Descartes & Elisabeth Discussion Questions 2023

.pdf

School

Boston College *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

PL070

Subject

Philosophy

Date

Jan 9, 2024

Type

pdf

Pages

2

Uploaded by MegaElk1522

Report
Descartes & Elisabeth of Bohemia on Dualistic Interactionism QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION 1. Briefly re-cap for one another what Cartesian Dualistic Interactionism is. a. The immaterial mind/soul is separate from the material body, but the two causally interact. b. Descartes believes in this and Elisabeth questions this 2. What is Princess Elisabeth’s objection to Descartes’ view? Do you find it convincing? a. Elisabeth questions Descartes’ view, saying: “where does the immaterial interact with the material? And how does this happen?” i. Contact is required for one thing to initiate movement in another b. She finds his logic contradicting when he says that the immaterial can interact with the material 3. Descartes defends a Supernaturalistic worldview, while science gives a Naturalistic worldview. Explain what each type of view is committed to, and why they are incompatible. a. Supernaturalistic: some physical events have only non-physical causes b. Naturalistic: all physical events have only physical causes c. Three claims that are mutually incompatible i. Naturalism– part of new science ii. the soul is immaterial/ not physical iii. activity of the soul causes action in the body iv. If claims 2 and 3 are used, then 1 cannot be true 4. What do you think is the best argument in favor of dualism? Explain it as if you were trying to persuade someone that dualism was true. a. I think the best argument in favor of dualism is that if something is not possible, then we cannot conceive it. This is because people have intelligent thoughts and consciousness, so if something is logically impossible, then even our consciousness would not be able to perceive it. 5. What do you think is the best argument against dualism? Explain it as if you were trying to convince someone that dualism was false. a. Contact is required for one thing to initiate movement in another b. Descartes defines the soul as non-extended and immaterial c. Non-extended and immaterial things cannot make contact with other things d. So, non-extended and immaterial things cannot cause movement e. Therefore the soul (as defined by Descartes) cannot cause the body to move f. Therefore dualism cannot hold g. Elisabeth points out the inconsistency in Descartes’ view
i. Additionally, the law of conservation of energy is violated under dualism. This assumption states that energy is not created or destroyed, it is just converted to another form. Under dualism this cannot be the case 6. Many people today accept dualistic interactionism (even thought they probably wouldn’t use those terms to describe their belies). In fact, you may be among them! Does what we have learned so far shift your own thinking, or give you a new perspective on the thinking of others? a. What we have learned so far did indeed shift my own thinking but I think I only agree with parts of dualistic interactionism. I think the mind/soul is immaterial because I cannot conceive of it being something physical. Yes, the brain is the physical part but our thoughts, our memories, etc.– anything part of the mind/soul is immaterial to me. But my knowledge of modern science conflicts with it a little bit. With the new science of psychology and also the creation of technology that can see neurons, etc., it is hard for me to certainly say the mind/soul is not material. 7. Consider the short story “Meat in Space.” What connections do you see between the story, and our conversation about the mind/body problem? a. The connection between Meat and Space and the mind-body problem is the interaction between the material body (such as the physical brain) and the immaterial mind/soul that does the thinking and feeling. For example, “thinking meat! Conscious meat! Loving meat. Dreaming meat. The meat is the whole deal” (2). The “meat” is like the brain, where we understand an interaction occurs between the immaterial and material. 8. What about “For a Breath I Tarry?” Do you see the stories as complementary? Or as pointing in different directions? What relevance do you find between the story and our class discussion so far? a. The passage reads: “as gear knows gear, as electricity knows its conductor….” This relates to Descartes' view of dualistic interactionism. The electricity knows its conductor. The immaterial mind is the conductor of the electricity that interacts with the material body. Where exactly the "electricity" interacts with the body anatomically is slightly more foggy of an inquiry. We saw this when Elisabeth questioned Descartes. I think that the two stories in question present opposing views, however. “Meat in Space” presents the relationship through physicalism, while “For a Breath I Tarry” presents the relationship through dualistic interactionism.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help