Is there certainty in knowledge? What roles do the mind and body play in the acquisition of knowledge?” Although they both were trying to find answers to the same questions however the answers to these questions were not the same. In this paper I shall compare and contrast between the philosophies of Descartes and Locke. .Firstly I will explain some similarities then I will explain the differences between their theories about rationalism and empiricism. In a nutshell I will conclude that they both are two different philosophers with two different explanations.
The ability for the self to think, reason, and perceive believed by many philosophers is to relate ourselves to our bodies and bring ourselves to achieve a destiny. The philosophers who believe in the idea of self believe that the self is essentially independent of the physical body. It is a nonphysical element of... ... middle of paper ... ...ery topic discussed in this paper, it can be concluded that the idea of individuality explains the existence of life. Time, morals, and opinions all can be debated based on individual perception and thoughts through the self, enduring self. Reality is a difficult element to explain but through the ability of ourselves to shape the world around us based on our skepticism and knowledge; we are able to exist independently.
He builds from Descartes’ search for self-identity and reconciles Plato’s skepticism with his views of self-trust and unconformity among scholars. Throughout “Mediations I and II”, Descartes disputes definitions of reality and identity, establishing a precursor to Emerson’s philosophy. Initially, Descartes questions all notions of being. In “Mediation I”, Descartes begins his argument explaining the senses which perceive reality can be deceptive and “it is wiser not to trust entirely to any thing by which we have once been deceived” (Descartes 59). But, he then continues to reason; “opinions [are] in some measure doubtful…and at the same time highly probable, so that there is much more reason to believe in than to deny them” (Descartes 62).
The Mind-Body problem forms the basis of the philosophy of the mind argument. Descartes, the rationalist philosopher and scientist, was the first to propose a coherent, in depth theory, known as Cartesian dualism which supposes that “the mental and the physical – or mind and body or mind and brain... are radically different kinds of thing” or in other words, humans have a “non-physical soul existing independently from our bodies”. Descartes believed that the soul (or spirit) contains all our mental states. In this way he used the words ‘soul’ and ‘mind’ as synonyms. This might latter cause confusion with the idea of materialism so in order to avoid contradiction, the soul will be defined as “the non-physical aspect of a person” while the mind will be defined as “a collection of your mental states”.
After exploration through the thought and philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche it can be mesmerizing to grasp a firm hold onto viewpoints in contrast with many philosophers. Much of the content throughout his works can be perceived various ways and he even suggests that one does not have to accept it. The idea of perspectivism is developed by him throughout his works. This philosophical viewpoint makes the statement that all ideas are from different perspectives and that there is no definite truth, but not all perspectives are equal or true. He championed argument and felt that created agon, contest, which motivates and challenges people in the Genealogy of Morality (174-81).
Arguments against Dualism Before we proceed to critique dualism, it is imperative we first understand the arguments that dualists put forward in regards to the exact nature of their theory. Descartes was one of the major proponents of this theory. Dualists generally believe that things exist in or are composed of two different things or entities. Descartes believed that in regards to human beings that two attributes existed; the physical part that talks, walks and exists, the physical body that can be seen and proven to exist empirically and the mind or soul which is an entity that cannot be seen but is believed to exist . This is the part that is autonomous to the physical body.
This belief is known as mind-body dualism, which proves to explain the relationship of both them. Spinoza addresses the problem by denying that mind and body are really distinct things. Rather, he proposes monism and explains mind and body as two attributes of the single substance that is everything. Rene Descartes comprehension of the relationship between the mind and body is the paragraph's main focus. What's interesting is that the philosopher did not believe that the brain was identical to the mind; this is evident in his mediations.
The humanistic discipline all... ... middle of paper ... ...sciousness, but is a problem that people confuse as an understanding of our beings. In this sense, Searle is reiterating Husserl’s argument in a different context due to the cultural differences of their time periods. And though the problem still continues, Husserl tries to give his argument through the study of phenomenology, the theory of consciousness, that has a strong association to Searle’s intentionality, how consciousness represents something in the world. Although philosophers throughout time have worked to trying to understand the relationship between the mental and physical, the mind-body problem still remains an unsolved dilemma. Works Cited Husserl, Edmund.
Idealism, in general, is the claim that reality is dependent on the mind and their ideas, (Morrison). George Berkley, an early metaphysician that defended the views of idealism, presents a view of material idealism which claims that the existence of ... ... middle of paper ... ...ectively bring together the right ideas presented by the rationalists and empiricists and strengthen the foundation of metaphysics. Kant uses the theory of transcendental idealism, the claim that gains of knowledge are based on perceptions of the mind, to prove the limitations of the human mind. Transcendental realists are proven wrong by Kant because of their inability to see that the mind is incapable of perceiving things in themselves. Kant resolves Hume’s scepticism by confirming that there are sources of reality perceived by sensations.
One much discussed issue in contemporary philosophy is the relation between consciousness and intentionality. Philosophers debate whether consciousness and intentionality are somehow "connected" (see Searle, chap. 7); whether the one or the other is the "theoretically fundamental" one (see Dennett); and whether we have reason to be more optimistic about an "objective" or "scientific," or "third-person" "account" of intentionality ... ... middle of paper ... ...6) The Conscious Mind: In Search of a Fundamental Theory, Oxford UP. Dennett, Daniel C. (1994) "Dennett, Daniel C" in A Companion to the Philosophy of Mind, Samuel Guttenplan, ed., Oxford, Blackwell. Dreyfus, Hubert L. (1991) Being-in-the-World: A Commentary on Heidegger's Being and Time, Division I, Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press.