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.
In this essay, I will discuss and formally analyze the opinions in approval of substance dualism and conclude that substance dualism is without a doubt an accurate way of thinking. Firstly, it is important to describe what exactly what I mean by substance dualism. Basically, it asks a very menial question such as: what kind of thing is our mind? According to substance dualists aka Descartes, "the mind and the body are composed of different substances and that the mind is a thinking thing that lacks the usual attributes of physical objects such as size, shape, location etc." [Descartes] Substance dualism is then tested by different opinions which in return vouch for its soundness.
I do not believe that the Identity theory solves the mind/body problem as well, because the identity theorists they fail to construe what consciousness is from both the internalists and externalists perspectives. Since something as complex as consciousness cannot be simplified to physical properties as the identity theorists would like to think so, then they are left with the question of how someone is able to understand if they really, in fact, aware of their consciousness.
Substance dualism is a never ending argument in the Philosophy world as it’s been going on for decades. It is the view that the universe contains two important types of entity which is mental and material. The structure of this paper is that four main argument leads to one conclusion. Firstly, I’ll argue about Descartes’s ‘separability argument’ which stands as the definition of Substance Dualism. Secondly, I’ll argue that mental and physical have different and perhaps irreconcilable properties. An argument is not complete without a counter argument which in this case the “pairing” problem that exists in Descartes theory is highlighted and where is the interaction of material and immaterial takes
Perhaps one of the most controversial issues in the Cartesian view of mind and body is how the two substances interact. In the book The passion of the Soul Descartes returned to the problem; he suggests that there is a gland in the middle of the brain in charge of the interaction; he maintains that “from there it radiates through the rest of the body by means of the animal spirits”) (Descartes, 1649/1984, p.341). But what does he mean? The pineal gland is itself physical; Gassendi pointed out that “If it is a physical point, the difficulty still stands, since such a point does not wholly lack of parts. If is a mathematical point, then such a point, as you are aware is, purely imaginary” (Descartes, 1641/1985, p.236) To
that you exist is proof that you in fact exist as how can you doubt
In the world of philosophy, there has been an ever growing skepticism of the relationship between the human body and its mental state. The physical state of a person is tangible, meaning that they can be seen by anyone and touched. While the mental state of a person is embedded in their consciencousness, meaning that it can’t be observed by others unless willing expressed by said person. I will be using Leibniz’s law of identity to show that the metal states of an individual are distinct from a physical state. Using the notion of sameness, I can prove a valid argument that the physical and mental states are distinct. While this theory in part can be debated, some identity theorists can provide a rebuttal this claim. I will provide a response to an identity theorist rebuttal.
Descartes was no exception and believed the mind and body to be two completely different substances. He defines the body as an extended, non-thinking substance and the mind as a non-extended, thinking sunstance. But it not just these definitions that allow Descartes to adopt a dualistic point of view. Descartes
Descartes’ argue that mind is better known than body by first claiming humans as fundamentally rational, meaning “a thing that doubts, understands, affirms, denies, is willing, is unwilling,” ( Descartes, 19) he therefore argues that humans have the ability to know their proper minds clearly and distinctly. He proposes the conception of the mind where the imagination and the senses are also inherent capabilities of the body (faculties), specifically powers of the mind.
Dualism covers the issue that is concerned with the connection between the mind and the brain, and whether humans are composed of all physical matter or contain a mind along with a physical body. Dualism is the belief that humans have both a non-physical mind along with a physical body. There are two types of dualism, which include Substance Dualism and Property Dualism. Substance Dualism claims the mind exists independently from the body, and Property Dualism claims the brain causes the mind into existence. When compared to the other beliefs mentioned prior, Dualism provides strong arguments made by René Descartes and Gottfried Leibniz that help us understand and answer the questions previously mentioned. The main differences between Substance Dualism and Property Dualism are not far
Putnam claims that what makes up a psychological state can vary between different species (Putnam, 1975). He then attempted to undermine the validity of identity theory with the examples of octopi and aliens. Octopi and aliens have brains that are made up of totally different material, yet they can still function the same. Hence he came to the conclusion that we shouldn’t look at what our mental states are made up of, but rather their function, which is that they cause particular behaviours. By saying mental states are functional states, and not brain states, you are accepting the possibility of brainless systems having mental states (Block, 1978). One type of
In his meditations Descartes supposed there was two fundamentally different sorts of substances in the universe, physical stuff, which bodies and chairs etc. are made up of; which is extended in space, hence he called it res extensa, but there’s also mind stuff which isn’t in space at all thinking stuff or, res cogitans. Bodies are made of res extensa and minds are made of res cogitans and the two are separate. To understand why he thought this we must go back to his mission statement, which was to doubt everything he could in order to find something indubitable which he thought would be certain knowledge. Descartes found that he could doubt everything except that he was thinking since doubt was a kind of thinking, and since thinking requires a thinker he knew that he must exist hence the famous I think therefore I am syllogism known as the cogito. Descartes goes on to say that he can doubt the existence of his body and all other physical things but he cannot doubt his mind exists because of the cogito.
In denying that the mind and mental properties, like qualia, are nonphysical things, mind-brain theory objects to both substance and property dualism. Therefore it is a physicalist approach to the philosophy of
This paper will attempt to explain Descartes’ first argument for the distinction that exists between mind and body. Dualism is a necessary aspect of Descartes’ metaphysics and epistemology. This distinction is important within the larger framework of Meditations on First Philosophy (1641) because after doubting everything (body, extension, senses, etc.), Descartes comes to the conclusion that because he doubts, he must be a thinking thing and therefore exist (p.43). This means that the mind must be separate and independent from the body. One can doubt that the body exists while leaving the mind intact. To doubt that the mind exists, however, is contradictory. For if the mind does not exist, how, or with what, is that doubt being accomplished.
This is the doctrine which the mind-brain identity theory denies and seeks to refute. Its counter-claim is that mind and brain are one and the same entity, in short, that mental states are brain states. Why, then, from this perspective, has the dualist been mistaken? He may have been confused into believing that one thing is two things by the fact that it has two names. For example, while the Morning Star and the Evening Star appear by their different names to denote different things, in fact, astronomical studies reveal them to be the same (in fact, the planet Venus). Water is a different name from H20 but there is no difference at all in the physical substance which both names label. Scientific research has revealed previously hidden identities: that the temperature of a gas is the mean kinetic energy of its molecules; that light is electromagnetic radiation. In a similar way research in neuroscience is expected to show that the sound of a vacuum cleaner, a pang of hunger, the taste of mustard are nothing more or less than the firing of certain neurons.
The mind-brain identity theory is an ontological perspective which centers around the idea that the mind can be closely associated with the brain to be considered the same. In other words, a person’s mind processes are coherent with their brain processes. It is a significant topic included in the philosophy of mind. According to the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, the identity theory of mind is “to the effect that these experiences just are brain processes, not merely correlated with brain processes”. In this