The question for philosophers of mind is, if the mind is immaterial and invisible, then how can we know whether or not it exists? Dualism’s answer is that human beings do have a mental component distinct from our physical bodies. It embraces the existence of free will and other mental aspects that seem to make humans unique from other creatures. To support dualism, Jaegwon Kim presents the following argument: “Suppose I am identical with this body of mine.” (Jaegwon Kim, Philosophy of Mind, page 42).
However, that conclusion is not good because on its own, it does not establish substance dualism. In order to do that, individuals need to know that bodies exist and that their nature is different from that of the mind. In Descartes’ third step of his argument, he only argues that the nature of the body is different from the mind. He never presents an argument for the existence of bodies. For example, if someone were to say that I am incorrect and that minds can exist without bodies, then I would like to prove them wrong.
In order to defend substance dualism, one must consider the existence of the soul, because it seems as though it is what substance dualism refers to as the mind. Many philosophers believe in the existence of the soul; it is also mentioned plentifully in Greek mythology as well as in
Since the beginning of philosophy, the argument of the mind-body problem has been constantly debated. The mind-body problem asks what the connection is between the mind and the body. Many philosophers have come up with their own theories to answer this predicament but each theory that philosophers have come up with has some indication of a flaw. The mind-body problem is a philosophical issue that inquires the relationship among the mental and physical properties. The fundamental point regarding the mind-body problem considers whether perceptions, thoughts, feelings, and other mental features are an extension of physical features or if they remain entirely independent of the physical world.
Although there have been many possible contributors to establishment of what is often called "advanced science," the ideas of the philosopher Rene Descartes are vital to science but especially to psychology. Descartes lived from 1596 to 1650, and usually wanted to find answers to the questions like Are the mind and body the same, or different?" His answers were started to be called as Cartesian Dualism, this concept say that mind and body are two different entities, but that the mind can influence the body and the body can influence the mind. So to research on this idea the church and the scientist divided the work among them. The church could still work to influence the mind of individuals, and the scientists of the day could study the body, each group having its own domain to some
I will explain both philosopher’s methods when it comes to viewing the everyday world, talk about their similarities and differences, and then choose Descartes’s method regarding Rationalism. I agree with Descartes method a lot more than Plato’s because I feel that inborn knowledge is a form of deception and escaping your reality, like Plato would suggest, would only leave you to be deceived even more. Both Plato and Descartes believe in Rationalism, and they also fear uncertainty. These two philosophers want to answer the same basic question, “What is the difference between opinion and certainty” (Palmer 39). Plato believes that all
I believe that Ockham’s Razor cannot be pitted against this argument because the Razor already explains that the belief of one supreme being is a lot simpler than the belief of many. Anslem’s argument is trying to prove the existence of “one” supreme being, which already complies with Ockham’s Razor. Aquinas’s Cosmological Argument of God’s existence on the other hand is way too complex. He states that efficient causes are the reason for God’s existence. This argument is too complex, and Ockham’s Razor
How come there are people who oppose Him? Atheism is the absence of belief in any gods or spiritual beings . They still follow moral codes like us; nevertheless they can create decisions without the help from God. There are many reasons why
Aristotles starting point is with the highest good. It is the ultimate end goal. The highest human good is always worth pursuing in its own right. It is an activity that is an end in itself. This conception allows him to isolate two features of what he determines the ‘end goal’ or ‘final purpose’.
Plato expresses his personal convictions and beliefs through the dialogues of his teacher, Socrates. Through the dialogue Phaedo, Plato presents four different arguments that he felt supported his idea of the soul being immortal, and that we will live on after the body no longer exists in the physical world. The four arguments that Plato lays out in the Phaedo are the argument of Opposites, Recollection, Affinity, and the final argument of The Forms. These arguments have been analyzed throughout the ages, receiving not only praise, but at times, criticism for seeming insufficient and weak. The strongest arguments for the immortality of the soul presented by Plato are the arguments of Affinity and The Forms.
The divide between dualism and physicalism is a driving philosophical question in the discussion of the nature of mind and body. While dualists argue that the mind is an immaterial substance that transcends extension, physicalists believe that everything is physical or supervenes on the physical. A common form of physicalism is set forth in the type-identity thesis, which asserts that every type of mental state is identical to a type of physical state. The token-identity thesis is another, much narrower form which only equates an individual thought to an individual brain state. Physicalism comes to mean that there is nothing in the world that is not physical.
I am saying that “human beings are more than merely physical beings.” In Plato’s dialogues Phaedo and Meno “Theory of Recollection”, I began to understand that the soul carries innate knowledge. In Meno, the way that Socrates is able to prove this is by showing how a slave boy seems to have the ability to understand basic geometric principles. Socrates then concludes that the slave boy’s soul possessed the knowledge of geometry the whole time. From this, you could say that Plato hold’s deductive reasoning within ourselves that we have no business knowing, and that they must have been carried from a previous existence. Plato’s theology involves some kind of reincarnation.