1. What is the difference between the phenomenal and psychological concepts of mind?

Which
is he more interested in analyzing, and why does it lead to a distinction between what he
would call a "hard" problem and an "easy" problem of analyzing consciousness?

The phenomenal concept is the idea of the mind as a conscious experience, and the mental
state being a consciously experienced mental state. The psychological concept that the
mind is simply the causal state for observed behavior. He believes the phenomenal concept
is the “hard question” because it is observable, but does not make as much intuitive sense
as the psychological concept.

2. Given what Dennett says about Joycean machines in Chapter 9 of Consciousness

Explained, what do you think he would say about Chalmers' distinction? From what you've
read, what would Chalmers say to Dennett?

Dennett would likely say that Chalmers is making a single question two questions for no
reason, and Chalmers would say that Dennett has only answered the easy question of
consciousness.

3. Chalmers thinks that everyday mental concepts can be understood in part by whether the
phenomenal aspect plays a key role in understanding that concept or a minimal role. Name
one mental concept where the phenomenal plays a major role, and one that plays a
minimal role, and explain the difference and why it makes sense using your examples.

A concept that requires phenomenology to understand is pain. You can describe it in an

academic sense, but to really understand what it is you need to experience it firsthand. At
the other end of the scale is math, a concept requiring almost no phenomenology to
understand, as it has no feel, it is just a set of rules.

4. Chalmers defines supervenience using this definition:

B-properties supervene on A-properties if no two possible situations are identical with respect to
their A-properties while differing in their B-properties.

4a. Explain what that means in general.

Supervening means that one set of facts can determine another set of facts, such as the numbers
being added together determining the sum.

4b. Explain what that means using local supervenience

Local supervenience is supervenience that is reliant on context outside of the object itself. The
example given that while a replica of the Mona Lisa may be identical, they are not worth the same
amount due to historical context.

4c. Explain what that means using global supervenience

Global supervenience is supervenience that holds everywhere and in all contexts. There is no
situation possible where 2+2 does not equal 4.

4d. Explain what that means using logical supervenience

B- properties supervine logically on A- properties. For example, there cannot be a female bull in
any conceptual situation, because Bulls are, by definition, male.

4e. Explain what that means using natural supervenience

A situation has natural supervenience when B – properties naturally supervine on A – properties,

there can be no situation where two identical volumes of water in an identical situation at identical
temperatures can be in different phases of matter, for example.

4. What is a reductive explanation? How does it work?

A reductive explanation is an explanation that resolves difficult questions by pulling them

apart into smaller, more easily defined concepts that give rise to the greater concept. For
instance, heat is explained by reducing heat into kinetic energy carried by molecules in the
air.

5. What is the relationship between supervenience and reduction? If X is reductively

explainable in terms of Y, does that imply that X stands in a certain relationship of
supervenience to Y? Explain.

To explain something reductively, you are operating on an assumption that the things you
are reducing the problem to are supervining on the outcome. To go back to a simple math
example, 1+1=2, and so 2 is reducible as a function of 1. If you modified the ones in the
original problem, the answer would not be 2.