With the number of brain injury cases observed and the continuous advances in neuroscience, this has proven to be strong evidence in supporting materialism. By defining what Cartesian dualists and materialists mean by the ‘brain’, ‘mind’, ‘body’ and ‘soul’, an argument on behalf of Cartesians dualists will be reached, that responds to evidence concerning brain injuries with the claims that the brain is only ‘an instrument of the soul’. This will lead to the conclusion that there is stronger contemporary support for materialism due to neuroscience and that the Cartesian dualism argument as it is, may be wrong. However future neuroscience discoveries could continue to claim significant parts of both theories as wrong, meaning materialism as …show more content…
Looking throughout history, the brain has not always been associated with thought; even today we may associate such feelings as pain from the part of our body in which we were hurt, not as a mental state inside our brain. However when scientists observed brain injury patients they realised that thinking could take place in the brain. One famous example is Gage’s Case ; the calm railroad worker after a freak accident, that damaged the frontal lobes of his brain, turned into an aggressive person who became unrecognisable to his friends and family. Neuroscientists have now discovered with more cases similar to Gage’s that damage to specific regions of the brain can severely affect a person’s mental abilities or personality.
Due to these discoveries, many have now considered this as strong evidence for the opposing theory to dualism – materialism which believes that “mental states are brain states”. Materialists accept the notion that the brain is only a lump of neutrons and that our dreams, beliefs and desires can be reduced to the “firing of c-fibres”. Paul Churchland, an advocate for the brain injury argument for materialism writes:
“[I]n sum, the neuroscientist can tell us a great deal about the brain about its constitution and the physical laws that govern it; he can already explain much of our behaviour in terms of the physical, chemical and electrical properties of the brain...”
Modern-day Cartesian dualists can respond to the materialist’s
In his writings, “A Contemporary Defense of Dualism,” J.P. Moreland argues the point that the mind and brain are separate from each other. It seems as a quick thought that both are the same. However, the mind deals with ideas, thoughts and hopes. The brain is made up of the neural process. Throughout the entire argument, Moreland tries to prove the theory of physicalism, which is the idea that only things that exist are composed of matter. His explanation is that the soul doesn’t exist and the brain controls everything.
In Allan Jones’s presentation, A Map of the Brain, he explains his current project and why is essential to the modern day. Jones first starts off by giving the audience some background information about the brain. He states that the brain is a complex organ that receives around twenty percent of the blood from our hearts as well as twenty percent of the oxygen from our lungs. Jones explains that the brain is essential to the body because it controls everything we do. Even though the brain is very complex, it does not mean that it is not organized and structured. In the past century, scientists have created a blue stain that stains neuron bodies. This showed scientists that neurons were unevenly distributed throughout the brain depending on
Over the years, neuroscience has grown to reach new conclusions. Churchland said that neuroscience would reach the point of being able to answer the identity theory. “Neuroscience will discover taxonomy of neural states”(317), that are connected with our mental states. The nervous system will also be explored and provide information on the capacities of our physical structures.
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.
When contemplating the relationship between the mind and body, most philosophers advocate either dualism, the view that the mind and body belong to the mental and physical categories respectively, or physicalism, the stance that there is only the physical. (Gertler 108) Brie Gertler upholds the former perspective, and her essay In Defense of Mind-Body Dualism aims to disprove physicalism by establishing the possibility of experiencing pain without the firing of C-fibers, which physicalists believe is identical to pain. (110) She claims that thought experiments are best for determining matters of possibility, but only if such experiments utilize “sufficiently comprehensive” concepts. After first clarifying why Gertler emphasizes the need for
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.
In David Armstrong’s thought-provoking work titled, The Nature of Mind, he explains that the most convincing way to make sense of the mind-body problem is to approach it in a materialistic way. Specifically, Armstrong shows that the science of physico-chemical processes of the brain is the best way to explain the nature of our mind. He goes on to explain traditional and dispositional behaviorism, and states his own materialistic take on behaviorism. His arguments throughout his paper are very logical, and though there have been arguments against his explanations, he effectively justifies the materialistic view of the mind.
Imagine a situation where your entire personality is changed forever by an object that pierces an area of your brain. Those who have had a frontal lobotomy, whether purposefully or not, have had their personality changed permanently. An unlucky foreman of the Rutland Railroad, Phineas Gage, was on the receiving end of a tragic occurrence that severed the frontal lobe area of his prefrontal cortex. He underwent the experience of having a railroad spike pierce him beneath his left cheek and exit through his skull, consequently injuring an important area of his brain. This occurrence changed one part of Gage’s personality completely, though he seemed almost entirely functional after his accident. The one thing that changed in Gage was his ability to imagine the future. He lived completely present in the moment. The unique accident that affected Phineas Gage can be broken down with various different philosophical approaches to answer what is called the “mind-body problem”. The mind-body problem is composed of attempting to explain things like beliefs, consciousness, emotions, etc., in organisms. Physicalism, dualism, and functionalism all have their unique explanation for the mind-body problem’s implication of Phineas Gage’s accident.
It was the 17th century British scientist Thomas Willis who recognized that the custard like tissue of the brain was where our mental world existed. The brain is an electric organ. Now we know that instead of animal spirits, voltage spikes travel through it and out into the body’s nervous system.
The idea that mental states are non-reducible properties of brain states is the central tenant of a theory of mind called property dualism. However, before we can assess the theory we must be aware that the question assumes the existence of mental states and as such we cannot answer this question from some perspectives (e.g. eliminative materialism)
The concept of neuroplasticity has long been questioned. The term of “neuroplasticity” did not even come about until the mid-late 20th century. When the term “plastic” was used to describe the brain by a select few neuroscientists, they were laughed at and the term was never thought of as a description for the human brain. The human brain was seen as a closed circuit and one that once you had it, you definitely had it. Scientists thought the brain would not develop anymore past a certain point in your life. Norman Doidge brings the concept of neuroplasticity into reality in his book “The Brain that Changes Itself,” a book about the triumphs in the frontier of brain science.
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.
Suppose that there is a brilliant neuroscientist, let's call her Mary, who for her whole life has lived in a black and white room. Now Mary has learned every physical fact about everything there is to know in life. She's observed the outside world and learned these physical facts by watching other people's experiences and
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