The Brain, the Mind, and Metaphysics
(Maimonides vs. Freud’s views on Metaphysics
Metaphysics can be defined as the study of non-material things. For example; the mind, time and space would all fall under this category. Our brain and mind is constantly working to learn, imagine, dream, and remember. Which can all be explained by metaphysics. Although, like most things there is different views on how metaphysics works and why people act and learn the way that they do. With these different views, there comes the question of what is imaginary and what is real. “Extremely influential view about reality seen in the most general light is that it consists of things and their properties.” (Heidegger) In the Jacobus text, two well-known philosophers wrote about their views on metaphysics. Moses Maimonides wrote On the Limits of Man’s Intellect, and Sigmund Freud wrote The Interpretation of Dreams. In both these popular texts, metaphysics is, from the views of both authors, is relatable.
To begin, On
…show more content…
The similarities between the two make it easy to believe the theories they both explain. They both, in their writings, go into detail about how “…the mind is a complex entity that controls all parts of the human body” (Page 301). To moving you toes, to chewing your food, and lastly to think, learn, and breathe; you need your brain. Both authors also study how the mind and brain work. Each conducted experiments to learn about different aspects of the mind and brain as a whole. “Each author explores the mind from the inner core to the outer layer. They research the brain, to the mind to the way that humans speak, move and learn.” (Harvey) Both, Maimonides and Freud have different views but they both make it clear in their writings along with some disagreements, they also have very similar opinions when it comes to
Describe how both authors use similar elements in their short story. What else could you discuss about the similarities you seen between the two texts? In addition, what differences could you argue (keeping in context to the literary elements)?
In the Discourse on Metaphysics by Leibniz he suggest that, "we maintain that everything that is to happen to some person is already contained virtually in his nature or notion, as properties of a circle are contained in its definition." This assertion raised a difficulty for Leibniz. This difficulty was that "human freedom will no longer hold, and that an absolute fatality would rule over all our actions as well as over all the rest of what happens in the world." With such a reality there would be no use for free will and whatever fate succumbs an individual is the will of the Most High; in other words, being destined. But for Leibniz, this is not the determined reality of humanity. Leibniz
The similarities between these two philosophers are hard to find but there is one that caught
In conclusion, Even these two articles have some similarities and differences, they both can teach us to study hard. And these two authors are examples for all of students to follow. I hope every student can become more and more intelligent and make the world more
I read the article, “Secrets of the Brain”, found in the February 2014 issue of National Geographic written by Carl Zimmer. I chose this subject because I have been fascinated with the brain and how it works. The research of the brain has been ongoing for many centuries now. The history in this article is interesting. It explained how scientists used to understand the brain and its inner workings. For example, “in the ancient world physicians believed that the brain was made of phlegm. Aristotle looked on it as a refrigerator, cooling of the fiery heart. From his time through the Renaissance, anatomists declared with great authority that our perceptions, emotions, reasoning, and actions were all the result of “animal spirits”—mysterious, unknowable vapors that swirled through cavities in our head and traveled through our bodies.” (Zimmer, p. 38)
Though seemingly different on first look, the two writings follow a similar pattern and basic plot. In both, there is an encouragement
Sigmund Freud is highly renowned psychologists known for his most controversial theories in the history of psychology. He is also believed to be the father of modern psychiatry and psychology. His works are read widely and are criticized as well. He has left behind numerous theories regarding human mind and behavior out of which some are commonly accepted and some are widely debated. The question after that arises now is “Why did Freud’s theories get many criticisms?”
By studying the ideas of other psychologists and philosophers to support his own ideas, Freud was able to take the parts he agreed with and disprove the parts he did not agree with. He explores the ideas of Aristotle, Hildebrandt and Strumpell to name just a few. He agreed strongly with Aristotle’s belief that dreams are not divine in
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.
analogies to make between these two works are, I think, those between the works' two
Metaphysics can be defined as an attempt to comprehend the basic characteristics of reality. It is in fact so basic that it is all inclusive, whether something is observable or not. It answers questions of what things must be like in order to exist and how to differentiate from things that seem real but are not. A common thought is that reality is defined as what we can detect from our five senses. This type of philosophy is called empiricism, which is the idea that all knowledge comes from our senses. An empiricist must therefore believe that what we can see, touch, taste, smell, and hear must be real and that if we can not in fact see, touch, taste, smell, or hear something, it is definitely not real. However, this is a
According to the text “Philosophy the power of ideas,” the word metaphysics derives from a set of Aristotle’s writings known as ‘Physics”, stated in the text from the Greek word “physika, which means “the things of nature.”
Not knowing whether or not the voice that I hear is really a real person or a phantom echo in my head is an unnerving concept. Yet, it is one of the points that metaphysics covers. However, my major calls this concept, the science of the mind or simply put psychology. While being very similar in definition to psychology, metaphysics goes beyond the scientific terminology to
Freud’s theory was initially based on his own person and experiences and memories, hence, lacking experimental and scientific
I didn't exactly agree with how Freud thought, but I let a lot of it slide because his theories were developed a long time ago before all of that stuff became something we all find to be a perverted way of thinking.