@ARTICLE{Marzęda_Witold_Weak_2020,
 author={Marzęda, Witold},
 number={No 3},
 journal={Przegląd Filozoficzny. Nowa Seria},
 pages={95-108},
 howpublished={online},
 year={2020},
 publisher={Komitet Nauk Filozoficznych PAN},
 publisher={Wydział Filozofii Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego},
 abstract={Weak mysterianism defines the situation in philosophy of mind in which we can neither formulate a solvable problem of consciousness nor prove that it is unsolvable. To develop the issue the author starts with a description of the theories and concepts described as mysterious. General mysterianism is a position in the philosophy of mind, according to which we are admittedly able to indicate scientific issues but cannot formulate them as scientific problems and thus solve them. These issues are called ‘mysteries’ by Noam Chomsky. The article presents several argumentation strategies typical for mysterian theories – evolutionary closure, autonomy of consciousness, and methodological mysterianism of William Seager. Each is subject to criticism, which shows that the mysterian argumentation is non-conclusive. It turns out, therefore, that the problem of mysteriousness is that indicating the possibility of mysteries in science does not entail a proof that we are dealing with specific mysteries (first and foremost the mystery of the mind).},
 type={Artykuły / Articles},
 title={Weak mysterianism – can we still talk about the mystery of mind?},
 URL={http://www.czasopisma.pan.pl/Content/117073/PDF/2020-03-PFIL-08-Marzeda.pdf},
 doi={10.24425/pfns.2020.133977},
 keywords={mysterianism, mind, consciousness, N. Chomsky, O. Flanagan, C. McGinn, W. Seager, philosophy of mind, methodological mysterianism, transcendental naturalism},
}