Talk:Object of the mind

Psychology Low‑importance

	Psychology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Philosophy: Logic / Mind C‑class Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

C

This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Logic
	Philosophy of mind

Psychiatric diagnosis[edit]

"Psychiatric diagnosis The notion that psychological problems are symptoms of a chemical imbalance is a conjecture based on incomplete evidence. Psychiatrists do not test for chemical balances or imbalances in the brain, nor is there any known such test. The etiology of psychopathology might be exclusively in the body, exclusively in the mind, or in some combination of both."

I agree with this, but it seems to be a non sequitur in the context. Is this perhaps implying that etiologies based on organic dysfunction are fictional in the sense that they are quackery? I'd agree with that too - to some extent - but I'm not sure it's NPOV and I'm not sure the context is appropriate. Matthew Platts 15:04, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No. Quackery is a pejorative term for bad medicine. An object of the mind is not false or fictional, simpy by being a mental object. Mental objects may be truthful or deceptive. "Quackery" is a POV term; "object of the mind" is a neutral term. Oneismany 20:09, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've changed the title of the subsection to 'Pseudoscience' and added a second example of the same kind. Oneismany 21:01, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mathematical objects[edit]

Query - the article seems to imply, incorrectly, that there is no such thing as a physical Mobius strip. Does anyone else think this is what's implied? Matthew Platts 15:09, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you think that this is what the article implies, please improve the article with more information about physical mobius strips. The point is supposed to be that there is this mathematical object, the mobius strip, which like a triangle or a circle, is an abstraction. Yes there are physical mobius strips, just as there are physical triangles and circles. But these things are not the abstraction. The 'perfect' circle or triangle or mobius strip which the math describes, is not physical. Oneismany 20:14, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've revised this section to reflect the above considerations. Discussion? Oneismany 21:25, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The article now seems to imply that klein bottles can be made from cutting and sticking paper, but need fewer or more dimentions to be held in the mind, when in fact the reverse is true. Does anyone else think this. If no one disagrees, I may re word the article (to start with the information about klein bottles is mathematicaly incorrect, let alone in a philosophical context.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.234.4.76 (talk) 02:19, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

By all means edit the article, please, if you are still interested.Oneismany (talk) 05:37, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pseudoscience[edit]

I am removing this section because it is contentious:

The notion that psychological problems are symptoms of a chemical imbalance is a conjecture based on incomplete evidence. Psychiatrists do not test for chemical balances or imbalances in the brain, nor is there any known such test. Is the etiology of psychopathology exclusively in the body, exclusively in the mind, or in some combination of both? Each hypothesis is a possibility.

I am removing this section because it is not very relevant:

The hypothesis of intelligent design promotes the notion that certain examples of complexity did not evolve by natural selection. The theory contends that some elements of the universe must have been caused by a designer or designers unknown. This theory is widely criticized for being unfalsifiable. Critics point out that science can offer no information about causes which cannot be tested, and contend that intelligent design theory has not offered any testable predictions. The conviction that this theory is true is often grouped with religious beliefs and other matters of opinion.

1Z 20:26, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unusual traffic spike[edit]

traffic report

This article got 100k views on two days. I wonder what the referral was. Blue Rasberry (talk) 14:49, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]