The Idea Of Self By Derek Parfit

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

In this paper, I will discuss the “Divisibility argument” on Descartes mind- body dualism presented on Descartes meditations. I will claim that the mind and the body are in fact different as Descartes argument suggests, but I will more rather neglect and explain why his belief that the mind is indivisible is wrong. I also will discuss how Descartes argument on the body’s divisibility is reasonable, and the reasons why I believe this argument is true.

What is the mind-body problem? The mind-body problem asks the question, are the mind and body separate substances of elements of the same substance? In this paper I wish to propose, and try to provide support for Descartes notion of the immaterial mind, by critically discussing the view of substance dualism, pertaining to the relationship between the mind and body. The two arguments of which I will provide in this paper to support this view are divisibility and disembodied existence. There are two fundamentally different substances in this universe, physical and mental properties, this paper will explore both of these substances (8).

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.

The “self” is notion of oneself and qualities that distinguishes one individual from the other individuals. Self is consist of perspectives, characteristics, emotion and personalities of a person that makes them different from others. However, Robert Thurman implies that the "self" does not actually exist, and individuals have to become selfless in order to achieve a “fulfilling life.” He uses the word “pretend self” to describe that people 's identities are inherently false identities since individuals can control it. Therefore, according to Thurman in order to become the true self, individuals have to become “selfless”. Thurman discusses the importance of achieving the state of “selflessness” to find inner peace in his excerpt “Wisdom.” He encourages individuals to practice self-exploration, which can lead individual to give up their authentic self for the wellfare of others’ lives. become a “selfless” person, which then allows individuals to become flexible to change instead of staying fixated. On the other hand Beth Loffreda in her essay “Losing Matt Shepard: Life and Politics in the Aftermath of Anti-Gay Murder.” describes the effects of the violent act have on the town of Laramie. Loffreda discusses the town residents’ self-perception and how the minority community reacted to the murder of Matt Shepard.In contrast to Thurman 's’ argument, Loffreda describes the change in perspectives and actions of the residents, indicating that an individual 's “self” is not fixated

In Descartes Meditations on First Philosophy, he introduces the divisibility argument for his idea of mind-body dualism. It argues that the mind is distinct from the body and that they are different "substances". The argument has two premises; the mind is indivisible and the body is divisible. In this essay, I will interpret Descartes' argument by discussing the key points of these premises and how they are supported. I will also be incorporating my own thoughts on the argument to determine whether the divisibility argument is enough to validate the idea of mind-body dualism.

Therefore, there cannot be any persisting idea of “self.” In short, because the “self” must be a constant, persisting, stable thing, and yet all knowledge is derived from impressions, which are transient, non-persisting, variable things, it follows that we do not really have knowledge

For in Descartes terms, it was plausible to doubt that one has a body, but impossible to doubt the existence of one’s mind; therefore “…self and mind must be identical” (Palmer 162).

He finds it plausible that we are all living in a dream and we have never experienced reality. He can no longer give any credence to his senses and finds himself in a place of complete uncertainty. Descartes comes to the conclusion that nothing can be perceived more easily and more evidently than his own mind. He has discovered that even bodies are not accurately perceived by the senses or the faculty of imagination, and are only accurately being perceived by the intellect. He also realizes that they are not distinguished through being touched, smelled, or tasted, but by being understood alone. (An apple is an apple because our mind tells us that it is an apple.) It is the faculty of reason that gives the knowledge and lets the mind know the truths and essences of objects. Descartes assumes that all of us can be decided by our senses, someone can see something far away, and then discover that is not what we thought it was. Or even a oar when is immerse half in water attempt to be bent, but instead is straight. Descartes think that we cannot always be sure of what we sense, and gives the example of himself seated by the fire.

Mr. Descartes was optimistic of the fact that all men are capable of rational thought or reasoning. He took to a quiet environment and contemplated the serious problem for which he wanted to reconcile within himself; ho can man learn knowledge. Facilitating the process of reason is the element Descartes terms, "the natural light of the mind." He argues that if we are to attain axiomatic truths we must be free of "precipitancy and prejudice", whereby reason, the natural light of the mind, shall guide us to the certainties which define our existence.

Descartes’ claim of “I think, therefore I am”, is an attempt to establish a firm foundation for the understanding of the universe and explores the ideas of the self and what we can know to be real. However, there is one major flaw in this approach. That flaw is how we are to create this foundation when before it we had nothing and the paradoxes in the creating definitions of words.

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.

Elaborating further, he saw the only way that comes close to understanding reality is the realm of his reason, in that the use of knowledge and cognition helped Descartes understand the world around him. He then explains further that with his mind, he is able to perceive the world as it is. On Descartes view regarding the mind, he admits that “for since I have now learned that bodies themselves are not perceived not, strictly speaking, by the senses or by the imaginative faculty, but by intellect alone.”

Throughout the first two mediations of Descartes’ Meditations on First Philosophy, Descartes’ is concerned with knowledge, doubt, the human mind, and how all three of those things interact with one another. While explaining this in more detail, Descartes attempts to convene his main idea through the use of what is known as “The Wax Argument.” Descartes’ uses the argument to further and support his arguments about the mind, most notably, that he knows himself more than anything external. The main way he does this is through stating the limits of his imagination.

Based on the conclusion that “I am something” or “I am; I exist – that is certain” (15), Descartes explores his Cogito argument in “Meditation Two”. First of all, another question immediately follows such a conclusion: if such something – “I” – necessarily exists, what it is? Or what is such an “I”? Descartes first shows the evolution of his own meditations about this question. He once divided “I” into “the body” and “the soul”, the latter of which refers to “a rarefied I-know-not-what”, “the power of self-motion, […] of sensing or of thinking”, or “some supremely powerful and […] malicious deceiver” (14). Nevertheless, he not only shows his current “discovery”: “thought exists; it alone cannot be separated from me”; but also claims: “I am a true thing and am truly existing”, “I am […] a thinking thing; that is, a mind, or intellect, or understanding, or reason” (15).