Pros And Cons Of Cartesian Materialism

1408 Words3 Pages

In their article, Dennett and Kinsbourne (1992) discuss Cartesian Materialism and compare it to the Multiple Drafts Model. They try to point out issues with Cartesian Materialism to prove that their model (The Multiple Drafts Model) is superior. I believe that Multiple Drafts Model is better than Cartesian Materialism because it is better at dealing with the experiential anomalies. However, I believe that it possess issues and does not suffice as a model of consciousness. I find the Multiple Drafts Model to be problematic because it does not account for phenomenal consciousness, the possibility of multiple Cartesian Theatres and the possibility of information integration. What do Dennett and Kinsbourne (D&K) mean by “Cartesian materialism” and the “Cartesian Theater”? Cartesian Materialism follows Descartes’s dualistic ideas. In the past, Descartes thought the pineal gland was the center in the brain in which …show more content…

According to Hebbian theory, “neurons that fire together wire together” which can shape the organization of the brain and allow for neuroplasticity. If there is random distribution of processing, then there will be random pathways and organizations of the brain. This can’t be true considering what we know about neuroplasticity, which is not random. There must be a more purposeful integration or distribution across the brain to account for way the brain is organized. According to many brain lesion studies, it seems that the brain has compensatory strategies for certain functions in the event there is failure in some part of the brain. This suggests to me, that although there are unstable pathways that change all the time, they can’t be changing randomly. I believe Dennett & Kinsbourne (1992) should revise or clarify what they mean by random distribution and perhaps suggest a mechanism to support it with real life

Open Document