Ruh, Bilinç ve Zombiler: Metafizik Çıkmazlar ve Alternatif Yollar

Yıl 2024, , 172 - 205, 15.12.2024

Kayhan Özaykal

https://doi.org/10.58634/felsefedunyasi.1582240

Öz

Bu makale, zombiler örneği üzerinden metafizik ve fiziksel hakikat arasındaki ilişkiyi ele almaktadır. Felsefede zombi, fiziksel tüm açılardan insana benzeyen ancak bilinci olmayan bir organizmadır. Böyle bir varlığın mümkün olup olmadığı konusunda süregelen tartışmalar bulunmaktadır. Bu tartışmalar büyük ölçüde zombilerin tasavvur edilip edilemeyeceği meselesine bağlıdır ve bağlamda hayal veya tasavvur edilebilirliğin zorunlu olarak imkan anlamına geldiği fikri de çalışmada incelenmektedir. Tartışmalar, ruhun varlığı ve mahiyeti hakkındaki çalışmalar için de mühimdir. Genellikle zombilerin mümkün varlıklar olduğu görüşünü savunanlar düalist, mümkün olduklarını reddedenler ise materyalisttir. Bu çalışmada, tartışmada her iki tarafça kullanılan ana teorinin Kripke’nin mümkün dünyalar semantiği olması sebebiyle Kripke metafiziğine odaklanılmaktadır. Ancak burada Kripkeci metafiziğinin bu görüşlerin hiçbirinin doğruluğunu belirleyemeyeceği, çünkü gerekli türde bir zorunluluğu temellendiremeyeceği öne sürülmektedir. Böylece, literatürde temelden hatalı bir değerlendirme yapılmış gibi görünmektedir. Bunun yerine, geleneksel nedensel ve ontolojik türde bir metafiziğin daha etkili olacağı önerilmektedir ve özellikle bazı farklı nedensellik teorilerinin faydalı olacağı ileri sürülmektedir. Bu tür teorilerin konunun sonlandırıcı karara bağlanmasında etkili olabileceğini göstermek için gerçekçilik karşıtlığı, indeterminizm ve özellikle teistik iradecilik örneklerinden yararlanılmaktadır. Her teoride, zombi imkanını kesin olarak belirleyen cevaplar elde edilmektedir. Bu şekilde, bir materyalistin zombilerin mümkün varlıklar olduğunu kabul edebileceği görüşü ispatlanmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Düalizm, Materyalizm, Determinizm, Kripke, Zombi, Bilinç

The Soul, Consciousness and Zombies: Metaphysical Impasses and Alternative Paths

Öz

This article aims to discuss the relationship between metaphysical and physical reality through the example of zombies. Zombies in philosophy are beings that are considered to be exactly like us physically, but still lack consciousness. There is ongoing controversy on the possibility of the existence of such entities. This debate is largely dependent on whether a zombie is conceivable or not, and the idea that conceivability necessarily implies possibility is subject to intense scrutiny. The debate is also important for the debate on the existence and nature of the soul. Generally, those that defend the view that zombies are possible entities are dualists, while those that reject their possibility are materialists. In this study, we focus on the use of Kripke’s metaphysics, as his possible world semantics has been a main theory used in the debate by both sides. However, it is argued that Kripkean metaphysics is able to determine the truth of neither view, as it cannot ground the needed type of necessity. Thus, it appears that a major misstep has been made in the literature. Instead, it is proposed that a metaphysics of the traditional causal and ontological type will more effective, and it is suggested that certain different theories of causality will be crucial. We use specifically the examples of antirealism, indeterminism and especially theistic voluntarism, to show that such theories can decide the matter. In these cases, we gain answers that determine with certainty the possibility of zombies. In this way, we defend the view that a materialist can accept that zombies are possible existents.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Dualism, Materialism, Determinism, Kripke, Zombie, Consciousness

