The problem of Disjunction for Casual Approach to Mental Content

The approach of Casual is developed with the help of other representation of mind approach. In this approach, holds that the states of mind are about the world in the relationship of the advantage of representation that exists between the object and the state of the mental. Therefore, the casual approach of the mental content states that the representation of the world is the awareness of the mental with the aim of getting the relationship between the world and the mental. The philosophical understanding of the mental content is of all mental states, relations, properties events, and objects. The understanding of the problem of disjunction for the casual approach of mental content has been deeply demonstrated by Fred Dretske in article “Misrepresentation”.

The casual approach of the mental content in this case of the problem of disjunction have led to two difficulties: 1) the noticing of the interference of contents state representation. If an individual has a belief about “cats”, then the approach of casual indicates that the beliefs an individual possesses are always according to the property of a ‘skunk or cat’. 2) The problem of disjunction is likely to illustrate that the approach is difficult to account for the misrepresentation because the case of misrepresentation by a known state is the correct disjunctive property representation under the casual approach of the mental content. For instance, one always recognizes one’s mother at some place and believe “mother or other” is at that place.

Information representation In 1981, Fred Dretske came up with casual approach or theory which was most influential based on the information representation. In the terms that are more technical, the information receiver gets, carries the greatest amount of the information which is important for the source, which becomes simple to the condition of the receiver chances of obtaining the specific source condition to the receiver is taken to be one. This circumstance is summarized as;. The method is to simplify the way the receiver can identify the source of the information because there is assurance that is equal to one. The condition the source is in is the same that the receiver is in. In relation to the number of possible sources, the detailed message is not carried to the receiver state.

Dretske casual approach on the information representation must account for misrepresentation in it. The view of Fred Dretske at first is in accordance with a casual approach that is simple and the attention is restricted to the content of semantic (mental content). For an example, the mental representation of an individual that something ahead of the person is “awkward”. When the mental representation of the word AWKWARD in the person’s mind is being interfered with the word “anteater” and also in conjunction with other conditions of the environment apart from “awkward” or “anteater“. Given the symbolism of AWKWARD, the probability of the word being in the condition of the environment ahead of the person is less than one. The symbols of KS in the content-imbuing followed to the approach of casual and there is no misrepresentation of the known state.

The false representation of the known state KS as KSC symbolic is basically by content utilizing class. Therefore, the solution based on the two classes casework for mainly to differentiate the content utilizing and content imbuing classes and hence the fixing of representation of content is on the content imbuing class. The solution by Dretske, in this case, is satisfactory to the mental representation of content by differentiating the problem. The content representation of this two solution differ in the way content is represented to the mind of the individual as per the awareness of the world. The minds of people are held hostage in the physical world awareness and the states of minds. The mental representation concept and the physical state of the mental are things which include brain state that attains wrong information which are most likely not in the word (misrepresentation).