Plato's Theory Of Substance Dualism

To what extent if any is Descartes successful in showing there is a real distinction between mind and body

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

Dualism is defined as a belief that mental occurrences are more than just a physical act. Humans are composed of two kinds of substances which are immaterial and physical. The immaterial substance consists of the mind or soul and the physical substance consists of the body. Moreland attempts to make nonbelievers believe in the immaterial soul by mentioning that there are numerous non-physical entities that we believe in, such as numbers, goodness and moral laws. This ultimately leads to the defense of dualism and rejecting the physicalism worldview that is present with those that deny that the mind and body are separate entities.

As Descartes defines the mind and body, as clearly and distinctly separate entities with mental and physical properties, only when considered separately from each other. But then they cannot without irrationality also be considered as united, for this would be to consider them at the same time as two different and one single substance, which, as Descartes admits,

Descartes’ argue that mind is better known than body by first claiming humans as fundamentally rational, meaning “a thing that doubts, understands, affirms, denies, is willing, is unwilling,” ( Descartes, 19) he therefore argues that humans have the ability to know their proper minds clearly and distinctly. He proposes the conception of the mind where the imagination and the senses are also inherent capabilities of the body (faculties), specifically powers of the mind.

Dualism claims that the mind is a distinct nonphysical thing, a complete entity that is independent of any physical body to which it is temporarily attached.

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

At the start, I will talk about the argument from the religion aspect for dualism. Most major world religions are based on separating the ‘mind’ and ‘body’. The eternal ‘mind’ or soul either ends up in heaven or hell, free from the ‘body’ itself. According to a number of religions, there is some sort of life after you die; a good example of this is angels which some call the ‘mind’ of god exists without any physical presence. This is what we come to know as substance dualism or something that is very relative to a form of substance dualism. As a result, "seeing how uncertain dualism is, in principle, the similar would be a willing to also be uncertain in one 's religious tradition, which a lot of people find challenging to do". [Churchland] Yet, it must

In the Sixth Meditation, Descartes continues with his discussion about the mind-body problem by addressing the relationship between the mind and body. Descartes states that Anature ...teaches me by these feelings of pain, hunger, thirst, and so on that I am not only residing in my body, as a pilot in his ship, but furthermore, that I am intimately connected with it...@(Descartes 76). This relationship is the connection between the physical needs of the body and the mental acknowledgment of those needs. Although the mind and body are blended, the mind is the most essential.

In Meditations on First Philosophy, Descartes introduces the dualistic idea of a sharp split between mind and body. This mind-body split is a Western secular idea and discounts many important aspects of the human experience. Descartes argues that, “…a body, by its very nature, is always divisible. On the other hand, the mind is utterly indivisible” (Descartes, 56). This idea that there is a distinct difference between the mind and the body is nonsensical from both a phenomenological and a scientific perspective. Furthermore, it is a very privileged point of view. Descartes was first and foremost a scholar. Before dedicating his life to philosophy, he worked with analytic geometry and analytics. In many ways, Descartes was spared experiences that might have caused him to reassess his thoughts on the split between mind and body. Unlike the example of the man with an amputated foot that Descartes uses in Meditations on First Philosophy, Descartes did not lose a limb. If he had, he may have realized that the mind is just as divisible as the body, as is the case with traumatic experiences. Based on the theoretical possibility that Descartes is wrong, it follows that mind and body are essentially the same. This can be seen through a cognitive perspective of human experience, and in particular, the application of modern neuroscience.

Unlike substance dualist whom believe that there are only two properties the physical and the mind, property dualist believe that mental phenomena are non-physical properties of physical phenomena, but not properties of non-physical substances. In laymen terms property dualist believe that the world is made up of one physical property that is made up of two parts mental and the physical. Property dualist suggest that the mind is something more than the physical, that the mental is very distinct from the physical somewhat suggesting that the mind is emergent. Now this theory seems to be somewhat contradicting due to the fact it is saying the mind is separate but yet it is a part of the brain and emergent things are just sums of their parts.

Descartes’ Meditation 6 explains the distinction between the mind and body. He explains that he is confused as to why his mind is attached to a particular body to which he calls his own. He questions why pain or tickling happens in his own body but does not occur in any body outside of his own and why a tugging feeling in his stomach tells him that he is hungry and that he should eat. From this, he perceives that he is only a thinking thing. The idea of a body is merely extended and the mind is

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.

Descartes has a very distinct thought when thinking about the mind, and how it relates to the body, or more specifically then brain. He seems to want to explain that the mind in itself is independent from the body. A body is merely a physical entity that could be proven to be true scientifically and also can be proven through the senses. Such things are not possible with the meta-physical mind because it is independent of the body. Building on his previous premises, Descartes finally proves whether material things exist or not and determines whether his mind and body are separate from each other or not. In Meditation Six, Descartes lays the foundation for dualism which has become one of the most important arguments in philosophy.

In Meditation Six entitled “Concerning the Existence of Material Things, and Real Distinction between the Mind and Body”, one important thing Descartes explores is the relationship between the mind and body. Descartes believes the mind and body are separated and they are two difference substances. He believes this to be clearly and distinctly true which is a Cartesian quality for true knowledge. I, on the other hand, disagree that the mind and body are separate and that the mind can exist without the body. First, I will present Descartes position on mind/body dualism and his proof for such ideas. Secondly, I will discuss why I think his argument is weak and offer my own ideas that dispute his reasoning while I keep in mind how he might