|
Homunculus argument or fallacy in the
philosophy of mind
A Homunculus argument accounts for a phenomenon in terms
of the very phenomenon that it is supposed to explain
(Richard Gregory (1987)). Homunculus arguments are
always fallacious. In the psychology and philosophy of
mind 'homunculus arguments' are extremely useful for
detecting where theories of mind fail or are incomplete.
Homunculus arguments are common in the theory of
vision. Imagine a person watching a movie. He sees the
images as something separate from himself, projected on
the screen. How is this done? A simple theory might
propose that the light from the screen forms an image on
the retinae in the eyes and something in the brain looks
at these as if they are the screen.
The Homunculus
Argument shows this is not a full explanation because
all that has been done is to place an entire person, or
homunculus, behind the eye who gazes at the retinae. A
more sophisticated argument might propose that the
images on the retinae are transferred to the visual
cortex where it is scanned.
Again this cannot be a full
explanation because all that has been done is to place a
little person in the brain behind the cortex. In the
theory of vision the Homunculus Argument invalidates
theories that do not explain 'projection', the
experience that the viewing point is separate from the
things that are seen. (Adapted from Gregory (1987),
(1990)).
Homunculus - Gilbert Ryle
|