Kaynakça

• Alter, Torin ve Yujin Nagasawa, eds. Consciousness in the Physical World: Perspectives on Russellian Monism. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015.
• Alter, Torin. “A Limited Defense of The Knowledge Argument.” Philosophical Studies 90, no. 1 (1998): 35-56.
• Balaguer, Mark. “Why There Are No Good Arguments for any Interesting Version of Determinism.” Synthese 168 (2009): 1-21.
• Bayne, Steven R. “Kripke’s Cartesian Argument.” Philosophia 18, no. 2-3 (1988): 265-270.
• Botterell, Andrew. “Conceiving What is Not There.” Journal of Consciousness Studies 8, no. 8 (2001): 21-42.
• Brown, Richard. “Deprioritizing the A Priori Arguments Against Physicalism.” Journal of Consciousness Studies 17, no. 3-4 (2010): 47-69.
• Campbell Douglas, Jack Copeland and Zhuo-Ran Deng. “The Inconceivable Popularity of Conceivability Arguments.” The Philosophical Quarterly 67, no. 267 (2017): 223-240.
• Chalmers, David J. The Conscious Mind: In Search of a Fundamental Theory. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996.
• Chalmers, David J. The Character of Consciousness. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010.
• Chisholm, Roderick. “Human Freedom and the Self.” Lindley Lecture delivered at the University of Kansas, 1964. Mükerrer basım, Free Will içinde ed. Gary Watson, 24- 35. New York: Oxford University Press, 1982.
• Çelebi, İlyas. “Sünnetullah.” Türkiye Diyanet Vakfı İslâm Ansiklopedisi, 38. cilt, 159- 160. Ankara: TDV Yayınları, 2010.
• Dennet, Daniel C. Consciousness Explained. New York: Back Bay Books, 1991. Fakhry, Majid. Islamic Occasionalism: And its Critique by Averroes and Aquinas. London and New York: Routledge, 2008.
• Frankish, Keith. “The Anti-Zombie Argument.” Philosophical Quarterly 57 (2007): 650–666.
• Giere, Ronald N. Science Without Laws. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999.
• Geirsson, Heimir. “Conceivability and Coherence: A Skeptical View of Zombies.” Erkenntnis 79, no. 1 (2014): 211-225.
• Hart, Wilbur Dyre. Engines of the Soul. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988. Hill, Christopher S. “Imaginability, Conceivability, Possibility and the Mind-Body Problem.” Philosophical Studies 87 (1997): 61-85.
• Hill, Christopher S. and Mclaughlin, Brian P. “Review of There are Fewer Things in Reality Than are Dreamt of in Chalmers’s Philosophy.” Philosophy and Phenome- nological Research 59, no. 2 (1999): 445-454.
• İbn Sînâ, Kitabu’ş-Şifa: Metafizik I. çev. Ekrem Demirli ve Ömer Türker, İstanbul: Litera Yayıncılık, 2004.
• Jackson, Frank. “A Note on Physicalism and Heat.” Australasian Journal of Philosophy 58 (1980): 26-34.
• Jackson, Frank. “The Case for A Priori Physicalism.” Philosophy-Science-Scientific Philosophy: Main Lectures and Colloquia of GAP. 5, Fifth International Congress of the Society for Analytical Philosophy, Bielefeld, 22-26 September 2003, ed. C. Nimitz and A. Beckermann, 251-265. Paderborn: Mentis, 2005.
• Kripke, Saul. Naming and Necessity. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1980.
• Jackson, Frank. “Epiphenomenal Qualia.” The Philosophical Quarterly 32, no. 127 (1982): 127-136.
• Jackson, Frank. “What Mary Didn’t Know.” The Journal of Philosophy 83, no. 5 (1986): 291-295.
• Kaya, Mahmut. “Mugalata”. Türkiye Diyanet Vakfı İslâm Ansiklopedisi, 30. cilt, 371. Ankara: TDV Yayınları, 2020.
• Kirk, Robert. “Sentience and Behaviour.” Mind 83, no. 329 (1974): 43-60.
