In Philosophy, There Are Going To Be Some Agreements And

he distinction between the mind-body has been a controversial issue for centuries. Descartes' views differed from earlier scholars who described the mind-body as having different entities, one was physical and the other was abstract. Additionally, the theory that existed implied that the interaction between mind-body flowed in one direction. Therefore, the mind had a greater influence on the body, but on the other hand, the body had very little effect on the mind. One scholar described it as "a puppeteer pulling the strings of the body" which was almost independent of each other. However, Descartes had a different perspective on how he viewed the mind-body. He agreed the mind-body was different, however he also believed the mind

Secondly, to even think to reconcile scientific and religious views is entirely inappropriate. Descartes was a dualist in that he divided reality into two distinctly different realms. He said that the mind, which is what he thought was the Soul and not a physical brain, existed on its own and that the body was just a perceived extension of the mind. While he said that the mind and the body were related, he proposed that the mind was not governed by the body and therefore maintained free will. On the other hand, Descartes believed that the body can only be studied and explained through science. The mind was capable of free will, which has a religious connotation in that it denotes that a higher force, or God, is not controlling the minds of humans but then their minds are in control of their bodies. Then, the body was a scientific vessel that was inhabited by the Soul, or the mind, for a temporary amount of time. Apparently, the mind could not be explained through science but rather religion whereas the body could only be explained and studied through science and not religion. Descartes' attempt at

If these great thinkers (Descartes, Spinoza, and Leibniz) were to discuss instead the soul’s connection to the body, what might each say (both on his own behalf and in response to the other)? Would they find any places where they might agree? If not, why not? (These are, after all, smart guys!)

You see through the ages of philosophy there have been many debates and opinions. Yet it is those opinions that are the most radical that demand the most attention. On that note, we will address two radical philosophizers: Spinoza and Hobbes. Specifically there theory's pertaining to matter and the mind-body problem posed by Descartes. As such we will first address Hobbes then move to Spinoza and end with a combined statement on matter. Therefore we must begin by introducing Thomas Hobbes.

In Meditation six: Concerning the Existence of Material Things, and the Real Distinction between Mind and Body, Rene Descartes wrote of his distinctions between the mind and the body, first by reviewing all things that he believed to be true, then assessing the causes and later calling them into doubt, and then finally by considering what he must now believe. By analyzing Descartes’ writing, this paper will explicate Descartes’ view on bodies and animals, and if animals have minds. Before explicating the answer to those questions, Descartes’ distinctions between the mind and the body should first be summarized and explained.

In this essay, I will be explaining John Locke’s case of the prince and the cobbler and Bernard Williams’s second description of the A-body person and the B-body person. Bernard Williams has the correct analysis of the situation where the body is part of self-identity since it is inevitable for us to fear future pain.

Rene Descartes was a complex man who had questions about God and the human soul, and preferred to work through problems by eliminating all doubt with a particular issue. He works to prove that God exists and develops arguments to point out the limits between the mind or soul and the body, as well as, corporeal (physical) and incorporeal (mental) properties. When Descartes refers to mental properties, he is alluding to thoughts and emotions. When mentioning physical properties, he is talking about the brain. Hence, mind-body

First-order desire are starightforward. These are desires simple in nature and resmeble animal desires to eat, sleep, feel comforatable. Second-order desires are complex and arise from analysys, comaprison, and identification. These desires are human beings phenomena which animals do not have. Second order desires not only create notion of accountability for one’s actions, but also can be diferent in meanings and affect human consciences in a variety of ways. The link between two kinds of desires is Frankfurt distinction between a persona and a wanton. A “person” in Frankfrut theory has a second order volition which is a conflict resolution between first order desires and create a will, while a “wanton” has a lack of concern about first order desires “thus incapable of being concerned about his will.”

