preview

Descartes Arguments For The Mind Body Problem

Good Essays

The mind body problem can be understood in the following way, there is something it is like to ‘be’ and this ‘being’ is by its nature subjective and an organism has conscious metal states only if there is something it is like to ‘be’ that organism. This indeed seems to be incredibly perplexing to explain in terms of science because science the way it is practiced currently only explains phenomena objectively, either it tries to reduce and explain the subjective in terms of objective processes or only makes co-relation of the subjective processes to the objective processes but if it only makes co-relation then it is not able to explain the subjective itself. For example take the color red, no account of any physical theory of light wave, how …show more content…

Substance dualist’s main claim is that mind and body are two utterly distinct kind of things, Descartes formulates this in the following way; the essential property of matter is that it is extended in space thus is a physical entity located in space on the other hand the essential property of a mind is thought and thus is a non-physical entity not located in space. This according to this the picture we get is that the world contains two kinds of things namely mental substances and physical substances. To understand Descartes arguments for substance dualism it will first be helpful to first understand Leibniz’s principle of the identity of indiscernibles (which from now I will refer to as Leibniz’s Law). Leibniz’s law claims that X and Y are same if all the properties of X and Y are the same. One example of this would be water and H2O, they are both one and the same thing, for example if water boils at hundred Celsius then so will H2O, and if H2O conducts electricity then water will also conduct electricity. Now similarly to foreshadow further in the essay if we are to apply this law to identity theory then for them any property of pain should be identical to property of c-fiber firing and vice versa. Thus if one is able to locate a property of pain which is not a property of c-fiber firing or vice versa then according to Leibniz’s law pain and c-fiber firing are not …show more content…

This idea was first pointed to as far back as Thomas Hobbes and Pierre Gassendi, they both made claims which now would be understood as mind/brain identity theory (R 39). However it wasn’t till the mid nineteen hundreds this claim was systematically fleshed out by a group of Australian philosophers which included J.J.C Smart. Smart gives the following analogy to make the argument clear, mental states are identical to brain states in the same way water in identical to H2O or lightning is identical to atmospheric electrical discharge. To further clarify the argument we will explain the important distinction between token and types. Imagine that there are four German Shepard’s playing in the park, in this case we have four ‘tokens’ of the ‘type’ German Shepard. The tokens are the individual dogs and the type is the kind or class they belong to. The German Shepherds also belong to many other types for example, mammals, animals, material, object, etc. Now that we have the distinction between tokens and types clear we can further proceed and explain token identity and type identity. Take for example Superman and Clark Kent are the same person so if were to be invited to a party by Clerk Kent you are simultaneously invited to the party by Superman. Thus Clerk Kent and Superman being the same person are token identical.

Get Access