The Mind and Body vs. The Mind or Body
The debate of whether or not the mind is part of the body has been ongoing for centuries. Philosophers have not yet been able to come to a consensus on this question. Is the mind the driving force of the body? Would that make the mind and the brain one unit? How do we experience the world around us with this dire question unanswered? The mind and the body are two separate parts that combine to make one structure. It is important to answer this debate, so that each day we can understand why we do the things we do and so that we can understand how we experience these things that we do, rather than just assume and continue doing things for no understood reason. Thoughts, feelings, and perceptions are all
…show more content…
For those who believe that the mind and body are one must believe that both make one person. However, what if someone gets an organ transplant? People that believe that the mind and body are one must believe that a new being is made because it is a new body, when in fact it is still the same person as before except now with a healthier organ. Also, hypothetically speaking if a mind can be transplanted into another body, would the person be a different person just because of the change of body? Absolutely not, you would have the same ideas, thoughts, and emotions as before. The only difference would be your physical physique. Another counter argument is with the problem energy. Jerry Fodor wrote in The Mind-Body Problem, “To put it another way, how can the nonphysical give rise to the physical without violating the laws of the conservation of mass, of energy and of momentum? “ The explanation is as simple as the mind converting the energy to the energy needed for the body to respond to and move to it. Next, the idea of the mind and brain being separate is absurd to me. As an analogy, a book is a physical object, however the book is “about” something. So it is physical and intentional at the same time. This relates to the brain and the mind because the brain is complex, but when it is all added up the product is something. That something is the
In the reading by Richard Swinburne, he evaluates the mortality of the soul and its interaction with the human body. His position is best described as attributing the soul to a light bulb, and the brain to a functioning socket:
Richard Taylor explained why the body and the mind are one, and why they are not two separate substances. In the article “The Mind as a Function of the Body”, Taylor divides his article in a number of sections and explains clearly why dualism, or the theory that the mind and the body are separate is not conceivable. In one of these sections it is explained in detail the origin of why some philosophers and people believe in dualist metaphysics. As stated by Taylor “when we form an idea of a body or a physical object, what is most likely to come to mind is not some person or animal but something much simpler, such as a stone or a marble”(133). The human has the tendency to believe a physical object as simple, and not containing anything complex. A problem with believing this is that unlike a stone or a marble a human (or an animal) has a brain and the body is composed of living cells (excluding dead skin cells, hair, and nails which are dead cells). The f...
Along with an argument usually comes a counter-argument or rebuttal. The main question about the mind-body issue is how can us humans determine the interaction between mind and matter. I believe property dualism is a logic, justifiable response because it separates the mental entity from brain states, and shows how it can be related to physical substances. The knowledge argument helps convey this view because it shows how non-physical properties such as consciousness, can be proven in any given person. The problems of interaction argument is a well structured rebuttal against property dualism, mostly because it brings about the issue that the mind is not a physical entity, thus it 's not possible for a non-physical substance to interact with a physical substance. According to scientism, this statement is correct but it can be refuted through a different perspective. A dualist could respond to this and bring out multiple points. The first one being that yes, the mind does act upon or bodies and the issue is only apparent, and does not exist. A good example of this can be pain. If a human breaks a bone, the pain is brought to the mental state of the person, then passed on to the brain for processing. This is direct evidence for the argument, and shows how the mind and body can interact. A second point I would consider a rebuttal for this argument, a dualist could
... Theory is instrumental in explaining how the mind can be considered an entity that is separate from the body. We can come to this conclusion by first understanding that we are real, and we cannot logically doubt our own presence, because the act of doubting is thinking, which makes you a thinker. Next, we realize that the mind, and all of its experiences and thoughts, will remain the same no matter what changes or destruction that’s endured by the body. Then we can grasp that we are our minds and not our physical bodies. We can use a number of examples to illustrate that these concepts, including the movie The Matrix. Finally, we can disapprove John Locke’s objections to the Dualist Theory by identifying that the mind is capable of conscious and unconscious thought; therefore, it cannot be divisible like the body. Hence the mind is a separate entity from the body.
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.
I do not think that the mind and body are the same thing. Both from arguments relating to my own beliefs, and with supporting arguments I hope to have thoroughly explained why I feel this way. I just don?t see how something as unique as the mind, with so much nonphysical substance to it, can be a part of the brain, an object which is so definitively physical. Although I feel the two are separate, this does not mean that I think they have no connections at all. The mind and brain are, without a doubt, a team. They interact together and run the body, however, they just are not the same thing.
The premise the mind cannot be split we know to be false. For example in the 1960s Scientists Sperry and Gazzaniga split the brain in studies of epilepsy. The result was having two minds operating in two different specialised areas. The patients for example would see a picture of an object in their right vision but see themselves holding another object in their left vision. This resulted in confusion in the patients due to conflicting perception of what they are seeing in their split brain (nobelprize.org, 2016). This shows that Descartes’ premise was wrong because the mind can be split. Thereby we can see Descartes reason for believing that the mind can exist without the body is limited. The split brain procedure isn’t the only modern day article that limits Descartes reasoning from body-mind divisibility. There are mental disorders such as the dissociative identity disorder whereby the mind appears to be split into different identities. This results in there appearing to be more than one person living inside a single body. This example of mental disorder depicts that the mind is divisible and thereby Descartes reasoning is furthermore limited. In modern day understanding of the mind, there are disorders such as post-traumatic stress disorder that signify that the mind can be ‘broken’. Studies in physical brain damage, for example car crashes causing loss of memory and suggest that the mind
I have been a firm believer of the anti-Cartesian argument that in order to join together one mind with one body Cartesians and anti-Cartesians are consider vital principles by Strawson, so one must think the mind as something dependent on someone, and not a separate entity altogether, as Descartes would argue.
Johnstone, M., Primmer, J. (2014). [Lecture]. The Mind-Body Problem. PHILOS 1E03, Problems of Philosophy. Hamilton, ON, Canada: McMaster University.
In my experience, I am aware of many cases in which my body affects my mind (I stub my toe & I feel pain) and many cases in which my mind affects my body (I feel an itch & I scratch it).
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.
The mind has an incredible power. We see it as we go through our everyday activities, constantly displaying the wonders of logic, thought, memory and creativity. Yet, can the mind be more powerful than we know? Is it possible to reduce or even eliminate pain, illness and disease by using the natural powers it possesses? Can the mind heal?
Overview This paper will discuss the mind-body connection and its relevance to health care professionals and to the public. It will explore the history of the mind-body connection, as well as state research that has been done on the subject. The reader will gain an understanding of the various techniques used in mind-body therapy, as well as their effectiveness. What is the Mind-Body Connection?
two distinct kinds of entities, bodies and minds (1). All objects that exist or can exist belong to one of these categories. The two forms are said to be mutually exclusive and commonly defined by fundamentally different characteristics, yet both are required to accurately define the world around us. According to Descartes, the body is a tangible physical substance (the unthinking thing), whereas the mind is an intangible non-physical substance (the thinking thing) and comes metaphysically before the body (3). The mind and body casually interact with one another while maintaining their distinctiveness: the eyes perceive objects and then focus the image to the pineal gland, where it transmits the information to the non-physical mind; the mind then may transmit a signal to the body, telling it what to do. The mind and body are independent from one another, yet they work in harmony; the mind receives signals from the body and the body responds to signals from the mind.
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.