by ohthatpatrick Fri Dec 01, 2017 2:25 am
This is where things went awry with your read:
1. Introduciton of modular theory of mind and how xray is different from MRI
2. William says that modular theory of mind isn't right.
3 William can't be right since it wouldn't explain th well defined areas.
4. There is an obvious problem, but doens't this problem strengthen the theory of modular theory of mind?
Here are the important author-position moments for me:
1ST P
Using brain scans for MEDICAL reasons have "indubitable, straightforward value"
however (i.e. main point)
Using brain scans for PSYCHOLOGY is a "fundamentally different enterprise".
So the main point is that using brain scans in psychology has dubious, unclear value
Why is it such a shady enterprise?
"Its validity depends on a premise", a premise the author doesn't fully trust
2ndP
Line 15 is the author saying, "I don't think I buy this premise. They think mental life can be broken down to independent modules? I think it may in fact be that mental life isn't decomposable into independent modules."
So Uttal is brought up to SUPPORT the author's notion that the modular theory of mind is dubious.
In the 3rd P, the author is letting his enemies make THEIR objection. He's telling us what supporters of modular theory would be telling us right now. You want to hear our author distancing himself from the modular theory people in line 43 when he's saying, "[Their] reasoning, seemingly plausible, is that ..."
(But) "one immediately obvious (but usually overlooked) problem is that ...."
So in the 4th P, the author is now taking apart the modular theory's argument in the 3rd P. Line 50 ... "a FALSE impression" is given off by these scans.
Hope this helps.