Kind, Amy. “Consciousness, Personal Identity, and Immortality.” Routledge Handbook of Consciousness, edited by Rocco Gennaro. Routledge, 2018, pp. 11-23.
Abstract: Several different intersecting questions are in play in philosophical discussions of personal identity. One such question concerns the nature of persons: What makes someone a person? Another question concerns the nature of self-identification: What makes someone the particular person that she is? And yet a third question concerns the nature of a person's existence through time: What makes a person the same person over time? In this chapter we focus primarily on the third question and, in particular, the role that consciousness has played in philosophical attempts to answer it. We begin in Section I with the memory-based view of personal identity offered by John Locke. Though this view faces various objections, we turn in Section 2 to various adjustments that can be made to the view to make it considerably more plausible. In Section 3 we turn away from these psychologically-based approaches to physical alternatives. Finally, in Section 4 we turn to a consideration of how issues related to immortality help shed light on the debate about personal identity.
Kind, Amy. “How’d Imagination Become So Hot?” The Junkyard, May 9, 2018.
Kind, Amy. “How Imagination Gives Rise to Knowledge.” Perceptual Imagination and Perceptual Memory, edited by Fiona Macpherson and Fabian Dorsch. Oxford University Press, 2018, pp. 227-246.
Abstract: Though philosophers such as Wittgenstein and Sartre have dismissed imagination as epistemically irrelevant, in this paper I argue that there are numerous cases in which imagining can help to justify our contingent beliefs about the world. My argument proceeds by the consideration of case studies involving two particularly gifted imaginers, Nikola Tesla and Temple Grandin. Importantly, the lessons that we learn from these case studies are applicable to cases involving less gifted imaginers as well. Though not all imaginings will have justificatory power, I show how the sorts of cases in which imagining plays an epistemic role can be easily distinguished from the sorts of cases in which it does not.
Kind, Amy. “Imaginative Presence.” Phenomenal Presence, edited by Fabian Dorsch and Fiona Macpherson. Oxford University Press, 2018, pp. 165-180.
Abstract: When looking at an object, we perceive only its facing surface, yet we nonetheless perceptually experience the object as a three-dimensional whole. This gives us what Alva NoÃ« has called the problem of perceptual presence, i.e., the problem of accounting for the features of our perceptual experience that are present as absent. Although he proposes that we can best solve this problem by adopting an enactive view of perception, one according to which perceptual presence is to be explained in terms of the exercise of our sensorimotor capacities, I argue that this is a mistake. Rather, we can best account for presence in absence in terms of the exercise of our imaginative capacities.
Kind, Amy. “The Mind-Body Problem in 20th-Century Philosophy.” Philosophy of Mind in the Twentieth and Twenty-First Centuries, edited by Amy Kind. Routledge, 2018, pp. 52-77.
Abstract: This chapter takes a historical look at the progression of philosophical thought about the mind-body problem over the course of the 20th century, a period of time in which considerable attention was addressed to this problem and also in which considerable progress was made. The first three sections trace the development of physicalism about the mind with attention to three influential specifications of the theory: behaviorism, the identity theory, and functionalism. The fourth section explores the qualia-based threat to physicalism that arose in the last quarter of the century.
Kind, Amy, editor. Philosophy of Mind in the Twentieth and Twenty-First Centuries. Routledge, 2018.
Abstract: While the philosophical study of mind has always required philosophers to attend to the scientific developments of their day, from the twentieth century onwards it has been especially influenced and informed by psychology, neuroscience, and computer science. Philosophy of Mind in the Twentieth and Twenty-First Centuries provides an outstanding survey of the most prominent themes in twentieth-century and contemporary philosophy of mind. It also looks to the future, offering cautious predictions about developments in the field in the years to come. Essential reading for students and researchers in philosophy of mind and philosophy of psychology, Philosophy of Mind in the Twentieth and Twenty-First Centuries is also a valuable resource for those in related disciplines such as psychology and cognitive science.
Kind, Amy. Review of Blade Runner 2049, directed by Denis Villeneuve. The Philosopher’s Magazine, vol. 80, 2018, pp. 108-110.
Kind, Amy. “Twentieth-Century Philosophy of Mind: Themes, Problems, and Scientific Context.” Philosophy of Mind in the Twentieth and Twenty-First Centuries, edited by Amy Kind. Routledge, 2018, pp. 1-20.
Abstract: This introduction aims to provide some important background for the essays in this book by situating 20th-century of mind in a broader context and, in particular, in a scientific context. While the philosophical study of mind has always required philosophers to attend to the scientific developments of their day, philosophy of mind in the 20th century was especially influenced by such work - perhaps more so than at any other point in its history. The influence came largely from three different areas of research: psychology, neuroscience, and computer science. As psychologists came to attend more closely to the connection between mind and behavior, as scientists came to better understand neural function, and as the mid-century work of Alan Turing ushered in the computer revolution, our understanding of a diverse range of issues in philosophy of mind - and indeed, even our very approach to those issues - was deeply affected. In the first three sections of this introduction, I attempt to provide a brief overview of these three different areas of philosophically influential scientific research. Obviously, an introductory piece of this sort cannot provide anything even close to a comprehensive examination of such wide scientific terrain, but my selective discussion should nonetheless help to provide some important context for the essays of this volume. Thus, in the final section of this introduction, I turn to those essays themselves. There my aim will be twofold: first, to sketch the themes discussed in these chapters, and second, to highlight some of the interconnections between them.