Individual and Mental

Since Hegel’s Phenomenology of Spirit, a broad, inarticulate division of emphasis between the individual and his social environment has marked philosophical discussions of mind. On one hand, there is the traditional concern with the individual subject of mental states and events. In the elderly Cartesian tradition, the spotlight is on what exists or transpires ‘in’ the individual—his secret cogitations, his innate cognitive structures, his private perceptions and introspections, his grasping of ideas, concepts, or forms. More evidentially oriented movements, such as behaviorism and its liberalized progeny, have highlighted the individual’s publicly observable behavior—his input–output relations and the dispositions, states, or events that mediate them. But both Cartesian and behaviorist viewpoints tend to feature the individual subject. On the other hand, there is the Hegelian preoccupation with the role of social institutions in shaping the individual and the content of his thought. This tradition has dominated the Continent since Hegel. But it has found echoes in English-speaking philosophy during this century in the form of a concentration on language. Much philosophical work on language and mind has been in the interests of Cartesian or behaviorist viewpoints that I shall term ‘individualistic’. But many of Wittgenstein’s remarks about mental representation point up a social orientation that is discernible from his flirtations with behaviorism. And more recent work on the theory of reference has provided glimpses of the role of social cooperation in determining what an individual thinks.

In many respects, of course, these emphases within philosophy—individualistic and social—are compatible. To an extent, they may be regarded simply as different currents in the turbulent stream of ideas that has washed the intellectual landscape during the last hundred and some odd years. But the role of the social environment has received considerably less clear-headed philosophical attention (though perhaps not less philosophical attention) than the role of the states, occurrences, or acts in, on, or by the individual. Philosophical discussions of social factors have tended to be obscure, evocative, metaphorical, or platitudinous, or to be bent on establishing some large thesis about the course of history and the destiny of man. There remains much room for sharp delineation. I shall offer some considerations that stress social factors in descriptions of an individual’s mental phenomena. These considerations call into question individualistic presuppositions of several traditional and modern treatments of mind.

Foundation of  Mind : Philosophical Essays by TYLER BURGE

က်ေနာ္တို႔ေတြ ဘယ္အခ်ိန္ ဘယ္ကာလ ကတည္းက စျပီး စိတ္နဲ႔ ပတ္သက္လို႔ စိတ္ဝင္စား လာၾကသလဲ ။ အဲဒါကိုေတာ့ သိႏိုင္ေတာ့ဘူးေပါ့ေလ။ တကယ့္ ရာဇဝင္ သမိုင္းနဲ႔ ေခတ္သစ္ ဒႆနိကေဗဒ အရ လူေတြ စိတ္ အေၾကာင္းကို လူမွန္း သိတတ္တဲ့ အခ်ိန္က စျပီး သိလို ခဲ့ၾကတာပါ။ သိခ်င္ခဲ့ၾကတာ။

အလားတူ က်ေနာ္ေရာ စိတ္ဝင္စားတယ္။ ဂုဏ္ထူးဝိေသသ ပုဒ္ တပ္ရမယ္ဆိုရင္ အထူး ကို စိတ္ ဝင္စားတယ္။ ကိုယ့္စိတ္တြင္း ကိုယ္ျပန္ၾကည့္ရတဲ့ သေဘာ သဘာဝကို ၾကိဳက္တယ္။ အေလ့အက်င့္ ေမြးတယ္။ တစ္ဦးပုဂၢလနွင့္ စိတ္ေဗဒ သေဘာ၊ စိတ္အတြင္း ေကာက္ယူမႈ၊ စိတ္အတြင္း ျဖန္႔ေဝမႈ၊ အာရံုထိခိုက္မႈ။ ( က်ေနာ္ ဒီစကားလံုးေတြကို သံုးေတာ့…. ဓမၼစရိယဘက္က လူပုဂၢိဳလ္မ်ား စာသံေပသံနဲ႔ လာေျပာနိုင္မွာပါ။ “ဒါမ်ားကြာ ဗုဒၶ အဘိဓမၼာမွာ အက်ယ္တဝင့္ ရွိလြန္းလို႔” ဆိုျပီး ေျပာ ေကာင္း ေျပာပါလိမ့္မယ္ )  က်န္းဂန္ကို က်က္ေျပာတာ က်မ္းဂန္ စကားပဲ ျဖစ္မယ္ထင္ပါတယ္။ ကိုယ္ကိုယ္တိုင္လည္း ေဝဖန္စိစစ္ နိုင္ဖို႔ .. က်ေနာ္တို႔ေတြ ဝိပႆနာ ၊ ဘာဝနာ ၊ ကမၼ႒ာန္း မစီး ျဖန္းနို္င္ေသးသေရြ႕မွာ ( တစ္နည္းေျပာရင္ သူတို႔ ဆိုေနေလ့ရွိတဲ့ ဝိပႆနာဥာဏ္ဆိုတာ မၾကိဳးစားနိုင္ေသးခင္ၾကား )  သေဘာေပါက္ နားလည္ေအာင္ေတာ့ စိႏၱာမယနဲ႔ ၾကိဳးစားၾကည့္ၾကပါတယ္။  ဒီလို ၾကိဳးစားရာမွာ အေရွ႕တိုင္း  အေနာက္တိုင္း မခြဲျခား – လူကို လူလို ျမင္တဲ့ အျမင္နဲ႔…လူစိတ္ကို ခြဲျခမ္းစိတ္ျဖာေပးၾကတဲ့ လူသားမ်ားရဲ႕ စာကို က်ေနာ္တို႔ ဖတ္ၾကတယ္။ အခု အထက္မွာ တင္ထားတာက Foundation of Mind ဆိုတဲ့ ဒႆနိက စာတမ္းမ်ား ေရးသားထားတဲ့ က်မ္းတစ္ဆူထဲကပါ။ အေနာက္တိုင္း ဟန္ ပါေပမယ့္ သူတို႔လည္း သူတို႔ နည္း သူတို႔ဟန္ ၾကိဳးပမ္း နားလည္ဖို႔ ၾကိဳးစားထား ေၾကာင္း သိျမင္နိုင္ပါလိမ့္မယ္။

About zayya
Just Be. That's Enough! Shared words with Silence.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: