Descartes Vs. Descartes 's Theory

Moreover, Descartes relies on having a thorough knowledge of mind and body. We may conclude with Descartes that thought is necessary to having a mind, and materiality is necessary to having a body, it does not inevitably follow that there is an entity whose sole nature is to think. Descartes is limited by his subjective viewpoint that it could not be the case that extension could be another property of mind. He needs to prove the stronger argument that it is not possible for the mind to have extension as one of it’s properties. Descartes tries to make this proof in his Divisibility Argument:

René Descartes believed that the mind and body are separate; that the senses could not always be trusted, but that because we as humans are able to think about our existence, we possess some sort of entity separate than our fleshly body. I believe this separate entity to be a soul”an immaterial and

Descartes “Divisibility argument” states “[There] is a difference between the mind and the body, inasmuch as the body is by nature always divisible, while the mind is utterly indivisible… I am unable to distinguish any parts within myself… [My] mind is completely different from the body…” (Descartes Meditations, pg.59). His “Disability argument” is logically simplified as: (1) The body is a divisible thing. (2) The mind is an indivisible thing. (3) [Therefore, the] body and mind are two different things. (Armstrong on Descartes. Pg.23). Descartes here believes that the mind can’t be divided, but the body can, so it proves that they aren’t the same. Descartes first premise means that if you cut your body at any point, it is being divided. Which in his argument, that “[the] body… by its very nature [is] divisible (Descartes Meditations, pg.59) shows that the body by nature is extended as in being able to take up space. This leads to the thought that there is no other way to think about our body, but [Just] in having

     The second argument that Descartes defends is another question posed towards the senses. How can we take anything as real if our dreams cannot be

By the first premise Descartes refers to an activity that the body does not participate in. For instance, perception and walking are two activities which either directly requires the body (walking) or relies upon the body (perception). The activity of thinking can be done without a body. You can clearly and distinctly imagine yourself without a body, but you cannot imagine not thinking. Premise 2 indicates this distinction even more. Since the activity of thinking is separate from the body then this activity does not fall into doubt. Anything the body senses or is part of the body can be doubted because the mind’s eye would only perceive the image the body creates which has previously be shown to be dubious. A possible objection is that Descartes is pointing to another representation which the body has created. For instance, the body has created the image of thinking which the mind’s eye views. In addition, could we not be dreaming and thus deceived that we are thinking or could there be a demon deceiving

     This is where the wax argument comes into play. All the properties of the piece of wax that we perceive with the senses change as the wax melts. This is true as well of its primary properties, such as shape, extension and size. Yet the wax remains the same piece of wax as it melts. We know the wax through our mind and judgement, not through our senses or imagination. Therefore, every act of clear and distinct knowledge of corporeal matter also provides even more certain evidence for the existence of Descartes as a thinking thing. Therefore his mind is much clearer and more distinctly know to him than his body. At this

Like many people today, Descartes believed that the mind and soul were separate. He believed that the mind’s purpose was only for “thinking” and “non-extended” things. While, the body is an extension; non-thinking. Descartes thought that the mind and body were different substances, thus they

As the first “premise” of his proof Descartes makes a very important distinction between the various types of ideas. The first type of idea he discusses is ideas that are images of things. This type of idea, when thought of, is apprehended as an object of my thought, but there is something more embraced in the thought than merely the representation of the object. Now if these ideas are considered only in themselves, and are not referred to any object beyond them, they cannot, properly speaking, be false. This even applies to the will and affections, a second type of idea, for although I may desire objects that are wrong, it is still true that I desire them. The third type of idea is that of judgement. Descartes goal in this classification is to find in his mind which of the ideas are the proper bearers of truth and falsehood. Considered in themselves, ideas are not false nor are desires. The only place where mistakes can be made is in making judgements. As Descartes says, “And the chief and most common mistake which is to be found here consists in my judging that the ideas which are in me resemble, or conform to, things located outside me.” Descartes further classifies his ideas by their origin: those that appear

As a thinking entity, Descartes is a consciousness mind aware of the potential to engage in various modes of existence. To the numerous operations of “thought” he includes doubting, understanding, affirming, denying, willing, refusing, imagining, and sensing. As varied and manifold as these operations appear, they are but expressions of two principal types of conscious activity, to which Descartes eventually traces the nature of error. Thinking and reasoning, together with all belief in general, depend upon the operation of the twin faculties “knowing” and “choosing,” or the free will. Garrett Thompson writes:

The first premise is uncontroversial, as it follows from the concept of numerical identity that if two things are numerically identical then anything that is true of one is true of the other, as both things are actually only one thing being referred to in two different ways. We can therefore accept it as true. Moving to the second premise, it should be noted that physical bodies may not, in fact, be infinitely divisible, but as they are still divisible to some extent, this does not invalidate the argument and is only a tangential concern. At any rate, that material bodies are divisible seems almost self evident. The third premise is really the crux of the argument and the point of uncertainty. Is the mind really indivisible? Upon initial reflection it would certainly seem so; Descartes’ claim that one cannot conceive of “half of a mind” seems intuitively true on the face of it.

Just like a computer cannot fulfill its full function without a software, the mind and the brain are exactly the same and have a strong symbiotic relationship between the two, though they are both distinct. Descartes believes the mind is indivisible for a few reasons, reason number one is because the mind is a complete thing, he states in his 6th mediation that that the fact that he cannot “distinguish” parts in himself, he is a “complete thing.” Descartes also states that the reason why the mind is divisible is because if one or many limbs were severed from the body, it would not take away anything from the mind, other than the fact that one is aware a limb or many are missing. One other important factor in why Descartes believes the mind is truly indivisible is because the body is an “extension” and that therefore if there is anything that can be added on or amplified, it is capable of of being divided.

Among the issues with his belief of the mind and body plus how the operate is there connection. Descartes only connection of the two in the Pineal gland. This would mean everything would have to go through gland. Although very important in hormone distribution today the world has decided that the brain is in charge.

Something very essential to know about Descartes is his idea of Cogito Ergo Sum; I think, therefore I am. He believes that he exists because he is thinking, making him a thinking thing. Descartes first premise states, "I have a clear and distinct idea of myself, in so far as I am simply a thinking, non-extended thing" (Descartes, 54). The first thing that we need to understand from this premise is what Descartes means by extended; to occupy space. So, since he believes that he is not an extended thing, it follows that he does not take up space. Given this, he looked inside himself and saw no parts within his mind, no space or boundaries that his mind contains. In addition, the mind provides a place for free will and faith, which are not parts but different ways of thinking. He rationalizes this by making the mind of a qualitative substance. By saying that only things that can be measured must be of a material substance and those things that cannot be measured are of a thought like substance. The relation between body and mind now seem to be more divided since he believes that his mind is not extended. In short, this premise states that the mind has no parts, making it indivisible.

exists no separation of the two. Descartes recognized that the body and even the brain

Descartes discusses the existence of the human mind as a separate entity from the human body, including the a passage confirming his own existence as nothing but a thinking entity, in his writing Principles of Philosophy (I. 63-65). Following his rejection of all knowledge, in order to divide what was false from what could be proven, Descartes strives to prove the existence of his own mind, as a basis from which to prove the existence of the rest of the universe. I think his premise is flawed, Through the concept of doubt, he finds a contradiction (I am thinking about not