Dualism
In this paper I will be discussing the philosophical perspective of Cartesian Dualism. To draw upon reliable sources my information will be base from the textbooks Doing Philosophy as well as the "Unfortunate Dualist" found in the anthology Mind's I. I will make an attempt to show that Smullyan's theories based on anti-dualism do not hold weight in modern philosophy During the period when Descartes was alive, religion was a major part of society. The belief that God was all around, watching and controlling everything. This firm belief in religion made it easier for Descartes to justify dualism to the masses. If there were computer during that time his opinion may have differed because it would show him that the human mind is not the only form or intelligence. In order to prove many things such as the existence of a higher power, and the immortality of the soul, Descartes came up with. The thought experiment entailed imagining your existence without a material body, which is conceivable. Therefore Descartes envisioned the theory of dualism, the existence of the immaterial mind and the physical body. The main opponent to Cartesian Dualism is the theory of materialism. The theory of materialism states that the m
ind is brain matter and is stimulated or engaged into action. Bodily functions are occur when the brain tells the body it needs to move, and the body does so by neurons and electrodes that fire from the brain and stimulate the muscles in order to perform movement. The next argument presented by Descartes is the divisibility argument. The principle of indiscernibility of identicals: "if two things are numerically identical (that is, if two names or descriptions refer to one and the same thing), then whatever is true of one is true of the other, and visa versa." (54 Doing Philosophy) The premises presented by this is 1) Our minds are identical to our body, so what is true for the mind is also true of the body. 2) Minds are not divisible and our bodies are divisible. 3) With the previous premises it can be derived that the mind is not identical to the body. It proves the unfortunate dualist's mind would not be effected because the mind is not identical to the physical body so the physical drug would not injure the man's mind. The next argument for Cartesian Dualism is epiphenomenalism. This idea states that the mind is an ineffectual byproduct of our body. This theory still states that the mind and body both exist so it fits under Cartesian Dualism, but it states that what you experience physically during your lifetime is what you mind is composed of. For example when you were a young child and you touched the stove while it was on, you will burn yourself, and next time the child sees the stove is on he or she will not go near it. Since the body experienced pain from the stove it learns not to perform the same action again. "The mind is a by-product of a brain process and has no effect on the brain that produced it." (Doing Philosophy, 58) Applying this postulate to the "Unfortunate Dualist" it makes it impossible for the mind to be effected due to the fact that mind is not physically harmed like the body is, and only learns from the experience of
Some common words found in the essay are:
Cartesian Dualism, Unfortunate Dualist, Doing Philosophy, , CAT Scan, cartesian dualism, drug kill, unfortunate dualist, immaterial mind, physical drug, mind effected, doing philosophy, mind drug, drug kill mind, complex memories, mind argument, mind drug user, physical drug kill,
Approximate Word count = 1330
Approximate Pages = 5 (250 words per page double spaced)
|