More handpicked essays just for you.
Reflection of the philosopher rene Descartes
Reflection of the philosopher rene Descartes
Reflection of the philosopher rene Descartes
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Identity Theory vs. Dualism: The Nature of the Mind
In this paper, I will argue that the materialistic approach of the identity theory to the mind/body problem gives a better account of the nature of the mind than René Descartes’ theory of dualism. These two theories take opposite stands when trying to explain the nature of the mind: dualism holds that the mind and the body are different entities; the body/brain being of physical nature, whereas the mind being non-physical. In contrast, the identity theory says that the mind and the brain are the same, and that the terminology that we use to describe them refer to the same thing (Sober, 204). In this essay, I will outline Descartes’ argument of indivisibility and indubitable existence, and
Although we might not fully understand the linear relationship between what we call mental states to its physical-state-equivalent, it does not follow that they are not the same.
Descartes’ use of Leibniz’s law
Descartes’ arguments for dualism rely on Leibniz’s law, which says that if ‘a’ and ‘b’ are identical, then they must have all the same properties (Sober, 206). What this means, is that Descartes only needs to show that the mind and the body do not share one single property, to be able to conclude that they are different things. He does this in both the argument of indubitable existence and the argument of indivisibility.
Indivisibility argument
In this argument, Descartes’ uses Leibniz’s law to show that the mind lacks the ability of being divided, which the body possesses, and thus is different from the body. The idea here concerns the ability to occupy space in the physical world. Descartes’ points out that a surgeon can divide the brain into pieces but nobody can’t do that to the mind, since the mind is not placed in space, thus cannot be divided. But how do we know that the mind is not indeed able to be divided? According to Elliot Sober, this argument begs the question since we cannot accept that the premise is true unless you already accept the conclusion that the body and the mind are different
He argues that a person can entertain the thought of not having a body, but not the thought of not having a mind. Take for example those people who claim to be able to perform astral projection, whether this is possible or not does not concern us, but rather the fact that such person is at least able to think of its ‘soul’ or internal essence separating from her/his body. In contrast, if you try to image yourself without a mind, you should not be able to have mental states, such as thinking, but you are thinking, which shows that you are in a mental state; thus, have a mind. Therefore, we can see that we can doubt having a body but we cannot doubt having a mind, and as per Leibniz’s law we can conclude that they are different since they do not share all the same properties. Although it seems that this argument succeeds at showing that the mind and body are different, Sober points out a weakness in the argument concerning propositional attitudes. He says that doubting is an attitude that we have towards propositions. Therefore, it does not follow that the object of the first proposition is different from the one of the second (Sober,
Descartes claims there is a real distinction between the mind and body. In the Second Meditation the Meditator establishes his existence, that he is a thinking thing and the distinction between the mind and body. Descartes claims he is a thinking thing and since he can think he exists, same too with the mind. The mind is a thing that thinks therefore the mind exists. Using the method of doubt discussed in the First Meditation, Descartes is able to doubt the existence of the body but not the mind. Descartes cannot doubt that he has a mind , but can doubt he has a body therefore Descartes is a thinking thing and not a body. He can exists as a thinking thing without a body because the body's existence can be doubted.
The differences of mind and soul have intrigued mankind since the dawn of time, Rene Descartes, Thomas Nagel, and Plato have addressed the differences between mind and matter. Does the soul remain despite the demise of its material extension? Is the soul immaterial? Are bodies, but a mere extension of forms in the physical world? Descartes, Nagel, and Plato agree that the immaterial soul and the physical body are distinct entities.
1. "RENÉ DESCARTES AND THE LEGACY OF MIND/BODY DUALISM." Rene Descartes and the Legacy of Mind/Body Dualism. Web. . .
However, Descartes claims that the mind and body have been created separated without good reason. This point is not shown clearly, and further, although I can conceive of my own mind existing independently of my body, it does not necessarily exist as so. On page 56, when Descartes talks about how sailors are related to ships and why the mind body union is different, he is vague on the metaphorical analogy. To try to get his point across, dualism is used.
Every since Plato introduced the idea of dualism thousands of years ago meta-physicians have been faced with the mind-body problem. Even so Plato idea of dualism did not become a major issue of debate in the philosophical world until the seventeenth century when French philosopher Rene Descartes publicized his ideas concerning the mental and physical world. During this paper, I will analyze the issue of individuation and identity in Descartes’ philosophical view of the mind-body dualism. I will first start by explaining the structure of Cartesian dualism. I will also analyze the challenges of individuation and identity as they interact with Descartes. With a bit of luck, subsequently breaking down Descartes’ reasoning and later on offering my response, I can present wit a high degree of confidence that the problems of individuation and identity offer a hindrance to the Cartesians’ principle of mind-body dualism. I give a critical analysis of these two problems, I will first explain the basis of Descartes’ philosophical views.
