Viewing Thread:
"My Essay - I'll get thrown of the course for this."

*****
This essay 'The Problem of Other Minds' was meant to be in in January. However I avoided handing it in and now I have had the phonecalls and threats its time I did it. Keith is the main philosophy lecturer and Angela is the other one I have. Enjoy. I'll hand this in and probably get thrown. I don't care. Stupid idiots that they are.


*******

The problem of other minds arises from ideas by Descartes as to mental states of private nature. That is, that all the states of mind we are able to experience are totally private to us, and although another could observe our physical output, they could never know our mental states which aren't public. If this view is taken, how do we ever know about the minds of other people, or know if any minds exist apart from our own? How do I know what is happening in your mind if I can only ever access it from a third person perspective?

A simple way of answering this problem is that what we observe in other people is the mental state of that person, the behaviours we see are the mental states. It does seem like a very simple conclusion to the question,
what is does is take that mental states are no more than behaviour patterns.

We are human and we should except the fact that we can't know everything, we aren't built to do everything, and everytime we try to argue a topic about something of this magnitude we fail. I choose philosophy as a subject because I believed that I would be able to place forward my argument against great philosophers from the past, I would be able to argue my moral opinion in the hope to obtain more knowledge about subjects which I am not to clear on. Instead, its been about learning other peoples opinions or reading from a book every lesson where philosophers either form an argument which doesn't actually get them anywhere and they always end up in some pathetic vicious infinite regress. And you say something about 'Before you can have your own opinion, you should learn about these peoples opinions first'.

Whats that meant to mean? That they are more important? Oh yeah thats right! The dead dude who was gay and lived in a shack because he feared being killed by homophobes. Geeh, I really want to learn his way of life, he is not more important, sure he thought up a bunch of crap and his clever use of language allowed him to win your heart, but not mine. If you want me to start talking random crap I could go on for years, probably ending up in some circle. hey hey! Does that make me a philosopher now?


None of them can accept when they are wrong and I know I can accept when I am wrong and when I have to back down. Up until now I have tried to learn, and indeed I have learnt, Descartes was interesting, but all of the philosophers are just doing the same thing! Pathetically arguing with each other to know result. Philosophy will always live on, because you will never have an answer. In the future, I urge you to sell the subject to future students on what you actually will be doing in the course. Also, references to Star Trek every lesson do not help and as nobody under the age of 20 watches that terrible excuse for an entertainment program anymore its not worth it. If you are going to quote and use references to a program to a class of 17/18 year olds every year why not use The Simpsons? They always have some kinda debate.

I have my opinions, everyone is entitled to their opinions. Infact, a utilitarian would state that if an act is going to produce greater good for a greater number than that act should be carried out. This essay will probably upset you the reader, however the couple of phone calls home to my mum have really got to me. If you have something to say, why not call me into class or talk to me during lesson about it. The reason I didn't hand this essay in on time was that I didn't do it due to other commitments, and then when I went to start the essay I couldn't do it because I was just couldn't bring myself to type about something so painfully frustrating. Got damn. Why can't philosophers just accept we are human and we live, we shouldn't look for answers about how are mental states work, we should enjoy the time we have. What was going to happen anyway? You were going to mark it, and then give me a grade back and probably say to me 'You can do better', like you always do! What do you
mean? I can't do better on that handin because thats what I have been taught.

Hold on though, don't get me wrong, I have enjoyed the challenge of you always looking over to me to have my own opinion. I enjoyed being singled out by Angela and being made the class fool for a piece of work I had actually done when 40% of the rest of the class hadn't done. Infact. I enjoyed being called a 'piece of grit' by you in a lesson a while back. That was real fun. How about this? Next time you don't listen to my opinion or actually respect anything I say. I start standing up and getting all defensive back. Two weeks ago you laughed at me because I had my own opnion. Would you like it if I stood and laughed at you? You wouldn't expect that though would you? I am not to happy with myself in life as it is, I don't like to be reminded I am the different one every lesson by someone that barely knows me.

My opinion of the problem of other minds?

Its a problem which will never be answered. Nobody can remove the sceptical gap that remains. Its true we can never know what somebody is thinking inside. Yet we can assume a lot from personal experience. I can fake being happy. I can fake being in pain. The problem of other minds is that there are other minds in the first place.

The biggest fall of this pathetic race is communication. When we developed communication we all placed a hex on one another. Then through this communcation we developed religions. Religion is the reason we don't have peace.

