Mind And Nature-A Discussion On McDowell's View

Empiricism since Locke has this opinion:our knowledge comes from experience, and here the experience means sensory impression. By holding and abstracting this impression, we further acquire concept and knowledge. This point has been completely criticized by modern philosophy, because sensory impression and knowledge do not share the same nature. For us experience can only be non-cognitive knowledge. Yet this starts to challenge the substantial problem of the world revealed by our experience. In this background,McDowell's viewpoint has changed our understanding of experience and the world. He points out that, as for mature people, experience is conceptual itself. In modern philosophy, the concept of experience comes from understanding how the world influences the subject in perspective of natural science, however, this is a misunderstanding. As for individuals who are intellectually mature, the content of their experience is conceptual, including the function of norms. Therefore, our contact with the world can be called rational.According to McDowell, sensory experience is one example of a series of difficulties in front of modern philosophy. Modern philosophy can trace its series of difficulties to our natural concept. Influence of modern science causes a misunderstanding that nature is completely understood as the realm of science law, and as a meaningless world. Therefore we fail to find a place for mind and spontaneity in the world. Modern philosophy tries to make up this gap with various theories, in order to find a proper relationship between mind and nature. However, Sellas and Davidson's work tell us that any philosophy that seeking a medium between mind and nature for harmonious relationship is a kind of "Myth of the Given"(Sellars), because it ignores that norms and nature have different logical space. This expressed modern philosophy's danger that it was impossible for the mind to find a certain position in nature. McDowell's job is to reply to this. In order to avoid causing the spontaneity to become one kind to be different with the ordinary natural mystical domain, we need to naturalize the spontaneity. He reminds us that we should not forget our nature still includes the second nature. Here he means the conceptualized nature that concerns human's sensory experience. Because human's conceptual capacity has been expressed in nature, it can be the direct object of reason. In this way the relationship between mind and nature can be reframed. They share conceptual construction, and both belong to conceptual space. Therefore it is possible to understand that mind plays a reasonable role in our sense, think, and behavior.McDowell wants to show that the second nature belongs to logical space of reasons; it is the determinate shape of our rationality. Besides, spontaneity does not have independent position. To give examples of our spontaneity, it would be language, practice, the theoretical thinking, game, etc, all of which are part of the second nature. Therefore, we need not to build a possibility for mind in another place. As we make sure of the nature we have, we can find it in natural activities. He calls this idea "naturalism of second nature". He believes that after receiving this idea, we need not to search for relationship between mind and nature by using a special perspective, and philosophy will not have instant duty any more.