The purpose of this essay is to discuss how dualism describes reality more accurate than materialism, idealism, and transcendental idealism. Even though dualism doesn’t describe reality one hundred percent just like the other theories about the nature of reality, it is the most accurate argument out of the four major theories about the nature of reality and substance. Dualism was a concept that was not originated by Rene Descartes but coined by him. The concept was that our mind is more than just our brain. The concept was not originated by Rene Descartes because the Bible explains that we are more than our body and brains. It teaches that we have a separate mind, soul, and spirit. One argument for dualism is that the physical and mental territories have different properties. The mental events have qualities such as what does it feel like, what does it look like, or what it sounds like. Another argument is the lack of any understanding of how any possible reaction can take place between the mind and brain. The essay will include reasons for favoring the Thomistic and Cartesian forms of substance dualism and the counter arguments that are against them.
Descartes makes a careful examination of what is involved in the recognition of a specific physical object, like a piece of wax. By first describing the wax in a manner such that “everything is present in the wax that appears needed to enable a body to be known as distinctly as possible” (67), he shows how easily our senses help to conceive our perception of the body. But even if such attributes are modified or removed, we still recognize the changed form, as the same piece of wax. This validates Descartes’ claim that “wax itself never really is the sweetness of the honey, nor the fragrance of the flowers, nor the whiteness, nor the shape, nor the sound” (67), and the only certain knowledge we gain of the wax is that “it is something extended, flexible, and mutable” (67). This conclusion forces us to realize that it is difficult to understand the true nature of the wax, and its identity is indistinguishable from other things that have the same qualities as the wax. After confirming the nature of a human mind is “a thinking thing” (65), Descartes continues that the nature of human mind is better known than the nature of the body.
René Descartes was the 17th century, French philosopher responsible for many well-known philosophical arguments, such as Cartesian dualism. Briefly discussed previously, according to dualism, brains and the bodies are physical things; the mind, which is a nonphysical object, is distinct from both the brain and from all other body parts (Sober 204). Sober makes a point to note Descartes never denied that there are causal interactions between mental and physical aspects (such as medication healing ailments), and this recognition di...
One of the ways in which Descartes attempts to prove that the mind is distinct from the body is through his claim that the mind occupies no physical space and is an entity with which people think, while the body is a physical entity and cannot serve as a mechanism for thought. [1]
While the great philosophical distinction between mind and body in western thought can be traced to the Greeks, it is to the influential work of René Descartes, French mathematician, philosopher, and physiologist, that we owe the first systematic account of the mind/body relationship. As the 19th century progressed, the problem of the relationship of mind to brain became ever more pressing.
In Meditation Six entitled “Concerning the Existence of Material Things, and Real Distinction between the Mind and Body”, one important thing Descartes explores is the relationship between the mind and body. Descartes believes the mind and body are separated and they are two difference substances. He believes this to be clearly and distinctly true which is a Cartesian quality for true knowledge. I, on the other hand, disagree that the mind and body are separate and that the mind can exist without the body. First, I will present Descartes position on mind/body dualism and his proof for such ideas. Secondly, I will discuss why I think his argument is weak and offer my own ideas that dispute his reasoning while I keep in mind how he might dispute my argument.
Descartes is a very well-known philosopher and has influenced much of modern philosophy. He is also commonly held as the father of the mind-body problem, thus any paper covering the major answers of the problem would not be complete without covering his argument. It is in Descartes’ most famous work, Meditations, that he gives his view for dualism. Descartes holds that mind and body are com...
Ryle, in his seminal work, The Concept of Mind, begins by stating the official doctrine of Cartesian dualism, “which hails chiefly from Descartes, is something like this. With the doubtful exception of idiots and infants in arms every human being has a body and mind. Some would prefer to say that every human being is both a body and a mind. His body and his mind are ordinarily harnessed together,...
But, “human persons have an ‘inner’ dimension that is just as important as the ‘outer’ embodiment” (Cortez, 71). The “inner” element cannot be wholly explained by the “outer” embodiment, but it does give rise to inimitable facets of the human life, such as human dignity and personal identity. The mind-body problem entails two theories, dualism and physicalism. Dualism contends that distinct mental and physical realms exist, and they both must be taken into account. Its counterpart (weak) physicalism views the human as being completely bodily and physical, encompassing no non-physical, or spiritual, substances.
Gilbert Ryle’s The Concept of Mind (1949) is a critique of the notion that the mind is distinct from the body, and is a rejection of the philosophical theory that mental states are distinct from physical states. Ryle argues that the traditional approach to the relation of mind and body (i.e., the approach which is taken by the philosophy of Descartes) assumes that there is a basic distinction between Mind and Matter. According to Ryle, this assumption is a basic 'category-mistake,' because it attempts to analyze the relation betwen 'mind' and 'body' as if they were terms of the same logical category. Furthermore, Ryle argues that traditional Idealism makes a basic 'category-mistake' by trying to reduce physical reality to the same status as mental reality, and that Materialism makes a basic 'category-mistake' by trying to reduce mental reality to the same status as physical reality.