Saint Thomas Aquinas provided a theory on the intellectual soul. He believes that this soul is in fact a non bodily thing since it can potentially cognize all bodies, something that can only be done if you possess none of it. Aquinas is incorrect in this though since his understanding of thinking makes it apparent that the intellect is finite not infinite. Due to the need of phantasms to produce ideas the intellect can never be able to cognize all things due to the limitations of matter, that produces phantasms, thus making it not necessary that the soul be immaterial.
According to Aquinas the intellectual soul is non- bodily since it can potentially cognize all bodies. He states that anything that is made of matter suffers due to its own …show more content…
Thus the soul is limited to know only that which exists within the capabilities of the body.
If the soul cannot cognize all things then the soul does not have to be immaterial. Aquinas believes that the soul is immaterial since to know all matter it must have none. But do to how human thought is to occur according Aquinas than this is incorrect. If the soul is limited to the phantasms then it can never know of all matter. Therefore it is not necessary that the soul be immaterial since it still cannot know of all matter. All the soul does not have to be is matter that you are trying to understand since it would be unable to understand it because it is it.
Aquinas would disagree with this stating that if the soul were material than it would be part of our body but we can cognize what our body is so this does not follow. He is incorrect though. Although you can understand some parts of your body there are others that you cannot since it is physically impossible for your body to do so. For example you can never see what your face looks like. What you can see is what a reflection of your face looks like by looking at a reflective substance. No matter how hard you try you can never see your entire face without a reflection since the eye is physically incapable of see it. Thus although you can cognize some aspects of your body you can never completely cognize your entire body. If you cannot
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
One may first look at the argument contained within Descartes’ book Meditations on First Philosophy. In the sixth meditation Descartes states “On the one hand I have a clear and distinct idea of myself, in so far as I am simply a thinking, non-extended thing and on the other hand I have a distinct idea of body, in so far as this is simply an extended, non-thinking thing. And accordingly, it is certain that I am really distinct from my body, and can
For Aquinas intellect comes from the soul and the body working in unison. The soul is the substantial form of a living material thing. It is the actuality of a living material substance. Even though the rational soul is what differentiates humans from other living things, it does not make us human beings. Aquinas writes that "we could maintain this if we were to suppose that the activities of sensory souls are proper to such souls apart from bodies." (Aquinas 62) Aquinas is saying that we would be able to say that the human
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,
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
Summary: The problem of the soul continues as Descartes suggested that the human is composed of two completely different substances; a physical body which Descartes compares with a machine, and a non-physical mind, related to the soul, that allows humans to think and feel even if it has no “measurable dimensions” (67). But Elizabeth put in doubt his ideologies when she realized that a non-physical thing doesn’t have the strength to push and move the body. This led to several questions unanswered and also let space for other materialist theories such as behaviorism, mind-brain identity, and functionalism, which also fail in offering an explicit solution.
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
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.
To Lucretius, this works in the opposite way as well, “For without the intelligence and mind no part of the soul / can reside in the limbs for even a tiny part of time […] but a person remains in life whose intelligence and mind remains”(3.398-399). This is explained further as his argument develops.
In his only extant work, the poem De Rerum Natura (On the Nature of Things), Epicurean author Titus Lucretius Carus writes of the soul as being inseparable from the corporeal body. This view, although controversial in its opposition to the traditional concept of a discrete, immortal soul, is nevertheless more than a mere novelty. The argument that Lucretius makes for the soul being an emergent property of interactions between physical particles is in fact more compelling and well-supported now than Lucretius himself would have ever imagined.
Since Descartes was able to think, he knew that he existed ultimately. With this in mind, Descartes reckoned that a person 's "self" illustrates their identity. Descartes states: “that he possesses a body intimately conjoined... and that he has a clear and distinct idea of himself, inasmuch...it is certain that this I [that is to say, my soul by which I am what I am], is entirely and absolutely distinct from my body, and can exist without it" (Descartes, Meditations On First Philosophy, pg.29). In fact, Descartes proposes that the body connects dually with the mind, which he believes the body is "divisible", and the mind as "indivisible", but he also informs the readers that he knows certainly who he is. Not only did Descartes deem this information as true, but he was adamant about the possibility of living without a soul. In particular, Descartes depicts a vivid picture of how the
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
I believe there is a soul, which also is the mind, and a physical body. The argument that supports my belief the best will generate from the concept of a persons thoughts. I reject the belief that everything that is real must be in physical form.