The source of knowledge comes from innate ideas and deduction, there is no posteriori knowledge. On the contrary, empiricism regards experience is the primary source of knowledge. Descartes’ universal skepticism and rationalism The key of Descartes’ epistemology is ‘universal skepticism’, unlike tradition skepticism, universal skepticism aims to find a first principle, which in Descartes’ epistemology is ‘The Cogito’. In order to look for a solid ground for knowledge, Descartes has to eliminate any unreliable knowledge, or source of knowledge, which the first will be sensory representations. In the first of the Meditations, Descartes questioned the reliability on delivery of senses: What I have so far accepted as true par excellence, I have got either from the senses or by means of the senses.
The nature of reality is a primary concern for Parmenides, Heraclitus, and Plato. Parmenides believes that the substance of the universe is one and unchanging. Heraclitus argues counter to this view, that substance is constantly in flux. Plato agrees with some aspects of Parmenides’s and Heraclitus’s ideas but comes to a fundamentally different conclusion, that the universe is divided by what can be observed by the senses and what can only be understood through reason. Plato’s view allows for the ability of humans to know the universe, whereas the Pre-Socratic views would strip mankind of either their free-will or ability to find objective truths.
For example, John Locke is a main antagonist to innatism. According to Yacouba (2016), Locke criticized that Plato’s view of innate knowledge is more religious than rational because Plato asserted that knowledge is a process of remembrance which is already engraved in one’s soul; therefore, Plato’s doctrine of innatism can only be true to those who believe in reincarnation (Yacouba, 2016). This polemic does not seem convincing due to the lack of scientific evidence. On the other hand, the research of neuron system described earlier in the paper support Plato’s view of innatism with scientific evidence. Consequently, Plato’s doctrine that certain knowledge pre-exists in one’s mind at birth seems more reliable.
(2001 ). How is it possible for two different substances such as mind and body, that have nothing in common (because our mind, as we will explain in next sections, is not extended in space, and for the body cannot think alone) interact together. It was hard for him to elaborate clear explanation about the connection between mind and body, and when does it come (Watson, n.d.). He considered that this connection is the work of God's constant action because to Descartes substance does not require anything to exist. But this connection is still not clear, and it needs something to exist, and this where he pretended the interference of
While the other theories are focused one of identity or the other, but never both together. In support of dualism, Cornman and Searle state, “Whatever is mental depends essentially on consciousness or awareness, but what is material does not. Furthermore it certainly seems that nothing mental has size, shape, mass, or spatial location; such qualities seem only to characterize the material” (Cornman and Searle 240). The authors, aware of the two identities, are using these examples to establish a precedent as well as to help the two identities stand out. Furthermore, the authors begin to speak about how the identities have been connected since the beginning when God created the world.
What if nothing is real and it is all an illusion? And we are just connected by an experience machine that creates this images and send signs to our brains that makes us think we are seeing, touching, smelling, hearing, and or tasting. If you think about it even though it sounds crazy it makes sense if you believe in God. But what if you do not, or do not believe that we do live in a matrix? Then you would have to answer to the questions that the humanity has make for centuries.
In the realm of Philosophy, different views about the definition of the mind and its interactions exist. Among the many, Dualism stands as one of the most debatable, thanks to its position about the relationship of the mind and body, and its repercussions. This assignment discusses the dualist relationship between the mind and the body, as well as its impact on the individual free will. It asserts Interventionism as an extension of Dualism, as well as an alternative to Determinism. The objective of this endeavor is to present the Dualist approach to Mind and Body as an alternative or possible solution to the dilemma of Determinism.
According to his text, God is simply an illusion that does not exist. It is a human desire to, when overwhelmed by the complexity of the world, to worship something. “Science emancipates us from that desire”, Dawkins
Spinoza explained it in this manner: "thinking substance (the mind) and extended substance (the body) are one and the same thing." The ultimate substance for Spinoza was God. This interpretation of the mind- body problem was least clear for us as the existence of god has not yet been proven. 2. Epiphenomenalism The mind is thought to be a by-product of the physical brain.
Many philosophers thought about the definition of god. St. Anselm is the one of the great philosopher who clarified the definition of god and gave an argument about existence of god. This argument seems logical and builds logic like a math equation. For instance, suppose “A” is true, if “A” then “B” should be true, but “B” cannot be true by definition. So it leads to contradiction which force us to think about our prior assumption and conclusion will be that “A” is false.