The Unity of the Mind and Body

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

The connection between the ‘bondage of mind’ and the ‘bondage of the body’ as found in the southern ideology justifying slavery; The notion of slavery seems foreign to the majority of people today, but for our ancestors and Frederick Douglass it was a very real part of life. The concept of slavery is one that people today find unfathomable, particularly in the justification of slavery and why people owned slaves. The institution of slavery is as old as civilization itself existing in various forms throughout the world, history and remarkably, continues to exist in some people’s lives today. The historical common denominator is that enslavement of another human being has been more often than not involuntary. Sometimes people sold themselves into slavery as a means of survival as is seen with English indentured servants coming from England to the “New world” in the early 1500’s. These indentured servants would enter a contract with their master and after a period of time would fulfill their obligation and then be released to continue and pursue their lives. However, most forms of slavery were not voluntary and these people would be forced into enslavement via becoming prisoners of war, punishment for illegal or criminal conduct, failure to pay debts, sold by parents or chieftains, birthed by a slave, or transferred from one master to another through sale or inheritance.

For centuries philosophers have engaged themselves into conversations and arguments trying to figure out the nature of a human person; this has lead to various theories and speculation about the nature of the human mind and body. The question they are tying to answer is whether a human being is made of only the physical, body and brain, or both the physical or the mental, mind. In this paper I will focus on the mind-body Identity Theory to illustrate that it provides a suitable explanation for the mind and body interaction.

Throughout the history of civilization, there have been many great thinkers and philosophers who lay claim and offer their theory of the world around them. Michel de Montaigne, a prominent philosopher of the French Renaissance, argued in his essays of the habitual inconsistency of man and how it is nearly impossible for man to correct these everyday irregularities and contradictions. To say that man is flawed and utterly irregular are statements not particularly surprising or revelatory for philosophers to make, even in Montaigne’s time. However, what can be considered unique about Montaigne, aside from his sharp perceptions of the everyday man, are his sharp—and honest—perceptions of himself, never bragging about his intellectual prowess or

Acceptance and understanding into a persons society is one of the major goals that people strive to achieve. There is a natural tendency for the individual to be compelled to join the majority. Many times, however, a person will change themselves to fit into the group instead of having the group change itself for the person. This forces a person to take action, form opinions or adopt customs that do not reflect their own beliefs. Montaigne addresses the differences between two distinctly different forms of society in his essay Of Cannibals. Montaigne’s comparison between the recently discovered aborigines of the new world and his European society compels a person to reconsider what an ideal society should be. Should a natural state be the

One who seeks to know what justice is should be dissatisfied with the lovers of spectacles; if you let someone believe a false idea of what justice is, then that is an injustice in itself. It is like letting someone believe that santa claus is real for their entire life. Lovers of spectacles focus on fair things, subject to opinions and change what they think is beautiful. Its just to appreciate the form and idea of beauty but it is unjust to not seek out wisdom/truth and only focus on beautiful things. By explaining to the lovers of spectacels that they need to be lovers of the truth instead, is a just action because you are opening their minds to true wisdom. A philosopher aspires to know what justice is and they aspire to know the truth. They focus on the eye of the soul and mind. Philosophers are lovers of learning and seek out wisdom. This is shown when Socrates says, “But the one who is willing to taste every kind of learning with gusto, and who approaches learning with delight, and is insatiable, we shall justly assert to be a philosopher, won 't we?”

In the first part of this extract, Montaigne considers how one can obtain the most reliable information on the New World. He wants to avoid creating stereotypes and prejudices, thus aspires to get the most accurate information. Lines 1-2 of this passage demonstrate Montaigne’s use of employing syntax to highlight his ideas. By describing his servant as ‘simple et grossier’ in the first clause of the sentence, Montaigne’s readers’ instinctive response to this description may be to assume that, due to his lack of education or status, his view may not be of much value. The references to great philosophers such as Plato and Aristotle throughout the essay could certainly be considered to make the opinions of a plain and ignorant man seem irrelevant. However, true to his style throughout ‘Des Cannibales’, Montaigne

In regards to Montaigne 's statement on page 23 in Apology for Raymond Sebond, I would deduce that he was using the metaphor of nature and natural tendencies in opposition to man 's vain, self-seeking façade that displaces God the creator. Montaigne 's statement appears to (on the surface at least) value mans naturalistic tendencies and graces in a much better light than our own vain-striving presumptions that claim that our "competent utterances" hold the very answers to the "right" way in which to conduct oneself. Montaigne constantly uses the contrast of animals and humans with the former representing a more pure, natural existence that I assume is to be

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.

These examples illustrate Montaigne’s belief that while there is some justification to base a judgment based on daily activities, it is nearly impossible to create a proper judgment of humankind, and when a historian cannot, they become hypocrites.

The concept of mind and body interactions has been debated among many modern philosophers. Some believe that our minds and bodies are different things, thus existing separately, while others believe that they exist as a whole. In this paper, I will be introducing two rationalist philosophical views regarding this topic, one which is by Rene Descartes and the other by Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz. Rationalists, in philosophical terms, are the ones who obtain their knowledge through reasoning rather than the human senses. Descartes and Leibniz both have similar perspectives, but Leibniz takes a slightly different approach to improve Descartes’ argument. This paper will first show Descartes’ original argument, an example that proves the argument to be invalid, and then lastly, a revised version of the argument with Leibniz’s help.

Envision living in a nation that has achieved the paramount form of society, one that is ideal in its ethical, social, and political facets. Simple to imagine but impossible to replicate, and that is, according to Plato’s Theory of Forms, because the physical world is a poor copy of these ideas, these forms, even the ones closest to perfection are imperfect. That is why a utopia can not be attained in reality. Although, in Montaigne’s Of Cannibals, it is proposed that the natural state is the closest to accomplishing this. The ideas set forth in this work, chiefly the concept of cultural relativism, influenced Shakespeare in his writing of The Tempest, and the characters Gonzalo and Caliban portray

The Mind-Body problem arises to Philosophy when we wonder what is the relationship between the mental states, like beliefs and thoughts, and the physical states, like water, human bodies and tables. For the purpose of this paper I will consider physical states as human bodies because we are thinking beings, while the other material things have no mental processes. The question whether mind and body are the same thing, somehow related, or two distinct things not related, has been asked throughout the history of Philosophy, so some philosophers tried to elaborate arrangements and arguments about it, in order to solve the problem and give a satisfactory answer to the question. This paper will argue that the Mind-Body Dualism, a view in

Some would choose to declare that every human being is both a body and a mind. Both being gelled together until death, than having the mind go on to exist and the body being lifeless. A person lives throughout two collateral histories, one having to do with what happens to the body and in it, and the other being what happens in and to the mind. What happens to the body is public and what happens to the mind is private. The events which reply to the body consist of the physical world, and the events of the mind consist of the mental world.

In our world constantly changing and the growth of the population living a victorious life in a world that offers few opportunities, it’s difficult because negativity can affect us on how we behave and how we pursue life. Aristotle believes that we should focus on living a good life by obtaining happiness and obtain the highest good by being self-sufficient. In the other hand, O sensei believes that we should acquire wisdom and virtue Also, that we shouldn’t engage in negativity acts and be virtuous. We should be able to find enlightenment by practicing Akido.Akido would help us find our inner self and inner peace. The practice of Akido is a great tool that can help us avoid negativity. Aristotle and O sensei believe that by living a virtuous life we must be able to obtain the highest good by obtain wisdom and virtue.