PHIL205: Take-Home Midterm
Sarah Muench
1407552
Question 1:
Berkeley’s arguments for idealism dismiss the mind-body problem by introducing immaterialism in which only the mind exists. Berkeley suggests that everything in reality is experienced internally via perception; therefore, everything we experience must be a product of the mind. According to Berkeley, to exist is to be perceived. If an object is experienced via the senses and anything perceived by the senses is an idea within the mind, then an object must be an idea within the mind. From this, the only things that exist with certainty are the perceptions/ideas and their perceivers. Because perceptions exist in the mind, the existence of a perception is dependent on the mind. Minds are the source of perceptions but are passive in what they perceive via the senses therefore do not have control over what is being perceived. Because only a mind can be the source of an idea and we do not have control over the objects we perceive via our senses, then we must perceive the ideas of
…show more content…
When the brain undergoes physical damage, the mental capabilities within that brain are negatively affected. If mind and matter are completely separate, the damaged material brain should not compromise the immaterial substances of the mind. Furthermore, if the mind is said to perceive matter but the mind is distinct from matter then it actually just perceives an internal mental image of the external matter. Because perception of matter is just a representation of the matter within the mind Descartes fails to explain the process how the two distinct substances actually interact. The complete distinction between mind and matter makes it impossible to relate the two realities without some sort of intervening supernatural power. This intervening extra force leaves dualism with the fallacy of false alternatives, as it can be neither mind nor
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 this paper, I will examine the principal merits and challenges of René Descartes’ concept of dualism and then defend my preferred alternative among the options Paul M. Churchland discusses. After briefly defining Cartesian Dualism, I will show that its principal merits are that it is consistent with common sense and that it is able to explain phenomena that appear mental in nature. Next, I will show that its principal challenges are its failure to adequately explain how the mind and the body can causally interact, and its failure to respond to the observation that brain damage impairs the mind. Finally, I will explain why Functionalism is the best alternative to Cartesian Dualism.
George Berkeley believed that nothing is real but minds and their ideas. Ideas do not exist without the mind. Through a complicated line of reasoning he concluded that “to be is to be perceived.” Something exists only if someone has the idea of it. George Berkeley stated that if a tree fell in the forest and there was no one there to hear it, not only would it not make a sound, but there would be no tree. According to George Berkeley, that the mind of God always perceives everything.
Descartes’ strongest argument for dualism is his doubt argument. He argues that the mind and body are distinct and separate things because by the very act of doubting there is a thinking thing, there must be something in the first place to do the doubting. Descartes goes on to develop his argument and declares that his mind could exist without his body. Some doubt Descartes claims, saying that just because two things are distinct, does not mean one can exist without the other. However, Descartes proves his famous argument “ I think, therefore I am”, and establishes the mind as a separate substance from the body.
Berkeley's attempt to popularize his pro-mind conception of the external world, Three Dialogues between Hylas and Philonous, serves to undermine Locke's distinctions between primary and secondary qualities of the external world. In his publication, Berkeley uses dialogue between Hylas and Philnous, which consists of a series of arguments, to determine the most sound theory. Ground rules of the debate consists of: whoever of the two's position avoids skepticism about knowledge of physical objects wins and that if one position can be shown to entail that we cannot know anything about physical objects, consequently that position should be dismissed as absurd (Kelly, 2013). Throughout the arguments, Berkeley weakens Locke's theory of Limited Representationalism by counteracting Locke's with the possibility that instead of “matter” that comprises physical objects in the external world, these objects are simply ideas. Drawing back on Berkeley's catchy motto, “to be is to be perceived”, he proposes three arguments that support his idealist view that the motto encapsulates. The three pieces of support also importantly shed skepticism upon Lockes primary and secondary distinctions involving “matter”. The three statements of support include: The argument that physical
I would like to begin this paper by addressing what question I hope to answer through the entirety of this paper: is the mind physical? As simple as this question may seem to be, there still, to this day, is not a definite answer. There are, mostly, two approaches to answering this problem, through dualism or physicalism. The dualist, for the purposes of this paper, simply believes that the mind and the body are not equal and therefore, they are not one in the same. The physicalist, however, would come back to say that there are no such things as non-physical objects and therefore, they would conclude that the body and the mind are both physical. After weighing on both sides of this argument, I am going to defend the physicalist ideas and
Descartes dualism proposal is an interesting concept due to its simplicity. Yet, being so simply makes one more and more want to dismiss. His argument begins with what is known as Real Distinction. This is the term used to describe a substance or non-physical object that exists on due to the help of a higher being or power—be it God or science, though Descartes would likely argue for God. The mind, in Descartes view, can only exist because of this higher power. One knows the mind exists simply due to being able to ask the question of its existence. However, to prove that the body exists one must think about the physical nature, shape, and sensations of said body. In Descartes sixth meditation he discusses the idea that a person can conceive their mind without their body, but cannot conceive of the reverse. This argument seems to be the most sounds.
Dualism and monism is a famous philosophy topic from ancient to now. The word "Dualism" means that our physical and our mental are independent. And our body and our mind cannot be the same. It is because of mind and body is two separate substances. In the contract, the "monism" means that both of the physical and mental are combined being one. And our mind and body are indivisible and are each influenced by the other. The monism and dualism individually has its strengths and weaknesses.
Berkeley offers both an epistemological and metaphysical argument against the idea of mind independent matter as an object of knowledge. Berkeley talks about the attributes of matter which are primary, quantitative, and geometric. Casual powers that change position and cause secondary qualities that apply to the senses and is what you see in your mind. He thinks the idea of matter is either contradictory or empty. When you subtract out the things that you get from your mind you are left with nothing. Sensation he says, is a thing in your head so it doesn’t belong to the object. If what we know about the world we know through perception and perception is in our minds then we must know nothing about the outside world. Our ideas of the attributes of matter are derived by abstraction from secondary qualities. If we have an idea of matter it comes from sense or by reason. Senses are ideas in our mind they don’t resemble what we perceive so it can’t be senses.
For centuries philosophers have debated on monism and dualism, two different philosophical views of the human person. Philosophers have been trying to decipher whether the person is made up of the mind, the body, or both. Monists hold the belief that existence is purely based upon one ultimate “category of being” this means that either the person is made up of only the body or only the mind (Morris p155). Dualists hold the belief that existence is based upon the body as well as the mind and its mental properties (Morris p155).
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.
To support his claim of dualism, Descartes presents a number of arguments that attempt to prove that the mind is separate from his body. Two of his strongest points are from the conceivability argument and divisibility argument. Further reinforcement of his claims comes from the idea of privileged first-person access, where he concludes that only an individual has full access to his own thoughts and state of mind.
In my mind, dualism is a more attractive view to take when considering the mind-brain issue. The idea that the mind is a separate entity and that it is independent of the physical body is the central point of dualism. One reason it appeals to me is because of my religion, my Catholic upbringing. Introspection is another good reason why dualism is a little more logical to me than materialism.. It logically explains why the mind and brain are separate. Also, the divisibility argument raises good points to allow dualism to appear to be the more attractive idea in my eyes.
Berkeley can be considered an immaterialist. He thought that there are no material substances. There are only a finite amount of mental substances and an infinite mental substance; he perceived these infinite substances as God. With these points there is general agreement with allot of philosophers. There is much less agreement on Berkeley's primary approach to idealism and immaterialism and on the role of some of his specific arguments.
Mind-body dualism is usually seen as the central issue in philosophy of the mind. The problem with mind-body dualism is that it is unknown whether the mind really is a separate entity from the human body as Descartes states in his argument, or whether the mind is the brain itself. Descartes believed that in a person existed two major components, the physical body and the nonphysical body which was called the mind or soul. As a scientist, Descartes believed in mechanical theories of matter, however, he was also very religious and did not believe people could merely be mechanical creatures that ran like “clockwork.” And so, it was Descartes who argued that the mind directed thoughts. To account for this, he split the world into two parts,