René Descartes’ seventeenth century philosophy receives much of the credit for the basis of modern philosophy, specifically his argument that the body and the mind are completely separate substances, each with its own independence from the other, also known as dualism. Descartes was educated in the Aristotelian and Greek tradition, and those ideas influenced his dualist thought. In Meditations, Descartes focused on dualism in the context of human consciousness. While the work is organized in separate ‘Meditations’, and Descartes’ main motivation for writing it was likely philosophical exploration, there are mentions of God in the part of Meditations on dualism, because the separation of mind and body often leads to the necessity of the existence of a soul, and therefore gave itself nicely to a seventeenth-century theology. Despite its organic religious affiliation, Meditations was not universally agreed upon, or even well liked, specifically by people who believed that the body and the mind, everything that makes up a person, is the same physical substance. Among these disbelievers in Cartesian dualism was Princess Elisabeth of Bohemia, a staunch materialist who responded to Descartes’ work through a series of letters. Elisabeth’s doubts of Descartes’ dualism remain one of the greatest arguments against substance dualism.

The concept of God is central to the development of Cartesian and Spinozan philosophy. Although both philosophers employ an ontological argument for the existence and necessity of God the specific nature of God differs greatly with each account. While Descartes suggests a Judeo-Christian concept of God, Spinoza argues a more monistic deity similar to that of the Hindu tradition. The most significant difference however, lies within the basis and structure of each argument itself. Considered from an analytical standpoint through the lens of Gotlobb Frege, Descartes' proof of God possesses both sense and reference and is therefore capable of expressing the

The concept of mind and body interactions has been debated among many modern philosophers. Some believe that our minds and bodies are different things, thus existing separately, while others believe that they exist as a whole. In this paper, I will be introducing two rationalist philosophical views regarding this topic, one which is by Rene Descartes and the other by Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz. Rationalists, in philosophical terms, are the ones who obtain their knowledge through reasoning rather than the human senses. Descartes and Leibniz both have similar perspectives, but Leibniz takes a slightly different approach to improve Descartes’ argument. This paper will first show Descartes’ original argument, an example that proves the argument to be invalid, and then lastly, a revised version of the argument with Leibniz’s help.

In his argument, Hinman (2007) asserts that every action that people engage in is motivated by self-interests or pleasure or direct benefits the agent or to avoid living with guilt in the future. This is the nature of human beings. Even the most altruistic action is in actual sense motivated by the egocentric desire of the actor (Hugh, 1898).

Building off his established idea of the Cogito, Descartes continues to formulate an idea of how the world operates. He arrives upon one of the most widely held metaphysical opinions, especially among a majority of the world’s religions, which is mind-body dualism. Mind-body dualism states that there are two types of entities in the world; those which have extension and measurable qualities such as the body and existing separately is the non physical mind.

One way in which Descartes and Locke differ is their opinions of how knowledge is attained. Descartes ascertained that you could only gain knowledge through reasoning and not reasoning and senses together. He concluded that senses can deceive us and should not be trusted. Descartes states, “I will suppose, then, that everything I see is fictitious. I will believe that my memory tells me nothing but lies. I have no senses. Body, shape, extension, movement and place are illusions. So what remains true? Perhaps just the one fact that nothing is certain!” (Descartes). Descartes identified the mind as a thinking substance and bodies as material substances. Descartes is a rationalist, as he believed knowledge could be gained without experiencing it in the real world.

This paper will attempt to explain Descartes’ first argument for the distinction that exists between mind and body. Dualism is a necessary aspect of Descartes’ metaphysics and epistemology. This distinction is important within the larger framework of Meditations on First Philosophy (1641) because after doubting everything (body, extension, senses, etc.), Descartes comes to the conclusion that because he doubts, he must be a thinking thing and therefore exist (p.43). This means that the mind must be separate and independent from the body. One can doubt that the body exists while leaving the mind intact. To doubt that the mind exists, however, is contradictory. For if the mind does not exist, how, or with what, is that doubt being accomplished.