Afterimages and Token Identity Theory Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Afterimages and Token Identity Theory - Essay Example I have just stared at a bright neon light bulb shaped like a cow for exactly one minute. When I close my eyes, I can see an afterimage of the cow, but it is changing colors and the shape is shifting somewhat. After a while, the image disappears entirely.To answer this question, there seems to be three logical positions for explaining what I see. First, there is the assertion that the afterimage doesn't exist at all. This position makes a certain amount of sense to me, because I understand that seeing requires the use of my eyes and that my eyes respond to light. If my eyes are closed, there is no light hitting them and I shouldn't be able see anything. This view is problematic for me, however, because I can still see the image before me. It may be changing colors and the shape may be shifting, but I can perceive it very clearly. If the image did not exist at all, then I wouldn't be able to see it. Therefore, since I can see it, it has to exist somewhere. The second position is that t he afterimage exists, but it isn't physical. I can accept this idea more easily than the first because it allows me to believe in the reality of what I see without having to prove that it exists in a physical sense. This view is also problematic, however, because it challenges my rationality; I am seeing the image when I shouldn't be able to. I can describe the changes in color and shape. Even though the image eventually goes away, I know that I continued to see it after I closed my eyes. I don't have a good explanation for why I can see it, however, because I know that it isn't physically possible for me to see it. To adopt this position, I have to explain why I can see something that is no longer there; and that isn't very logical. The third and final explanation for the afterimage is that it exists and that it is physical. On its face, this position gives me the most options for believing in the image that I see because I can attribute its reality to a physical process. Even thou gh I may not be able to explain exactly what is happening, this position allows me to assert that the image is real and that there is a rational physical or biological reason for it. Unfortunately, this position has its own difficulty with my understanding of vision. Even though I can describe the afterimage in terms of its shapes and colors, to assert that there is a physical reason violates what I know about the biological process of vision. I see with my eyes because light stimulates the nerves and those nerves transmit the image to my brain. If my eyes are closed, then I shouldn't be able to see anything because there is no light coming into my brain. Once I close my eyes, the neon cow cannot be truly seen because there is no more light being processed by my visual nerves. Determining the answer to this question is difficult because I have to balance what my eyes are seeing with what I know about vision. As Seager states in his discussion of token identity theory, "[t]he essential idea is that mental states are ascribed through the interpretation of behavior under the constraint of rationality" (54). My mental state of seeing the colored cow and interpreting its behavior is constrained by my own rational mind. My position. I will argue for position two, the view that the afterimage exists, but it is not physical. Even though this position has problems, I think this is the best explanation for the afterimage. First, the image exists for me. I see it, so that excludes position one, but there is no real physical reason to do so; which excludes