Brain bisection and the unity of consciousness.

Topic and The topic is Thomas Nagel’s paper “Brain bisection and the unity of consciousness.” In this paper, Nagel argues that certain empirical
results regarding split-brain patients call into question the idea of a single person, that is, the idea of a single subject of experience and
action. This idea found its paradigmatic expression in the Ego Theory of the self, according to which the self is simply an indivisible
subject. In your paper, you are asked to do two things:
1. Explicate Nagel’s argument against the idea that the self is a single subject of experience.
2. Articulate one objection to this argument.
1. You must follow the outline, given in the table below.
2. Try to describe Nagel’s argument in your own word, as far as possible. If you want to use quotes, make sure to keep them very short
– no longer than one line. Ideally, do not use outside sources.
3. Clearly indicate the parts of your paper. You can just write a number before the respective parts: 1, 2, 3, 4. (Just write the number in
front of the first paragraph of this part.)
Part 1: Introductory
Paragraph
In three or four sentences, announce the topic of your essay and tell your reader what you are going
to do in the rest of the essay.
5%
Part 2: Background Explain the claim that Nagel calls into question. (Nagel articulates this claim in the first paragraph of
the paper, but it is a bit hidden there. The clam is also clearly stated in the last section of the paper.)
It might be helpful to illustrate this claim with the Ego Theory as we discussed in class.
15%
Part 3: Empirical
evidence
Introduce the empirical data regarding split-brain cases that provide the basis for Nagel’s argument.
Try to explain these data to someone who has not heard about this. 15%
Part 4: Present Nagel’s
argument
Explain Nagel’s argument. Here I would like you to do the following:
1. State how Nagel aims to show that the idea of a single subject of experience is
problematic.
2. Explain why Nagel rejects both the one-mind hypothesis and the two-minds hypothesis.
Your explication of the argument should take up the largest part of your paper.
40%
Part 5: Objection Articulate one objection to Nagel’s argument. For example, you could target one of his criticisms of
the one-mind or the two-minds hypothesis. Make sure to explain to your reader why the objection
presents a problem for Nagel.
25%
Evaluation
Your paper will be graded according to the following criteria:
1. Accuracy: Are the views and positions in question described accurately?
2. Clarity: Are you using clear language? Are you using precise terms? Did you manage to avoid ambiguities?
3. Organization: Is your assignment well-organized? Do you understand how the main claims interact logically?
4. Writing policies. Have you followed the citation and quotation policy?
Citations
Please cite all readings (or external sources) that you use in the following way: at the end of the series of sentences in which you make
reference to that reading write (Author Date, Page) e.g. “(Huxley 1874, p.13)”. Any sources that are cited in the text must be listed in the
bibliography. Any readable and complete bibliography style is acceptable.

Last Completed Projects