• Kripke, Saul. Reference and Existence: The John Locke Lectures. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013.
• Kung, Peter. “Imagining as a Guide to Possibility.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 8 (2010): 620-633.
• Kung, Peter. “You Really do Imagine It: Against Error Theories of Imagination.” Noûs 50 (2016): 90-120.
• Locke, Don. “Zombies, Schizophrenics, and Purely Physical Objects”, Mind 85, no. 337 (1976): 97-99.
• Look, Brandon C. “Simplicity of Substance in Leibniz, Wolff and Baumgarten.” Studia Leibnitiana 45, no. 2 (2013): 191-208.
• Loptson, Peter. “Was Leibniz an Idealist?” Philosophy 74, no. 289 (1999): 361-385. Marton, Peter. “Zombies versus Materialists: The Battle for Conceivability.” Southwest Philosophy Review 14, no. 1 (1998): 131-138.
• Montero, Barbara Gail. “Russellian Physicalism.” Consciousness in the Physical World: Perspectives on Russellian Monism içinde, ed. Torin Alter and Yujin Nagasawa, 209-223. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015.
• Mumford, Stephen. Laws in Nature. London: Routledge, 2004.
• Nagel, Thomas. “What Is It Like to Be a Bat?” Philosophical Review 83 (1974): 435-450.
• Nagel, Thomas. “Conceiving the Impossible and the Mind-Body Problem.” Philosophy 73, no. 285 (1998): 337-352.
• Onur, Ferhat. “Bilinç Neden Var: Teleo-İşlevsel Bir Analiz.” MetaZihin: Yapay Zeka ve Zihin Felsefesi Dergisi 2, no. 2 (2019): 213-230.
• Papineau, David. Thinking about Consciousness. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2002.
• Pelczar, Michael. “Modal Arguments Against Materialism.” Noûs (2019): 1-19.
• Pereboom, Derk. Consciousness and the Prospects of Physicalism. New York: Oxford University Press, 2011.
• Pereboom, Derk. “Consciousness, Physicalism, and Absolutely Intrinsic Properties.” Consciousness in the Physical World: Perspectives on Russellian Monism içinde, ed. Torin Alter ve Yujin Nagasawa, 300-323. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015).
• Searle, John. “Minds, Brains and Programs.” Behavioral and Brain Sciences 3 (1980): 417-424.
• Smithies, Declan. “The Mental Lives of Zombies.” Philosophical Perspectives 26 (2012): 343-372.
• Spinoza, Baruch. Ethica: Geometrik Yöntemle Kanıtlanmış ve Beş Bölüme Ayrılmış Ahlak. cev. Çiğdem Dürüşken. İstanbul: Kabalcı, 2011.
• Stoljar, Daniel. “Physicalism and the Necessary a Posteriori.” The Journal of Philosophy 97, no. 1 (2000): 33-54.
• Stoljar, Daniel. “Two Conceptions of the Physical”, Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 62, no. 2, (2001): 253-281.
• Stoljar, Daniel. “The Conceivability Argument and Two Conceptions of the Physical.” Philosophical Perspectives, 15. Cilt, içinde, ed. James E. Tomberlin, 393-413. Oxford: Blackwell, 2001.
• Turing, Alan M. “Computing Machinery and Intelligence.” Mind 59, no. 236 (1950): 433-460.
• Webster, William R. “Human Zombies are Metaphysically Impossible.” Synthese 151 (2006): 297-310.
• Wright, Crispin. “The Conceivability of Naturalism.” Conceivability and Possibility içinde, ed. Tamar Szabó Gendler ve John Hawthorne, 401-439. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2002.
• Yablo, Stephen. “Concepts and Consciousness.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 59, no. 2 (1999): 455-463.
• Yablo, Stephen. “Is Conceivability a Guide to Possibility?” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 53, no. 1 (1993): 1-42.
• Yavuz, Yusuf Şevki. “Ruh.” Türkiye Diyanet Vakfı İslam Ansiklopedisi, 35. cilt, 197-199. Ankara: TDV Yayınları, 2018.