Journals / Kilikya Felsefe Dergisi / 2026 / Sayı: 1

An Analysis on McGinn’s Mysterianism: Reply to Erhan Demircioglu

Pages
11–18
Publication Date
2017-01-31
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

In this study by analysing McGinn’s mysterianism I show that no contradiction exists between the reasons why McGinn presented his cognitive closure thesis and the existence of a naturalist solution to the mind-body problem. 

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This paper discusses Erhan Demicioglu’s approach to McGinn’s mysterianism.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Demircioglu argues that the reasons why McGinn considers his cognitive closure idea to be true with respect to the solution of the mind-brain problem are not compatible with his claim about the existence of a naturalist solution to the mind-brain problem.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In this study by analysing McGinn’s mysterianism I show that no contradiction exists between the reasons why McGinn presented his cognitive closure thesis and the existence of a naturalist solution to the mind-body problem. 
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Bilişsel kapalılık · doğalcı çözüm · nesnel uzam

Abstract

This paper discusses Erhan Demicioglu’s approach to McGinn’s mysterianism. Demircioglu argues that the reasons why McGinn considers his cognitive closure idea to be true with respect to the solution of the mind-brain problem are not compatible with his claim about the existence of a naturalist solution to the mind-brain problem. However, I consider such a criticism to be the result of missing some important details in McGinn’s thesis on cognitive closure. In this study by analysing McGinn’s mysterianism I show that no contradiction exists between the reasons why McGinn presented his cognitive closure thesis and the existence of a naturalist solution to the mind-body problem. 

Özet

Bu makale Erhan Demircioğlu’nun McGinn’in gizemcilik görüşüne yaklaşımını tartışmaktadır. Demircioğlu’nun iddiası şudur ki; McGinn’in beden-zihin probleminin çözümüne ilişkin olan bilişsel kapalılık görüşünün doğruluğunu göstermek için öne sürdüğü gerekçeler, beden-zihin probleminin doğalcı bir çözümü olduğuna ilişkin görüşü ile çelişik durumdadır. Fakat ben bu gibi bir eleştirinin McGinn’in bilişsel kapalılık tezinde ortaya koyduğu bazı önemli detayların gözden kaçırılmasının bir sonucu olduğunu düşünmekteyim. Bu makalede McGinn’in gizemciliğini analiz ederek göstereceğim şey şudur ki; McGinn’in bilişsel kapalılık tezi için sunduğu nedenler ile beden-zihin probleminin doğalcı çözümünün varlığı arasında herhangi bir çelişki yoktur.

🔖

Cite This Article

Işıkgil, S. (2017). An Analysis on McGinn’s Mysterianism: Reply to Erhan Demircioglu. Kilikya Felsefe Dergisi, Sayı: 1, 11–18. https://ajindex.com/articles/1140263

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (8)

  1. Demircioglu, E. (2016). Against McGinn’s Mysterianism. Cilicia Journal of Philosophy, (1), pp: 1-10
  2. Işıkgil, S. (2016). A Study on McGinn’s Mysterianism. (Unpublished Master Thesis). METU/Graduate School of Social Sciences, Ankara. https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/
  3. McGinn, C. (1989). Can we solve the mind-body problem? Mind, 98 (391), 349-366.
  4. McGinn, C. (1991). The Problem of Consciousness: Essays toward a Resolution. Oxford: Blackwell
  5. McGinn, C. (1999). The Mysterious Flame: Conscious Minds in a Material World. New York: Basic Books
  6. McGinn, C. (1995). “Consciousness and Space”, in Conscious Experience, ed. T. Metzinger. Paderborn: Ferdinand Schöningh
  7. McGinn, C. (2004). Consciousness and its objects. New York: Oxford University Press
  8. Whiteley, C. H. (1990). McGinn on the Mind-Body Problem. Mind, 99: 289