Communication is the reason we have religion.

I am not saying I want to change the past or even who you or I am. I really want to pass this philosophy course and I will do my upmost best to do that. However, I don't miss lessons as you told my mum. I am mostly always there and when I do its for a LEGITIMATE reason. Even if thats 'I don't feel like it, I would be useless'. Which is apparently what I am anyways.

So here is my essay. Its not what you wanted. But its an essay. Also, I did start with the problems with other minds and give my own opinion. So I can't have failed it.

See you in class. Its a challenge teaching me I know. However, for me, its a challenge sitting their and not being able to voice my opinion as you don't listen and always ask your 'class' favorites.

Keith, its not war. Its me.

I thought it was pretty well written - I would admire you if you submitted it, but I think the best course of action could be to do two - one could be the standard run-of-the-mill essay to get you a good mark, and you can just hand in the other so the teacher knows how you feel.

It started alright, but then you went COMPLETELY off topic for no reason at all. If you're unhappy with teh course talk to your tutors or someone higher up - at least write a seperate essay, but don't confuse it with your actual work. I take philosophy too, and I can honestly say we haven't opened a single book all year. We get the odd photocopy handout of the important bits of what certain people have to say (Plato, Descartes, Berkeley etc) but that's it.

Your a brave man if you hand this in as coursework. You really get lecturers phoning your parents if you miss classes ? Wow, where I am we skip the odd one or two seminars when we know they will be pointless.

For anyone who doesnt know, seminar is the university description for a group of 8-20 people (depending on class size) doing a group activity like a discussion, in practice it's 60% of people having done no work for it, and the 40% who have didn't show for it anyway because the other 60% pi£$ them off.

~~Belldandy~~

Since I'm such a nice guy, here's a proofread:

The problem of other minds arises from ideas by Descartes as to mental states of private nature. That is, that all the states of mind we are able to experience are totally private to us, and although another could observe our physical output, they could never know our mental states which aren't public. If this view is taken, how do we ever know about the minds of other people, or know if any minds exist apart from our own? How do I know what is happening in your mind if I can only ever access it from a third person perspective?

A simple way of answering this problem is that what we observe in other people is the mental state of that person, the behaviours we see are the mental states. It does seem like a very simple conclusion to the question,
what it does is presume that mental states are no more than behaviour patterns.

(I don't know what to do in that last sentence, since I don't know what it was meant to say. I've changed as I think it's meant to be, you decide)

We are human and we should accept the fact that we can't know everything, we aren't built to do everything, and every time we try to argue a subject of this magnitude, we fail. I chose philosophy as a subject because I believed that I would be able to place forward my argument against great philosophers from the past, and that I would be able to argue my moral opinions in the hope to obtain more knowledge on what I'm not to clear on. Instead, its been about learning other people's opinions or reading from a book every lesson where philosophers form an argument which doesn't actually get them anywhere and they always end up in some pathetic vicious infinite regress. And you say something about 'Before you can have your own opinion, you should learn about these peoples opinions first'.

What's that meant to mean? That they are more important? Oh yeah, that's right! The dead homosexual who lived in a shack because he feared homophobes. Jesus, I really want to learn his way of life, and he is so much more important. Sure he thought up a bunch of crap and his clever use of language allowed him to win your heart, but not mine. If you want me to start talking random crap I could go on for years, probably ending up in some circle. Does that make me a philosopher now?

(I changed the sentence in the middle, which started as being caustic but then reverted to your own opinion midway)

None of them can accept when they are wrong, but I do know I can accept when I am wrong and when I should back down. Up until now I have tried to learn, and indeed I have learnt - Descartes was interesting, but all of the philosophers are just doing the same thing! Pathetically arguing with each other to no result. Philosophy will always live on, because you will never have an answer. In the future, I urge you to sell the subject to future students on what you actually will be doing in the course. Also, references to Star Trek every lesson do not help and as nobody under the age of 20 watches that terrible excuse for an entertainment program anymore, because it's not worth it. If you're going to quote and use references to TV culture, to a class of 17/18 year olds every year, why not use The Simpsons? They always have an underlying moral debate.

