Is Dualism Best? The Nature Of Consciousness? Essay

In essence, Cartesian Dualism attempts to solve the mind-body problem – that is, what is the relationship between the mind and the body? The answer, according to this theory, is that the mind and the body are two distinctly different substances that constitute each person. Here, “mind” can be described as a nonphysical thing that thinks and “body” as a living physical thing that does not think. The mind can also exist independently of the body, and both can causally affect one another.

The mind is a complex myriad of thoughts and psychological systems that even philosophers today cannot entirely grapple. It is composed of the senses, feelings, perceptions, and a whole series of other components. However, the mind is often believed to be similar or even the same as the brain. This gives rise to the mind-brain identity theory, and whether there exists a clear distinction between the physical world and the non-material mind. In this paper, I will delineate the similarities and differences between mind and brain, describe the relevant ideas such as functionalism and materialism, and provide explanations on how these theories crystallized. Further, I will discuss the differing views of this concept from multiple philosophers’ perspectives and highlight the significance of each. Ultimately, I will defend the view that the mind-brain identity theory is false by analyzing its errors and examining the invalid assumptions it makes about consciousness.

According to Durkheim’s work The Dualism of Human Nature and Its Social Conditions (DHN), a man has a dual nature which is made up of the body (individual) and the soul (social). He sheds light on this by citing post-Durkheim theories which he does not agree with and which do not solve the problem of this dual nature. Durkheim also uses The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life (EFRL) to discuss the religious aspect of the body and soul. Upon reading, it is discovered that as society evolves, so does this “dual nature.”

According to J.P. Moreland in his argument for dualism, he states that humans are composed of both an immaterial substance and a physical substance. Moreland notes that there are contrasting differences between the minds and the brains and that they are ultimately separate entities. By defending dualism, Moreland seeks to make nonbelievers believe in immaterial souls, while discrediting materialism. We can look at the arguments in which Moreland uses to support the argument of dualism and belief that the mind and brain are separate entities.

Numerous factors determine when and why you feel tired, full of energy, and hungry. A person's state of consciousness and awareness varies throughout the day and depends on a person's activity, environment, and time clock.

For centuries philosophers have engaged themselves into conversations and arguments trying to figure out the nature of a human person; this has lead to various theories and speculation about the nature of the human mind and body. The question they are tying to answer is whether a human being is made of only the physical, body and brain, or both the physical or the mental, mind. In this paper I will focus on the mind-body Identity Theory to illustrate that it provides a suitable explanation for the mind and body interaction.

Nella Larsen, a luminary of the Harlem Renaissance, explores the nature of racial identity and double-consciousness in her novella Passing. W.E.B Du Bois’s theory of double-consciousness is characterized in The Souls of Black Folk as a sense of “twoness,-- an American, a Negro; two souls, two thoughts, two unreconciled strivings; two warring ideals in one dark body” (Du Bois 2). Irene and Clare, Larsen’s novella’s primary characters, both lack a “dark body” which allows them to oscillate, by choice, between playing the part of the white “American” and the “Negro”. The appeal of racial passing lies in how it provides disenfranchised minorities access to otherwise unattainable

In my mind, dualism is a more attractive view to take when considering the mind-brain issue. The idea that the mind is a separate entity and that it is independent of the physical body is the central point of dualism. One reason it appeals to me is because of my religion, my Catholic upbringing. Introspection is another good reason why dualism is a little more logical to me than materialism.. It logically explains why the mind and brain are separate. Also, the divisibility argument raises good points to allow dualism to appear to be the more attractive idea in my eyes.

In the world of philosophy, there has been an ever growing skepticism of the relationship between the human body and its mental state. The physical state of a person is tangible, meaning that they can be seen by anyone and touched. While the mental state of a person is embedded in their consciencousness, meaning that it can’t be observed by others unless willing expressed by said person. I will be using Leibniz’s law of identity to show that the metal states of an individual are distinct from a physical state. Using the notion of sameness, I can prove a valid argument that the physical and mental states are distinct. While this theory in part can be debated, some identity theorists can provide a rebuttal this claim. I will provide a response to an identity theorist rebuttal.

Aristotle has a different view on the make-up of the soul. In Aristotle discussion On the Soul he talks about the kinds of souls possessed by different living things such as plants, animals and, beings. Aristotle then goes on describing the substance that makes up the soul, the first is matter which is not this in its own right, the second is form which makes matter this and the third form is the compound of matter and form. Every living body is a substance and the soul is the actuality of the body. The soul

The mind is perhaps the most fascinating part of the human body due to its complexity and ability to rationalize. In essence, the mind-body problem studies the relation of the mind to the body, and states that each human being seems to embody two unique and somewhat contradictory natures. Each human contains both a nature of matter and physicality, just like any other object that contains atoms in the universe. However, mankind also is constituted of something beyond materialism, which includes its ability to rationalize and be self-aware. This would imply that mankind is not simply another member of the world of matter because some of its most distinctive features cannot be accounted for in this manner. There are obvious differences between physical and mental properties. Physical properties are publically accessible, and have weight, texture, and are made of matter. Mental properties are not publically accessible, and have phenomenological texture and intentionality (Stewart, Blocker, Petrik, 2013). This is challenging to philosophers, because man cannot be categorized as a material or immaterial object, but rather a combination of both mind and body (Stewart, Blocker, Petrik, 2013). Man embodies mind-body dualism, meaning he is a blend of both mind and matter (Stewart, Blocker, Petrick, 2013). The mind-body problem creates conflict among philosophers, especially when analyzing physicalism in its defense. This paper outlines sound

I am faced with the philosophical task of defending either dualism or materialism, depending on which one is most attractive to me. So either I support the theory of dualism, which is the belief that there is both a physical and a spiritual state, or I believe in materialism, which is the belief that everything that exists is material or physical. Although I believe materialism to be easier to prove, I find dualism more attractive to believe. Throughout the following, I will attempt to build a case for the theory of dualism giving insights both documented and personal. I will also shed light on the theory of materialism and the proofs that support this theory; showing that

In continuing to lay out the argument, Aristotle explains that if there is a proper way of acting or being acted on by the soul that then the soul would be able of separate existence. However, if there is no proper way of acting on the soul, separate existence is impossible. Aristotle elaborates on this with the example of what is straight. Whatever is straight has straight properties coming from it. The example Aristotle uses for this is, whatever is straight “touching a bronze sphere at a point, through straightness divorced from the other constituents of the straight thing cannot touch it in this way; it cannot be so divorced at all, since it is always found in a body.”

Dualism is a broad term that can encompass many areas within philosophy itself. In aspect to metaphysics, it classifies the types of entities in the world into two subcategories, physical and non physical substance. While this may appear to be a very wide and ambiguous opinion, it becomes very specific in regards to our own existence. Paul Churchland puts it very explicitly in his book Matter and Consciousness, and defines dualism as the idea that, “the essential nature of conscious intelligence resides in something nonphysical” (Churchland 1). Though dualism is a highly regarded and popular view on the state of existence, its core arguments present an array of problems that detract from the credibility of its

Now for Aristotle in De Anima, he explores what the soul really is by making the distinction between matter and form, and this is called hylomorphism. He uses hylomorphism as a defense to claim that observable objects cannot be described by their material components, but must be explained by their natural foundations and Aristotle believes that the soul is a particular kind of natural element to life, specifically it is an essential component for all animal bodies. Aristotle’s main point in De Anima books II through III is that not only is the soul not