-knowledge claim in this case is saying that before leaving the room, Mary knows everything physical. The learning claim is saying that upon leaving the room, Mary learns something new and the non-deducibility claim is saying that if both the complete-knowledge claim and the learning claim are true, then what Mary learns when she leaves the room cannot be a determined by reason alone from the complete physical truth.
However, we can really examine the reasoning behind why physicalism is indeed false. We know that while she is still in the room, Mary has all of the physical information there is to know about other people and their experiences. We can attest to the fact that when Mary leaves the room and sees the color red for the first time, she now learns something new about other people. She learns what their experiences of red are like. Thus, she gains knowledge about what qualitative features their experiences have. So, while she was still in the room, Mary did not have complete knowledge, there was some knowledge that she lacked. She did not know everything of other people’s experiences. She did have some fact about other people’s experiences however it was not captured by the physical information about others, it is a non-physical fact.
We must take into account that the knowledge that Mary lacks while in the room and then gains upon leaving the room is knowledge about our experiences and what they are like. The argument still remains whether or not Mary could have known all of the facts about our experiences while still being in the room.
needs to know about the perception of color in the brain, as well as all of the physical facts about how light works in order to create the different color wavelengths. After all of Mary’s studies on color perception in the brain are complete, she finally leaves this black and white filled room and for the very first time and experiences direct color perception. She, then, sees the color red for the first time, and learns something new about it which is what red actually looks like.
Jackson now concludes that if physicalism were true, then Mary should have gained total knowledge about color perception by examining the physical world. However, since there is something that she learns after she leaves the room, physicalism is false. Jackson stated that since it is basically obvious that Mary will learn something about the world and our visual experience, it is then inevitable that her knowledge prior to leaving the room was incomplete. However, she had all of the physical information. Therefore there is more that she must have than simply that which led him to believe that physicalism is false.
After further review, Frank Jackson reversed him stance on this argument because the knowledge argument and the Mary’s Room experiment are thought to be deeply rooted in our intuitions about the matter, but science can give us other explanations for the apparent conflict. Because of this, I do believe that in some aspects the dualist does not succeed in undermining physicalism because if we were to deny the knowledge intuition, based on the Mary case, doing so requires rejecting the complete-knowledge claim, the learning claim, or the non-deducibility claim. The complete-knowledge claim in this case is saying that before leaving the room, Mary knows everything physical. The learning claim is saying that upon leaving the room, Mary learns something new and the non-deducibility claim is saying that if both the complete-knowledge claim and the learning claim are true, then what Mary learns when she leaves the room cannot be a determined by reason alone from the complete physical truth.
However, we can really examine the reasoning behind why physicalism is indeed false. We know that while she is still in the room, Mary has all of the physical information there is to know about other people and their experiences. We can attest to the fact that when Mary leaves the room and sees the color red for the first time, she now learns something new about other people. She learns what their experiences of red are like. Thus, she gains knowledge about what qualitative features their experiences have. So, while she was still in the room, Mary did not have complete knowledge, there was some knowledge that she lacked. She did not know everything of other people’s experiences. She did have some fact about other people’s experiences however it was not captured by the physical information about others, it is a non-physical fact.
We must take into account that the knowledge that Mary lacks while in the room and then gains upon leaving the room is knowledge about our experiences and what they are like. The argument still remains whether or not Mary could have known all of the facts about our experiences while still being in the room.