I have my opinions, and everyone is entitled to their opinions. In fact, a utilitarian would state that if an act is going to produce greater good for a greater number, then that act should be carried out. This essay will probably upset you, the reader, however the couple of phone calls home to my mother really got to me. If you have something to say, call me into class or talk to me during lesson about it. I didn't hand this essay in on time because I had other commitments, and when I did try to start the essay I couldn't do it because I was just couldn't bring myself to type about something so painfully frustrating. God damn it. Why can't philosophers just accept we are human and life is about living, not understanding. We shouldn't look for answers about how our mental states work; we should enjoy the time we have. What was going to happen anyway, if I had regurgitated the crap you'd spouted in class? You would mark it, give me a grade back, then probably tell me that I can do better. As always is the case. What the hell do you mean? I've put time and effort into comprehending what you've taught me, but according to you it's still not good enough.

But don't get me wrong, I have enjoyed the challenge of you always looking over to me to have my own opinion. I enjoyed being singled out by Angela and being made a fool in front of the class, for a piece of work most of the class hadn't yet done. In actual fact, I enjoyed being called a 'piece of grit' in a lesson a while back. That was really fun. How about this? Next time, ignore my opinion and show no respect to anything I say, and I'll stand up and defend myself. Two weeks ago you laughed at me because I had my own opnion. Would you like it if I stood and laughed at you? You wouldn't expect that, but find it acceptable to laugh at me? I am not to happy with myself in life as it is, I don't like to be reminded I am the different one every lesson by someone that barely knows me.

My opinion of the problem of other minds?

It's a problem which will never be answered. Nobody can remove the sceptical gap that remains. It's true we can never know what somebody is thinking inside. We can, however, assume a lot from personal experience. I can fake happiness. I can fake pain. The problem of other minds is that there are other minds in the first place.

The biggest fall of this pathetic race is communication. When we developed communication we all placed a hex on one another. Then through this communcation we developed religions. Religion is the reason we don't have peace.

Communication is the reason we have religion.

I am not saying I want to change the past or even who you or I am. I really want to pass this philosophy course and I will do my best to do that. However, I do not miss lessons, as you told my mother. If I'm able to attend, I will. Only with a legitimate reason will I miss a lesson. Even if thats 'I don't feel like it, I would be useless'. Which is apparently what I am anyways.

So here is my essay. It's not what you wanted, but it's an essay. And it is about the problems with other minds, and I gave my own opinion. So I can't have failed it, because you obviously have a problem with your mind, and that's what I've discussed.

So I'll see you in class. It might be a challenge teaching me, but it's even more of a challenge sitting there and suppressing my opinions while you play favourites with others in the class.

Keith, its not war. Its me.



I changed many of the sentence structures, but it's still basically the same. I felt some of the stuff could have been phrased better. Take it how you will, it was still very well done and a bold move. You can't fail for it, because it's following what you were told to do. Well done. :D

The only flaw, as far as passing the course with it, from what I can see is this.

University mark schemes incorporate how you've passed on your understanding and mastery of the information learned over the course. You're basically saying the course is wrong and focusing on that, especially the bit about the homophobe guy living in his hut. It's the way the course is done, and it's probably successful or they'd change how they do it. I think, and a I may be wrong, you have the same problem as I do for some of my modules.

Anything you really care about, and are interested in, makes a bad choice of module because most of the time lecturers still only present limited points of view, and thats what they are looking for in essay answers. Anything deivates from that limited view and they are really critical, and seeing as they have tons more knowledge than most students they can easily be overly critical and get away with it.

I did an essay about dependency theory and the third world for one last Xmas, and despite the fact the whole thing was referenced, it got a crap 60%, because the lecturer said most of it was factually wrong, by coincidence it said the exact opposite of her lectures..... I argued that dependency theory ( the idea that 3rd world was in a bad state because it was kept dependent on the 1st world, therefore if the 3rd world wanted to get better it had to cut those ties) was little more than a socialist theory designed in opposition to the dominant capitalist theories of the time, and that it was not a neutral theory, but one influenced by the USSR/Socialist countries. Every country trying this beloved theory she insisted worked, came to a bad end. But no, she still insists its flawless theory.....

~~Belldandy~~

I thought you did media, er-no?

Anyway, January ain't late. My mate and I were notorious for handing in projects late. Three months is my record. My mate has stuff due in at college from December of last year.

I like my philosophy teacher, he argues with us about anything. And he tells stories as though he's presenting Jackenory, which is always nice.

I liked Sociology, much more interesting. Would always argue with the posh, Oxford attending (he's there right now) son of a doctor about the working classes.

I have some very right wing views.

MoJoJoJo wrote:
> son of a doctor

Somehow you made that sound insulting.

He's just an upper class kid with a rich family who thinks he's above everyone else.